Низовцев Юрий Михайлович : другие произведения.

About the origin and manifestation of personality

Самиздат: [Регистрация] [Найти] [Рейтинги] [Обсуждения] [Новинки] [Обзоры] [Помощь|Техвопросы]
Ссылки:
Школа кожевенного мастерства: сумки, ремни своими руками
 Ваша оценка:
  • Аннотация:
    A person, although separated from nature, but not so much as to lose his animal essence. This essence, more precisely, the animal consciousness, manifests itself to one degree or another in each person in the form of his individuality, whereas the personality of a person is a reflection of his awareness of himself in the world as an self-made subject, sometimes manifesting himself in such a way that it seems - he moves history. There are still disputes on these issues of our existence, although the essence of the matter seems rather clear, and it is shown below.
  Keywords: individuality, personality, history, civilization, culture, creativity, consciousness, self-consciousness, dissatisfaction, sensations, information, religion, knowledge.
  
  Table of contents
  
  Introduction.
  Chapter 1.
  Why and how do personality and individuality compete in a person?
  Chapter 2.
  What forces manifest personality in history?
  Chapter 3.
  Property as the basis for the accelerated development of civilization.
  Chapter 4.
  The hidden prerequisites of radical turns and coups in the course of the development of civilization.
  Chapter 5.
  Why and when did the industrial revolution begin? and precisely in Europe?
  Chapter 6.
  The driving force and source of development of the person and his communities.
  Chapter 7.
  How can one attract randomness and take advantage of it in the process of creativity?
  Chapter 8.
  About the similarity and difference between smart people and creative people.
  Chapter 9.
  Why a person isn't capable to be not free?
  Chapter 10.
  Freedom as a product of dissatisfaction of consciousness.
  Chapter 11.
  What is the true difference between intellectuals and intelligentsia?
  Chapter 12.
  What is the mystery of genius, still unsolved?
  Chapter 13.
  What kind of dough is a hero sculpted of?
  Chapter 14.
  What were the true aspirations of the glorified rulers and the reasons that caused them?
  Chapter 15.
  Why doesn't hope leave us?
  Chapter 16.
  What can be revealed from the other side of fear?
  Chapter 17.
  Why does happiness always elude us?
  Chapter 18.
  The origins of cunning and its main difference from creativity.
  
  Introduction
  
  Although the duality of the human consciousness is not much in doubt at the present time, nevertheless, when characterizing a person, most often they point to his individuality, and personality is remembered mostly when it comes to heroes, as well as outstanding figures of science, culture and great statesmen.
  Perhaps for this reason, a theory even arose that it is these personalities, and not anyone or anything else, that are the driving forces of history. In particular, the British writer, historian and philosopher Thomas Carlyle, on the basis of intellectuality, began to preach the cult of heroes: "... world history, the history of what a person has done in this world, is, in my understanding, essentially a story of great people who worked hard here on earth. They, these great people, were the leaders of mankind, educators, models and, in a broad sense, the creators of all that the whole mass of people generally sought to carry out what she wanted to achieve. Everything that has been done in this world represents, in essence, an external material result, the practical realization and embodiment of thoughts that belonged to great people, sent to our world" [1, p. 7].
  On the other hand, there is an opinion that this theory is completely false. For example, the outstanding Russian philosopher N. F. Fedorov did not overestimate the role of the personalities in history: "The activities of personalities create not history, but the comedy of world history. The history that individual personalities create according to the principle of historiosophism is the struggle of these personalities for the right to lead the crowd towards a goal, towards an ideal, which serves only as bait to take possession of the people..." [2, part 1, note 9].
  Leo Tolstoy further belittled the personalities, who considered great people only instruments of providence, slaves of history: "A person consciously lives for himself, but serves as an unconscious tool for achieving historical, universal goals. A perfect deed, and its action, coinciding in time with millions of actions of other people, acquires historical significance. The higher a person stands on the social ladder, the more connected he is with a large number of people, the more power he has over other people, all the more obvious the predestination and inevitability of his every act... The king is the slave of history. History, that is, the unconscious, general, swarming life of mankind, uses every minute of the life of kings for itself as an instrument for its own purposes" [3].
  G. V. Plekhanov tried to combine these views on the role of personality in history on some basis, pointing out the obvious contradiction and shortcomings as actions in the history of some general patterns, so only personalities: "The collision of these two views took the form of the antinomy, the first member of which was general laws, and the second was the activity of personalities. From the point of view of the second member of the antinomy, history seemed to be a simple concatenation of accidents, from the point of view of its first member, it seemed that even individual features of historical events were conditioned by the action of common causes" [4, p. 32].
  Trying dialectically to combine certain "immutable laws" with a certain influence on the course of the historical process of personalities, Plekhanov puts the development of productive forces in place of the driving force of the historical process, believing that it is they "... determine successive changes in people's social relations" [ibid, p. 33], but at the same time attributes the influence on the course of historical events to special causes.
  These reasons, in his opinion, are "that historical situation in which the development of the productive forces of a given people takes place and which itself was created in the last resort by the development of the same forces among other peoples, that is, by the same common cause" [ibid., p. 33].
  However, these researchers of the human souls did not even try to penetrate into their depth, without which it is impossible to solve this problem, which rests on the difference between individuality and personality. And this distinction between one and the other, in turn, depends on the peculiarities of each person's consciousness. Therefore, it makes sense to show where from and why individuality arose, at least in more or less developed living beings, and only then demonstrate its difference from the human personality, which also did not appear out of nowhere, as well as show the connection between individuality and personality, since personality is not capable of forming in isolation from individuality.
  At the same time, it is necessary to trace the interaction of individuality and personality, adjacent in each person, as a reflection of the influence of his animal consciousness on self-awareness and vice versa, noting the role of dissatisfaction, always manifested in both forms of human consciousness in this interaction.
  The individuality of a living being is determined by its genome and the environment in which the living being is a dynamic component of this environment. Therefore, the main feature of the individuality of any living being is its adaptability, without which the possibility of survival in its own surrounding is absent.
  However, individuality is a secondary feature of the interaction of a living being with its surrounding, behind which lies what compels this being to lead an active lifestyle.
  The activity of living beings, unlike other objects of beingness, which are subject only to natural laws: conservation laws, the law of non-decreasing entropy, Newton's laws, etc., must be in consciousness - the only difference between living beings and other objects of beingness. Otherwise, the activity of living beings would not differ in any way from the rotation of other objects of beingness, but we do not observe this.
  But the activity of living beings must be carried out by something, forcing each living being not to stand still, but to change, reacting to the circumstances of life and the environment, lowering or raising the level of this activity in accordance with in accordance with the current situation.
  In essence, the active differs from the passive by the spontaneous desire to change both its surrounding and oneself for the sake of not only survival, but also for a more complete satisfaction of itself in the sensations received, unconsciously developing itself and its kind in generations.
  Thus, for any living being, activity manifests itself in permanent dissatisfaction with itself, entailing the creation and destruction of the environment, in the process of which both a change in activity and a change in the carrier of activity itself occur.
  This dissatisfaction drives any living being forward, reflected in unaccountable actions to overcome the incessant resistance of the environment in the desire not only to survive, but also to get to where it is warmer, safer, more nutritious.
  That is, the action of dissatisfaction of the consciousness of an ordinary living being manifests itself instinctively, without an obvious goal - by trial and error, in its desire for survival, reproduction, comfort and safety. Therefore, a living, or active being strives away from what it has, to where, as it assumes, it is better than this moment, that is, more favorable.
  However, ordinary creatures in the form of flora and fauna do not have subjectivity, manifesting themselves in the environment only as dynamic components of the environment that are not conscious of themselves, which, although they act, giving development to this environment, but act instinctively-reflexively, that is, their consciousness is limited to the consumption of sensations, and it does not go beyond the environment, and the development itself turns out to be very slow in comparison with conscious actions. Therefore, such an original type of consciousness can be qualified as the lowest consciousness, the only inherent in all living beings, except for man, who has a certain addition to it.
  Similar behavior of all living beings in their more developed representatives is externally manifested in their individuality, the properties of which allow them to better adapt to the environment, for example, without spawning, when the vast majority of eggs die for the sake of procreation.
  As a rule, it is less difficult to adapt to the environment in a group.
  Therefore, the individuality of a creature has to manifest itself in the herd community of certain creatures, that is, individualism coexists with collectivism.
  Under such circumstances, a living being is subject to the trend of survival and obtaining, if possible, pleasant sensations, without trying to understand where and why these sensations come from, that is, they lack reflection, and they do not need an understanding of the current time - this being is unaccountably updrawn in it like chip in a stormy stream, content only with the fact that they have the opportunity, thanks to the dissatisfaction of their own consciousness, to avoid, if possible, death and unpleasant sensations.
  In other words, all these beings are tuned to the possibility of "receiving" and not "giving" according to their own understanding of reality, which is limited to their analysis of their own sensations.
  The receptivity and ability to analyze the sensations, and, as a consequence, the effectiveness of their activity, is externally manifested in these beings in the individuality characteristic of each of them.
  Individuality is being formed on the basis of the genotype, to which is added the impact of the appropriate environment, which is determined by the dissatisfaction of the consciousness of the individual with the existing conditions in relation to nutrition, reproduction and status in the flock or herd.
  The very term "individuality" clearly indicates the main property of any individual - its egocentrism, that is, the paramount concern for oneself alone as a being who wants to preserve own sensations, mitigated, however, by the fact that the forced stay of an individual in a group cannot but reflect its attitude to the members of this group, expressed in behavior that is dictated by the group, that is, the collective consciousness.
  The consciousness of this more developed individual, for example, a primate, that is, the consciousness of an animal, strives only for nutrition, its own reproduction, possible improvement of its position in the environment and comfort, using such basic properties of its individuality, developed over millions of years of evolution, as quick-wittedness, sensitivity, impressionability, decisiveness, a certain degree of sociability, the ability to pry, as well as dominance, perseverance, cooperation in actions, which in their totality, level and relationships constitute the individuality of the animal consciousness together with its acquired or genetic traits - such as appearance, temperament, adding to them In own niche of existence the life experience, skills, and the behavior acquired in community.
  All these properties are present in a person for the simple reason that he is semi-primate.
  However, the adjustment to adaptability in person has been supplemented by an adjustment that forces a person to sometimes get out of the flow of sensations, in particular, to the shore of reflections on the essence of this flow, gaining knowledge about the possibilities of selectively changing the course of its flow.
  From here arises an understanding of the arrival of sensations in a certain sequence, which is noted by a person by the flow of time from the past to the future through the present, and as a consequence, the limited life span, but, along with that, an understanding of the various possibilities of changing this life for the better, again, due to dissatisfaction with what is.
  Thus, this new creature - a person - begins to understand that the sensations can be received not only induced, adapting to their flow, but also selectively, with the help of certain levers of control of the flow of sensations, and in fact, the flow of information, giving the appropriate commands to one"s own organs and using certain improvised means. Thus, gradually, a person comes to the realization that the known flow of sensations is nothing more than the current time of life, which begins and ends in him.
  On this new basis of a person's gradual understanding that he is in a time flow - not only a calendar one, but his own - which he is capable of consciously changing, which is externally expressed in constantly changing sensations, thoughts begin to arise in a person's consciousness about changing his life for the better not only by trial and error, but by his own conscious efforts to change the environment, which can extend or, alas, shorten his life, but make it more intense and interesting.
  With the emergence of property, some of its owners, having received the free time for thorough reflections on life, began to think not only about its pleasant moments, but also about its meaning.
  Culture appeared, technologies began to develop, science arose based on the application of new methods of management, providing surplus product for exchange and development of trade between separate specialized regions.
  The relationship of individuals in the state of herd mentality also changed towards the evaluation of their own, personal existence with all the ensuing consequences. That is, a personality began to form with all its negative and positive features, at the basis of which, nevertheless, there was individuality, but the main difference between a personality and an individuality was its desire not only to take, but also consciously, and often selflessly, to give.
  It is precisely this positive quality of the aware altruism, reflected in the personality, and the egocentricity of individuality in one and the same person, that began to create, to a greater or lesser extent, a tension, and therefore a motion to resolve the contradiction between them, which was carried out in favor of one or the other, but, in general, moved a person forward in his communities, developing his self-awareness and making social relations more effective and favorable for the development of society.
  Be that as it may, but the individuality of a person, behind which his primitive animal consciousness was hidden, closed on sensations, did not go anywhere, and all human life began to flow in the continuous struggles of the individualism of the animal consciousness with the altruism of self-consciousness in the aspiration to receive and give in the course of conscious change of the environment, destroying it and creating new things in it, differing only in the degree of manifestation of dissatisfaction with one or another form of consciousness, which ultimately created the entire social hierarchy.
  In the process of development of living beings, the adaptive lowest, or more precisely, the natural form of consciousness undergoes comparatively insignificant changes, since no being is capable of removing its main property - the instinctive aspiration for the survival, based on the original activity of any living being.
  The highest consciousness (self-consciousness), which always includes elements of altruism at any level of development of a person, is the radical opposite of natural - egocentric - consciousness.
  In the presence of the highest consciousness in the living being, it begins as though to see the light, becoming not so much "poured" in the environment, how many separated from it, and, so it acquires the opportunity to look at it and on oneself from the outside, to appreciate this ratio in attempts consciously to set goals for oneself in view of certain shortcomings in own existence, which, in the opinion of this being, could be overcome, and to try to obtain implementation of the goals in actions.
  All this obviously drops out of an instinctive-reflex sphere of action of the lowest consciousness, and even begins to contradict it as the highest consciousness often neglects utilitarian reasons, chasing something to unattainable, but cute for the heart and mind.
  It is visible from everything stated that for the living organisms there is only one opportunity to get out of existence as the slaves of sensations - more or less deliberately develop ways to change themselves, namely: at least partially to get rid of the full submission to the environment, i.e. to rise to some extent above it, and thus to gain the opportunity not only to adapt to it, but also to fit it under themselves, wondering at first how best to improve the quality of sensations, and then for autonomous reflections on the meaning of life, its curiosities and own improvement.
  Similar opportunity is realized through a person, who, while remaining an animal, or a creature adaptive to the environment, at the same time acquires the ability to consciously influence the environment, thereby raising oneself above it, that is, breaking out oneself of the full adaptive slavery, and getting the opportunity through this conscious impact with the acceleration to develop own consciousness, mainly manifested through the brain, the change of which is directly reflected in the growth of the possibilities of consciousness to influence the environment, which in turn changes the brain structure, and therefore - consciousness.
  In other words, a person becomes not a slave to the environment, but to some extent, a master, that is, a personality with its specific and new properties compared to an individuality.
  Along the way, a person becomes more savvy that is, inventive. The laziness of primates is replaced by hard work. The ability consciously to correct mistakes develop his self-criticism and responsibility for what he has done. The desire to know the world around him forms curiosity, abstract thinking and develops imagination, which, in turn, causes speech, will and creativity to emerge during the communication.
  Labor efforts contribute to the emergence of such personality traits as kindness, friendliness, empathy, compassion, mercy, sacrifice, and this is nothing but selfless care for others, that can be designated as altruism.
  Along with that, such properties of individuality as quick-wittedness, sensitivity, impressionability, decisiveness, a certain degree of sociability, the ability to pry, as well as dominance, perseverance, cooperation in actions, characteristic of both every animal and a person, passed by inheritance from the individuality of an animal to the individuality of a person with almost no change.
  These characteristics relate specifically to individuality, not personality, in contrast to such properties as conscious diligence or laziness, self-confidence or self-criticism, politeness or rudeness, responsibility or bad faith, conviction or unscrupulousness, which are features of a person's personality, being produced mostly by his mind, which, already being a property of a person's personality, has significant differences from quick-wittedness in its focus not only on nutrition, reproduction and dominance.
  However, the main characteristic of personality is altruism, which is opposite to the unchanging egoism of the animal consciousness.
  Therefore, it can be stated that in every human consciousness, individuality, which mainly reflects the egoism of animal consciousness, coexists with altruism, which underlies the personality of each person. And both of these sides of the human consciousness, mostly because of the difference in the tasks being solved, fight each other in every possible way, uniting only at critical moments of existence for the sake of survival. And the place of each person in society is determined, as a rule, by the predominance of certain properties of individuality and personality, as well as their level, which was achieved by the corresponding person.
  The formation of personality, however, is based on individuality. Therefore, in particular, quick-wittedness (the natural intellect), being a property of a person's individuality, at the same time gives rise to his mind, stubbornness (perseverance) precedes and produces will, remaining also in the consciousness of a person as a feature of his individuality. It differs from the will in that it lacks the goal-setting.
  The impact on the personality of individuality and a competitive environment can produce properties in it that contribute to a person taking a place in society that he does not deserve, based on the degree of his mind and abilities.
  These personality traits include cunning, hypocrisy, deceit, servility, the use of any, even unworthy means to achieve a profitable or leading position in society.
  All this makes the human communities extremely heterogeneous and contradictory, slowing down their development and ultimately leading to collapse, since the capabilities of a person in his communities are quite limited in consuming information flows, and when their volume is excessive for the capabilities of a person within a civilization to perceive these flows, they lead the civilizations to disintegration, but, as a rule, not completely, allowing them to be reborn on the same competitive basis of the dual consciousness.
  
  Bibliography
  
  1. Carlyle T. (1841) On hero, Hero-worship, & the Heroic in History. New York. D. Appleton & Co.
  2. Фёдоров Н. Ф. Философия общего дела. 1906. https://predanie.ru
  3. Толстой Л. Н. Собрание сочинений в восьми томах. Т. 3, часть 1. М., Лексика. 1996.
  4. Плеханов Г. В. Избранные философские произведения в 5-ти тт. Т. 2. М., 1956, с. 300-334.
  
  Chapter 1.
  Why and how do personality and individuality compete in a person?
  
  Individuality and personality are by no means identical, reflecting various and often contradictory hypostases of the human consciousness. They demonstrate not only the dual nature of his consciousness, but also show why this being is able to change both nature and himself with an unusual speed for nature, then now putting on the guise of goodness, then having threw it off, turns out the fantastically cruel and ruthless, crushing everything around for the sake of achieving the chimerical goals or solving the unseemly tasks.
  I
  Individuality and personality are often considered synonymous when characterizing a person with these concepts.
  Therefore, it makes sense to denote the fundamental difference between these concepts with the identification of the features of both.
  The fallacy of the opinion about the coincidence of these concepts, first of all, lies in the fact that any animal has its own individuality, by no means representing a personality.
  Similar transition from individuality to personality with the preservation of individuality succeeded only one being from the animal world - the hominid, who eventually became a person.
  The individuality of any animal consists in the features and properties that distinguish it from other individuals of this kind, being unique compared to the rest.
  The individuality of a being is reflected in the behavior, temperament, character of the animal, its physiological characteristics, appearance, ability to feel, the ability to pry.
  Similar features and properties characterize any person, but some other features and properties are added to them, which will be discussed below.
  Individuality is formed on the basis of the genotype, to which is added the impact of the appropriate environment, which is determined by the dissatisfaction of the consciousness of the individual with the existing conditions in relation to nutrition, reproduction and status in the flock or herd.
  The very term "individuality" clearly indicates the main property of any individual - its egocentrism, that is, the paramount concern for oneself alone as a being who wants to preserve own sensations, mitigated, however, by the fact that the forced stay of an individual in a group cannot but reflect its attitude to the members of this group, expressed in behavior that is dictated by the group, that is, the collective consciousness.
  Thus, a semi-primate-human could not but preserve the individuality of an animal in himself, like any individual in the animal world, more precisely, a person retained an animal consciousness in himself, outwardly expressed in his individuality.
  However, a person in some way, not yet precisely discovered, acquired his other "half" as a result of which there were the changes in his consciousness, which thereby began to "contain" in addition to animal consciousness and some other component.
  Until now, science cannot unambiguously define this component of the human consciousness, mixing it with individuality, probably because it has not yet been able to delineate them due to overestimation of the human subjectivity and underestimation of his animal essence.
  Therefore, science believes that in a person, in comparison with animals, his individuality also changes, although in fact, the individuality of the animal component of human consciousness in its unsocial basis practically does not change, remaining the same as a derivative of the animal consciousness, which also does not disappear anywhere, remaining the same, since it strives only for nutrition, its own reproduction, possible improvement of its position in the environment and comfort, using such basic properties of their individuality as quick-wittedness, sensitivity, impressionability, decisiveness, a certain degree of sociability, the ability to pry, as well as dominance, perseverance, cooperation in actions, which in their totality, level and relationships constitute the individuality of the animal consciousness together with its acquired or genetic traits - such as appearance, temperament, adding only to them the life experience, skills, and behavior acquired in society.
  Moreover, science, represented by various schools and trends, significantly diverges in determining what distinguishes a person from an animal.
  In particular, it is believed that a person is a reasonable being, capable of work, communication with each other and having a will.
  However, ants do not suffer from a lack of diligence, and with extraordinary diligence and skill, they create their earthen dwellings in a completely coordinated manner, forage for themselves and arrange their hierarchical community that contributes to their effective activities.
  Hence it is clear that these characteristics of a person do not reflect his main feature that makes him a person.
  If we imagine, as some scientists believe, that the main feature of a person is that he makes himself, then it must be said that many living beings "make" themselves much better, and therefore live more pleasantly and longer without much trouble and suffering, for example, sharks (the whale shark lives up to 100 years, and the polar white shark - up to 400 years).
  If we admit that a person is a set of social relations due to the fact that he is powerless in solitude, then any flock or herd also has social relations precisely because predators will quickly devour a single sheep.
  On the other hand, the ability of a person to reflect actively the reality as a result of a certain complexity of organizing the processes taking place in the tissues of his body does not mean at all that this process is less complicated in other living beings, especially since it is completely incorrect to reduce the multi-layered consciousness of a person to physiology.
  The point of view that man is a product of evolutionary development immediately raises significant objections.
  In particular, an analysis of the historical epochs in the development of living beings does not indicate any natural reason for the appearance of a being, that so clearly falls out of natural relations, reduced to the adaptive existence of all natural organisms as active elements of the environment, confirmed by the fact that not a single living being, either earlier or now, even the most highly developed and highly organized, has tried to acquire the properties similar to human ones, that is, to escape from the limits of adaptive existence in the environment. , where it is quite convenient for them in the natural niches they occupy, although this means complete subordination to it, despite the fact that, for example, the chimpanzee genome is 99% identical to the human genome.
  In addition, a person cannot be a purely natural product of nature for the reason that he is its natural enemy, destroying and eradicating it for his own purposes, which have nothing to do with nature. This means that the human genome could not have been programmed for these purposes naturally.
  On the other hand, if we admit that a person is a failed animal, then at the same time we should note the fact that contradicts this statement that man, judging by his genome, has fully taken place as the most highly organized animal, but for some reason he did not want to be one, or he was forced to leave the animal state, since an additional program appeared in his genome, pushing him to partially exit from adaptive existence in the direction of a creative-destructive state corresponding to project-target activity, that is, corresponding to free acts at a different qualitative level, which not only often contradict the complete subordination to the environment, but also contribute to the aspirations to achieve the fictional goals that are completely unrelated to this environment, and, moreover, destroying it to achieve them, for example, total felling of trees for the forest trade, the pollution of the environment with garbage, toxic and radioactive waste, as well as the involuntary destruction of themselves in order to achieve the power of one group of the population over the whole world by already found lethal means and methods for all alive.
  As for the definition of a person as a result of the action of social structures, firstly, social structures exist in almost the entire living world, since it is easier to survive in communities, but, for example, flocks of monkeys still roam the tropical forests, despite the rather complex hierarchical structure of these flocks, without producing even a close resemblance of a person.
  The assessment by science of self-consciousness inherent in every person is given in terms of the historical development of the human communities, since thanks to it, a person became able to interact with reality with awareness of his actions, receiving information about himself and accordingly regulating his behavior for self-assessment both in the present and in the future. that is, holding oneself in time.
  All this, of course, is true, but, giving an answer to the question of the role of self-consciousness as an indispensable condition for the constitution of the world, science avoids resolving the question of where self-consciousness came from, what is included in it, as well as how it interacts with the animal consciousness of man and what is the result of this interaction.
  The consideration that a person differs from all other living beings by the presence of a soul does not stand up to any criticism, since the soul is consciousness, and it is inherent in any living being, making it alive, that is, capable of metabolism, reproduction based on the genome, perception of the environment due to sensations and the action of processing centers of the incoming information.
  Of course, the soul, or rather, the consciousness of a person is different from the consciousness of other living beings, but science still finds it difficult to determine what this difference is, expressing all sorts of hypotheses that are not confirmed by anything.
  The human brain, which is quite large relative to the size of the body, really turns out to be most capable of abstract thinking, but, firstly, the rudiments of abstract thinking are inherent in many animals, for example, crows and rats, and secondly, such material formation as the brain is secondary, always fulfilling the role of an information processing center, and many simplest living beings quite do without a brain, but they never do without an information processing center replacing it in one form or another. That is, the properties of the brain largely depend on the genome, and the genome is a program written on a protein carrier. And if this program is such for a person, then somehow it was recorded with the difference that determines the fundamental difference between humans and the highest primates, and this difference manifested itself in the development of the brain in hominids, whereas the brain in monkeys has not changed practically over several million years.
  And this difference comes down to the addition of a program that is characteristic only of the animal consciousness, by a program that is inherent only to a person.
  If we distract from who or what and how did this addition, and it has already been fixed, then it remains only to determine the external manifestation of this software addition in relation to a person in relation to the reality surrounding him.
  II
  Thus, in order to come to an unambiguous conclusion regarding the main difference between a person and an animal, it is necessary to find those new approaches to reality that are characteristic only for a person, more precisely, for his altered consciousness.
  A person, unlike animals, realizes that he lives in time, which, having begun for him, inevitably ends for a number of reasons - depending on his behavior, circumstances and natural aging, and all this he can regulate with varying degrees of success, while the animal only feels the approach of death.
  Awareness of the temporality of one's own existence in beingness gradually led a person to certain considerations and actions.
  At first, he tried to change purposefully own surrounding, including his fellow tribesmen, just to improve his own life, gradually realizing that the most effective tool for this change is creativity, which rather quickly provides him with new opportunities to change around him as well as to distinguish oneself from the general surrounding to a leading position in the community. Thus, man received and used fire, the wheel, tools for hunting and farming.
  Then a person thought about his role in beingness, in which he is unknown where from he appears and disappears quite quickly.
  Since a person did not want to disappear from life, which quite often gives, in addition to misfortunes and troubles, a variety of pleasant feelings, he has imagined that the awareness of the world around him was given to him from above, and that the lofty patron would not leave him even after death, having paid tribute to him for everything he did during life by preserving life of one or another quality and for the coffin.
  In addition, it was boring for a person to stay in a routine existence, and he began to look for pleasant sensations not only in food, reproduction or dominance like animals, but also in individually interesting things for him, in particular, inventing new tools, new weapons, new accompaniment of screams issued by his vocal cords.
  A person also, in addition to religion, wanted to know why and what for the world is the way it is with all its changes, which meant knowing the causes and consequences of various phenomena and events.
  All these facts inevitably lead to the recognition that the main feature of a person, unlike animals, is the awareness of himself as an acting subject of history.
  In other words, self-consciousness has made a person out of an animal, and, therefore, a fundamentally new property has been added to individuality - personality, and it already has other features than individuality, although some of them were formed on the basis of certain features of individuality.
  That is, the addition (program) that has appeared in the human genome, provoking the appearance and development of self-consciousness in him, is the real basis for the emergence together with a person of his personality.
  If we turn to all living organisms, excluding the humans, they can be characterized only as slaves of sensations, since they do not go beyond adaptation to the environment. Within these limits, they strive to survive by obtaining food; seek to multiply, delivering satisfaction themselves; they try to dominate both individually and in the group, not being satisfied with the current situation, but striving to ensure a better quality of sensations, including a sense of superiority over neighboring beings.
  In other words, the lowest (animal) consciousness "feeds" only sensations that give it everything, including the harmony of existence, i.e. something acceptable and even pleasant in our understanding in a certain combination of feelings if, of course, to distract from fight of each being for survival. Therefore, any being does not wish to lose the sensations at all.
  Similar type of consciousness has the natural egocentrism, seeking to survive automatically, no matter what.
  In the process of development of the living beings, this type of consciousness undergoes relatively minor changes, since it is not able to withdraw own basic property - an unconscious desire for survival, based on the primordial activity of any living thing.
  The highest consciousness (self-consciousness) which is contained in the person at any level of its development is radical contrast to the lowest consciousness.
  In the presence of the highest consciousness in the living being, it begins as though to see the light, becoming not so much "poured" in the environment, how many separated from it, and, so it acquires the opportunity to look at it and on oneself from the outside, to appreciate this ratio in attempts to consciously set to itself goals in mind certain shortcomings in one's own existence, which, in the opinion of this being, could be overcome, and to try to obtain implementation of the goals in actions.
  All this obviously drops out of an instinctive-reflex sphere of action of the lowest consciousness, and even begins to contradict it as the highest consciousness often neglects utilitarian reasons, chasing something to unattainable, but cute for the heart and mind.
  Nevertheless, a rudimentary degree of liberty exists not only in a person, but also in all other beings, because they do not lose their activity during life, which enables them in one way or another to adapt to the environment, increasing the quantity and quality of sensations over time in their generations, that is, developing, acquiring both local perfection and variety of species.
  However, to get out of the limits of adaptability to the environment, that is, to cease to be slaves of sensations alone, these creatures - from bacteria to primates - are not able, remaining on the lowest degree of freedom, or - practically in complete dependence on their own sensations.
  The activity of their consciousness, as already indicated, is limited to nutrition, reproduction, attempts to dominate whenever possible, regardless of the complexity of the organisms and the development of their governing body - the brain. Everything that happens with such organisms is their response to the impact of the environment.
  Therefore, similar consciousness can be qualified as a lower consciousness, that is, a consciousness that is practically completely dependent on the environment, which is their hostess, and they are its involuntary slaves, although they are capable of slow development thanks to their own activity which is non-vanishing.
  It is visible from everything stated that for live organisms there is only one opportunity to get out of existence as the slaves of sensations toward liberty - more or less deliberately develop ways to change themselves, namely: at least partially to get rid of the full submission to the environment, i.e. to rise to some extent above it, and thus to gain the opportunity not only to adapt to it, but also to fit it under themselves, wondering at first how best to improve the quality of sensations, and then for autonomous reflections on the meaning of life, its curiosities and own improvement.
  Similar opportunity is realized through the person, who, while remaining an animal, or a creature adaptive to the environment, at the same time acquires the ability to consciously influence the environment, thereby raising oneself above it, that is, breaking out oneself of the full adaptive slavery, and getting the opportunity through this conscious impact with the acceleration to develop their own consciousness, mainly manifested through the brain, the change of which is directly reflected in the growth of the possibilities of consciousness to influence the environment, which in turn changes the brain structure, and therefore - consciousness.
  Getting out of addiction from the sensations alone onto the space of ideas, thoughts, refined feelings means a transition from the rudiments of liberty to the possibility of its fullest realization in the course of socialization within the framework of the building civilization by these already dual beings.
  There is still no convincing evidence of the procedure in which a primate has become a person, but the fact of this transformation is obvious.
  Thus, the lowest consciousness which is becoming isolated on sensations, in the person is complemented with higher consciousness which, if the person is capable to realize the actions and to foresee their development, is possible to call self-consciousness.
  Such dual nature of the human consciousness brings with it the emergence and development of antagonism of the lowest and highest forms of consciousness, since the egocentric animal consciousness is focused mainly on the survival of the organism in the struggle with everything around, and the highest - mainly onto social harmonization of human communities, its own cultural improvement. The resulting contradiction between these forms of consciousness, which are indissolubly fused in a person, leads them to fight for supremacy in the pursuit of so different aspirations, thereby stimulating the development of both the people and their communities, which the most characteristic is manifested into the emergence of civilization and its rather rapid development compared to past epochs of slow development of a purely plant-animal kingdom with a change in quality - in the direction of the technological and the cultural improvement, that is, the delayed biological evolution, not changing adaptability of consciousness of all available beings quite suddenly was replaced by the accelerated development of one of types of living beings with a modified (dual) consciousness.
  Accordingly, a relatively rapid increase in the degrees of the human liberty within the framework of the appeared civilization occur, which is the result of the action of the powerful driving force of the human development and its communities in the form of antagonism of the lowest form of consciousness, that is common for all living creatures, and having appeared suddenly of self-consciousness (the highest form of consciousness).
  As for the original source of activity of any form of consciousness of a living being, it can only be inescapable dissatisfaction of consciousness, without which any living being is a thing, that is, a passive object, unable to have aspirations - spontaneous or conscious.
  III
  Having found out the fundamental importance of self-consciousness for the formation of a person and the source of the emergence of self-consciousness, let us now turn to what the interaction of the animal consciousness of each person and his self-consciousness gives for the formation of various personalities, the tasks of which are mostly opposite, since the main feature of animal consciousness is egoism, and self-consciousness is altruism.
  In particular, the human behavior is evaluated by the psychologists with such properties as diligence-laziness, self-confidence-self-criticism, politeness-rudeness, responsibility-dishonesty, conviction-unscrupulousness, as well as quick-wittedness, the ability to pry, sensitivity, impressionability, decisiveness, will, one or another degree of sociability.
  From the content of this definition, one clearly views the mixing of the individual and personal traits, since quick-wittedness, sensitivity, impressionability, decisiveness, one or another degree of sociability is characteristic of any animal, and not only of humans.
  However, this characteristic of personality does not mention its most important features, such as curiosity, mental ability and creativity.
  In addition, such personality traits as kindness, friendliness, empathy, compassion, mercy, sacrifice, that is, selfless care for others, which can be designated as altruism, should not be considered insignificant.
  That is, psychologists, without imagining the origin of the main components of consciousness, mix a number of features of individuality and personality.
  As mentioned above, one or another degree of quick-wittedness, sensitivity, impressionability, sociability and decisiveness are inherent in both animals and humans, but psychologists attribute these properties to a person"s personality, while these properties characterize not his personality, but only individuality.
  In addition, such features of consciousness, which are features of each individuality, have fallen out of consideration, such as the ability to pry, lust for power (dominance), stubbornness (perseverance), one or another coherence (cooperation) in actions, characteristic of every animal and person, that is, these traits, as it were, were inherited from the individuality of the animal to the individuality of a person almost unchanged.
  These characteristics relate specifically to individuality, not personality, in contrast to such properties as conscious diligence or laziness, self-confidence or self-criticism, politeness or rudeness, responsibility or bad faith, conviction or unscrupulousness, which are features of a person's personality, being produced mostly by his mind, which, already being a property of a person's personality, has significant differences from quick-wittedness in its focus not only on nutrition, reproduction and dominance.
  However, the main characteristic of personality is altruism, which is opposite to the unchanging egoism of the animal consciousness.
  Therefore, it can be stated that in every human consciousness, individuality, which mainly reflects the egoism of animal consciousness, coexists with altruism, which underlies the personality of each person. And both of these sides of human consciousness, mostly because of the difference in the tasks being solved, fight each other in every possible way, uniting only at critical moments of existence for the sake of survival. And the place of each person in society is determined, as a rule, by the predominance of certain properties of individuality and personality, as well as their level, which was achieved by the corresponding individual.
  IV
  Nevertheless, individuality and personality do not have an absolute separation in the consciousness of a person, merged together from two components - animal consciousness and self-consciousness, partly because. that a number of fundamental properties of the animal's individuality to a certain extent produced some fundamental properties of personality.
  Quick-wittedness, which can also be designated as the natural intellect, representing a property of individuality, at the same time is the beginning for the development of the mind, and the mind largely determines the personality, being its indispensable characteristic, but they should not be confused. Therefore, it is necessary to determine the difference between quick-wittedness the (natural intellect) and mind.
  The natural intellect in its quality is determined by the speed, the amount of RAM, the use of formal logic to create models, in particular, behavior.
  The natural intellect has a certain autonomy in its actions, and it is able to solve tasks not only according to standard programs, but also to be applied to some changes in the parameters of the environment surrounding a living being, as well as to operate by various and largely arbitrary signals entering the senses and from them to it.
  This natural intellect does not have a strict program of actions, operating with various and largely arbitrary signals that enter the sense organs and from them to it, to solve the problem of keeping its own carrier (a living being) in a state of direct consumption of sensations, as a result of which the living being is able to at a minimum, to act by trial and error in a changing environment.
  The natural intellect is interested in preserving sensations that give life to the entire system of any organism, including it.
  The natural intellect is the integral part of the organism - a kind of information processing unit and a control unit for the functions of the organism in its interaction with the environment, independently thinking within the framework of such functioning, without which a living being cannot act.
  The peculiarity of the impact of consciousness on the structured material of the body is the distribution of this impact on at least two levels.
  One level - fundamental - refers to the functioning of each cell and the entire set of cells of the body in a mode that ensures both staying in the environment - nutrition, metabolism, and retention of this form of life in the current time by its reproduction and modification in accordance with the program laid down in the genome. Such an impact of consciousness on the body is automatic and is ensured throughout the life of any organism through the natural intellect of each individual consciousness.
  In this part, the natural intellect is addressed to the body, controlling its adequate functioning, and this intellect of any living being - from bacteria to humans - is the same in terms of the principle of operation and programmed functionality.
  At another level of the impact of consciousness on the structured material of the body, consciousness, with the help of this intellect, organizes the external interaction of the organism with the environment, at least for survival in it in the fight against competing individuals, and also, under favorable circumstances, gives the organism the desire to occupy a place in a community of similar organisms that is most advantageous in terms of receiving sensations, preferably the most pleasant, due to the creature's constant dissatisfaction with the present, forcing it to look for better conditions, that is, it solves different types of tasks, showing, respectively, different thinking abilities, which consist not only in the speed of decision-making using the data stored in memory that are suitable for solving the problem that has appeared, but also in finding new - more favorable ones - conditions for life, that is, to think at least at the lowest level of creativity, showing the ability to pry, which helps to extract new information that contributes, in particular, to survival, as well as distort the information about oneself (deception) for competitors and by doing so striving to create the most favorable conditions for one's own existence in the form of pleasant sensations.
  In this way, the natural consciousness strives to ensure the maximum possible adaptation of the organism to the environment with its open interaction with it.
  True, the natural consciousness practically does not go beyond instincts and reflexes, as a result of which a living being is able to act mainly by trial and error in a changing environment, often dying, but passing on to posterity the properties necessary for life in new conditions.
  An additional level of the impact of consciousness on one"s own organism, as well as on the process of interaction of this carrier of consciousness with other beings, is characteristic out of all organisms only for a person, concluding in self-consciousness inherent him, which already ensures the use of the environment for its own purposes based on an understanding of one"s own interaction with it not only for adaptation to this environment, but also for its artificial transformation, which gradually gives more and more free time, giving each person correspondingly more opportunities for general development, which was previously hindered by the problem of survival.
  The new tasks that have appeared before man suggest new approaches to them, which are inaccessible to natural intellect due to its focus on solving problems of adaptation to the environment. Therefore, in a person, gradually through the emerging new parts of the brain, already fully realized considerations regarding environmental changes in the form of specific design and target programs begin to be realized.
  That is, a person manifests both the action of natural consciousness, solving with the help of natural intelligence and other properties of his individuality, mainly the problems of survival and the best adaptation to his own environment, and the action of self-consciousness by the manifestation of all the properties of his personality, in particular his mind, which solves most of the problem improving one's own life and the state of human communities not only pragmatically, but also pursuing altruistic-cultural and cognitive goals in their best representatives, transferring own self-consciousness gradually to a higher level, that is, expanding the possibilities of existence up to its highest samples. At this, self-consciousness, like the natural consciousness, uses the intellect as a provider of information to solve its own problems of managing human behavior.
  Similar multidirectionality of the tasks to be solved in one and the same human consciousness not only presupposes the unpredictability of his actions, but also the continuous struggle of these components of consciousness, that solve various tasks, which means the appearance in this form of living beings of a new driving force for the development of consciousness, which significantly accelerates the development of self-consciousness together with development of the human communities.
  Just as quick-wittedness (the natural intellect), being a property of a person's individuality, at the same time gives rise to his mind, stubbornness (perseverance) precedes and produces will, remaining also in the consciousness of a person as a feature of his individuality. It differs from the will in that it lacks the goal-setting.
  Before the appearance of a person among living beings the will was not present in their consciousness as superfluous, because of these natural beings in the environment without realizing themselves as subjects of the actions, who set goals for themselves. Their desires, actions or aspirations were being determined only by instincts and reflexes, that is, they were a direct and largely the mechanical reaction to the impact of the environment. This reaction was fully adaptive according to its destination in relation to this environment, which they, as and themselves, if and were changing, then without any goal-setting and without the aspiration to go beyond the environment in any respect.
  In other words, the main characteristic of such actions is their subconsciousness, or the lack of subjectivity. This circumstance, naturally, rejects the will for purely natural beings as such a property of consciousness that supports the pursuit of a chosen goal, and the goal itself may be far from direct adaptation to the environment, and may even contradict it. That is, to this property of consciousness out of all living beings there corresponds only a person who is capable not only to adapt to the environment, but also to consciously change it under himself in the corresponding with own goal-setting, thereby putting himself largely above it.
  Nevertheless, although the goals are being not set knowingly by all living beings, except the person, these beings have the indispensable desires to feed, multiply and improve their position in their own surrounding.
  This means, that the dissatisfaction of the consciousness of any living being with the current situation or by the deterioration of the situation requires the support in its quest for its improvement.
  And this instinctive support is being conditioned by the unchanged activity of a living being, which increases with the deterioration of his position, that is, with the growth of the subconscious dissatisfaction of his consciousness with oneself and with the situation, and weakening with the improvement of the position of the being when the situation is restored or improved - a kind of the negative feedback of consciousness with the environment, directly expressed in its dissatisfaction with the current situation, which gives the command to the existing "mechanisms" of an organism to strengthen the counteraction to the negative impacts of the environment during this period. Although feedback can turn into positive with insufficient counteraction of the environment to organisms, which in particular can be traced by the uncontrolled reproduction of a number of algae in the absence of enemies, eating them.
  The instinctive effort, which compels a living being to act in accordance with its aspirations, could be called the subconscious perseverance or tenacity, since it lasts until the end of the action.
  Thus, similar response (reaction) to the impact of the environment can be characterized, respectively, by bigger or smaller subconscious perseverance or tenacity of an organism in resisting this environment, or in other words - by the natural subconscious attraction of a being to the best adaptation in relation to own surrounding in its aspiration for the survival and the creation of the more appropriate conditions for reproduction and feeding, that is encoded in the genome.
  Therefore, with change of conditions the being automatically tries to change not for the worse thanks to usual own activity, following the ability to absorb and issue information within the program of growth, development, reproduction and the actions corresponding to them coded in its genome.
  Naturally, such perseverance in the attraction, at least, to own survival, was remained and in a person, which by all signs, except self-awareness, is a representative of the animal world, who is controlled by the basic (natural) consciousness mainly through the limbic part of the brain.
  If for all living beings, the perseverance, emanating from the lowest consciousness, including the lowest consciousness of the person, is instinctive in its reaction to greater or lesser dissatisfaction with the current changes in the present, then the highest human consciousness, which predicts the future in its own goals, already draws the support of own dissatisfaction from the future, which the highest human consciousness foresees within the intended goals.
  Therefore, the effort to achieve this, as it seems to a person, a more favorable future cannot be instinctive, but it is quite conscious.
  That is, a person is aware of a significant part of his actions and deeds, sets himself various and not always utilitarian goals.
  These targeted aspirations, like those that are not targeted in nature, are a reaction, but already conscious, to the impact of the environment in a person's pursuit of a goal - they intensify with the deterioration of the situation, in which the conscious dissatisfaction increases, and weaken as obstacles are overcome - also a kind of negative feedback, but no longer of the animal-natural consciousness with the environment, but self-consciousness with it.
  In the course of his striving for the goal, whether it is achieved or not, overcoming obstacles, a person receives a development visible to him. In other words, in the process of self-consciousness development, it is not the result itself that is important first of all, but the change of self-consciousness, obtained in the course of motion towards the goal.
  That is why this new conscious "perseverance" in the form of the forcing oneself to attain the goal set should be called the will, that is, the permission on the part of the dissatisfaction of self-consciousness, based on data processing mainly in the cerebral cortex of the person (the intellect of self-consciousness, more precisely, the human mind), and the acceptance by this mind of the relevant decision to force (volitional impulse) a person consciously to strive for what was intended, if it attracts to itself, that is, - into the future. In particular, this fact was noted in English by the coincidence of this permission with the future verb form "will", in fact showing the direction of the will into the future.
  In addition to the inducement to conscious action through the will and the stimulation to subconscious action through the instinctive perseverance, the dissatisfaction of the human consciousness by means of the will and perseverance respectively consciously and instinctively regulates strengthening or weakening of the impact of the person on the environment depending on its resistance, carrying out thereby feedback with the environment.
  Thus, the most important consequence of the dissatisfaction of a person"s self-consciousness, realized through intellect, is setting a goal and the same conscious decision to start moving towards it.
  However, due to the multitude of life problems that arise, this solution may turn out to be forgotten or in vain put aside.
  Therefore, like the instinctive perseverance of the animal consciousness, which ensures the stability of the creature"s aspiration for prey, female or supremacy in the habitat, self-consciousness of the person should provide some effort to the stability of the aspiration, but already towards a goal, designated consciously.
  This duty is undertaken by the main property of self-consciousness of the person - his dissatisfaction with.
  The specific individual selects the relevant data for comparison with other people and the state of affairs in community from the available information channels. The processing of incoming data, carried out in the relevant center (self-consciousness intelligence) concretizing dissatisfaction with yourself in a certain respect, allows to respond to one or the other challenges by making a decision
  The implementation of this decision is made at the command of the intellect, organizing the conscious effort-directionality, in order to create the stability in the pursuit of the goal.
  This conscious effort-directionality is like the instinctive perseverance of the animal consciousness, since it is also basically a reaction to the surrounding.
  However, subconscious perseverance is nothing more than an adaptive response to a change in the environment, an instinctive accounting of changes of which makes it possible at least to survive in it.
  The difference of the effort-orientation inside the self-conscious sphere of a person from the instinctive perseverance of his own subconscious sphere lies only the initiativeness of the effort-orientation inside the self-conscious sphere of a person, dictated by the conscious dissatisfaction of the person by the surrounding through his mind.
  For this reason, a person always has the ability to plan, which allows him to stay ahead of the present in the formulation of the future (goals), thereby creating the possibility of partially going beyond the limits of the environment and circumstances. In other words, dissatisfaction of the person"s self-conscious sphere in this process is transformed into liberty understood by the person, and realized in his conscious actions, the choice of which is not predetermined and not an arbitrary, but divided into pragmatic and fantasy - and it is both capable to win.
  The intensity of a conscious reaction to what is happening, or the intensity of will, depends on the importance of the goal and on the level of the person"s self-consciousness, which is determined primarily by the individual properties of the brain, and secondly by the degree of upbringing and education of the person.
  Thereby the will as the conscious reaction to the events as outside, and inside the person in the form of the steady mental effort on achievement of a goal creates a possibility of a pursuit for a prospect in the conditions of the competitive environment, maintaining the forward orientation of the development, accelerating more and more owing to growth of information flows, made by the extending activity of human communities up to the information collapse.
  The ability to pry, which is also one of the features of the natural intellect, is transformed for a person in his self-consciousness into curiosity, which is the property of personality that presupposes in its development the manifestation of a purposeful interest in the new and unusual, which is the basis for the process of cognition.
  Living beings, first of all, are distinguished by the property that they are able to recognize the data that comes through sensations, turning them into an aggregate that is ordered for them or information.
  The very survival of every organism depends on the quality of the information received in a changing environment.
  Therefore, the satisfaction with the current, or the lack of new information leads eventually to the ousting of this organism from the niche it occupies, to degradation, and eventually - to dying.
  But each organism wants to survive, since it has appeared and began to receive sensations, and not the voidness of nothingness. It means that it should not be satisfied with what it has, but strive for something else that can help not only to keep it in existence, but also can improve this existence, making it more comfortable or even dominant what consciously or no associated with enjoyable.
  Thus, each organism must be inevitably active in relation to additional and, preferably, new information about the changes taking place, if it strives for survival, and any activity is characterized by dissatisfaction because constant satisfaction deprives the creature of its independent aspiration to change both its position and own change, that is, a being turns into a passive, inactive, indifferent, which is equivalent to death, because in the community of living beings the loss of the desire for change in accordance with the changing environment, i.e. the loss of adaptation, means the inevitable death .
  Therefore, the basis of activity is always dissatisfaction, from which, as a first step to interest for the most convenient dispensation in the surrounding both the most primitive organisms and a person occurs the direct adaptation to the environment, and only death can be a barrier to it.
  The next step to interest, characteristic of more advanced beings who already understand the difference in the quality of food and features of objects of the opposite sex, is the ability to pry.
  The cat-female often turns away from quite edible, but tasteless fish, having learned in curiosity at one time that fresh meat is much tastier. The same curiosity in combination with instincts of reproduction and experience helps it to choose from half a dozen cats-manufacturer most suitable for reproductive characteristics.
  Thus, the ability to pry helps to live more pleasantly and more comfortably, to breed more effectively, and thus occupy a higher position in one"s own niche of existence. This property does not bypass a person, as, in part, a representative of the animal world.
  An even higher level of adaptation to life realities is inquisitiveness (curiosity), characteristic only for a person, and especially vividly manifested in childhood, when a child begins to become aware of himself, and on this basis tries to more or less purposefully gains as much knowledge about oneself and own surrounding to get a better comfort in it
  Thus, a chain of the properties of individuality and personality is traced for a person, thanks to which he shows a purposeful interest in life phenomena and events, without which both creativity and the process of cognition would be impossible.
  The forced cooperation of animals for the sake of increasing the probability of survival in the wild world of nature presupposes, in the course of human development, the appearance in his self-consciousness as his external expression of friendliness and empathy, that is, the main features of altruism.
  Creativity, that is, the creative principle of a person, cannot be attributed only to the above-mentioned personality properties, since it has a rather complex basis, including some features of individuality.
  On the one hand, a person's individuality presupposes a certain level of the ability to pry, perseverance, dominance and quick-wittedness, depending on the genetic and physiological characteristics of the individual, as well as on his social experience and skills.
  On the other hand, some mental abilities, curiosity, diligence, confidence in your abilities, conviction and a considerable share of altruism also, but already as the personal qualities of a person, provide creativity. However, at the same time, these high-level individuality traits prevail, forcing the individual to strive, no matter what, to achieve something new and unusual to distinguish from the general population and increase his social status, but with an understanding of the social benefit of his work due to a fairly high level of altruism of his personality.
  In other words, in society, due to indicated combination of individual and personal traits, there are individuals who are always overwhelmed with a deep sense of dissatisfaction in relation to their environment, which comes to them from the animal (lower) consciousness in its desire to create greater conveniences for its own existence due to the initial egocentrism animal consciousness. However, this feeling is combined with the altruism of their self-consciousness (higher consciousness), the dissatisfaction of which with insufficient social comfort, the development of science and culture, reaching a high degree, requires that the achievements of civilization and culture be extended to everyone.
  But, at this, the properties of individuality, determined by animal consciousness, dominate, since the activity of these individuals manifests itself for the most part instinctively, without much thought, giving, nevertheless, the most creatively active persons of all living.
  That is, the noted combination of the peculiarities of individuality and the personality of the individual persons, regardless of the presence of talents or just abilities, invariably entails them into creative activity, although it does not always give a positive result, that is, - the new effective devices and systems, or leads to the discovery of new patterns, the invention of convenient life support systems and the creation of high archetypes of culture, but creative individuals are precisely that relatively small group of the population that ensures the accelerated development of technological civilization in the conditions of the private property relations.
  V
  Now we have a basis for determining which the properties of consciousness dominate in the main strata of the population and an example of evaluating the creativity of the individuals based on the specified features of their individuality and personality, that is, we can try to find out, for example, for what reason the philistine is passive, and the representative of the power elite is active, but thievish, which features of individuality and personality are combined in one way or another in entrepreneurs, the informal opposition to power or the criminal figures, etc.
  In addition, there is an explanation for why certain categories of the population are not amenable to re-education in any way.
  The entire mass of the population of each state is actually divided in accordance with the ratio of types of consciousness available to individuals, and therefore a certain ratio and level of characteristics of individuality and personality into the following main categories: philistines, who make up the majority of the population; representatives of the power elite and another "leadership"; the informal intellectuals who form the opposition to those in power; the creative persons whose individuality and personality, as well as their ratio, were described above; the business people (businessmen, bankers); managers and economists; representatives of power structures; as well as representatives of various kinds of criminals.
  The philistines, who make up the bulk of the population, are currently represented mainly by pensioners, housewives, service workers, small clerks, workers in the agricultural sector of the economy and enterprises producing certain equipment and other workers who are not burdened with solving significant tasks, complex problems, as well as by aspiration to innovations or solving the secrets of beingness.
  Therefore, this category of the population has such name, although some public figures call the philistines (inhabitants) a people, apparently because of their overwhelming number in the total population.
  As you know, the philistines are guided mainly by their own mind and experience: preoccupied with themselves and their own well-being, they do not strive for either "high" or "low" goals, limiting themselves by the aspiration to a well-fed life, in which it is desirable to see troubles only on the screen of the monitor. The philistines do not feel the desire for something new at the expense of their own efforts, achieving a more comfortable state in life from the position of simply acquiring and consuming its benefits.
  Such "plant" life, to which they quickly get used, partly resembles the existence of animals, which, as is known, are concerned only with the problems of nutrition, reproduction and achievement, preferably, of greater comfort.
  Therefore, they resemble a herd of herbivores that grazes calmly, if it is not especially disturbed.
  The lack of aspirations for a hectic life is due to the low level of quick-wittedness, unwillingness to use one"s mind, even if relatively good, weak sensitivity in relation to other people"s troubles and troubles, insufficient impressionability, determination, sociability, the ability to pry as well as curiosity, the low level of dominance, that is, the philistines have a kind of low-grade individuality and the unremarkable personality.
  Nevertheless, competition in this, at first glance, calm sphere, at least for improving the quality of consumption and small life joys, forces the inhabitants to show such personality traits as self-confidence, self-criticism, will, but still their egoism and indifference to other people's problems prevails over altruism.
  However, such traits of their personality and individuality for individuals as the quality of mind, curiosity, will, diligence-laziness, self-confidence-self-criticism, politeness-rudeness, responsibility-dishonesty, conviction-unscrupulousness, as well as quick-wittedness, sensitivity, impressionability, perseverance, decisiveness, one or another degree of sociability may experience significant fluctuations, due to which a relatively small - fluctuating - part of the inhabitants is able to supply products of these fluctuations to other strata of the population.
  In other words, the philistines are the main soil for formation of the intellectual, imperious, creative and other layers of population; the representatives of these layers are being grew from this soil accidentally, hereditary or thanks to these or those proficiency, competence, strong will or abilities, that is, the individual distortions in consciousness, the external signs of which are individuality and personality. Such deviations can raise them above the average level of the philistines.
  The bulk of the philistines, as a rule, passive, because of the load by the monotonous work for survival and nourishment; stagnant traditions; religious delusions; predispositions due to the low cultural level to the negative impact of the active propaganda of information frauds, even more fooling the people; the lack of the adequate education and upbringing, that does not allow these people to use in large quantities social elevators and to set before itself the high purposes: similar sad and gloomy life does not promote transformation of all mass of people into bright, educated, cultural, creative, vigorous and sociable persons at all.
  Similar people stand out only a few percent.
  But it is in them this faceless mass of the population outwardly acquires development in the person of their representatives in power and in informal-intellectual opposition to power.
  In particular, among the average inhabitants there are always subjects with a somewhat higher level of the lowest consciousness, which in this case can cause them to strive not only for full, quiet and safe life, but also for domination among their own kind.
  Focusing themselves mainly on such properties of individuality as a sufficient share of quick-wittedness; sociability up to servility; a tendency to deception in the form of distortion of information and dexterity in its presentation; acquired professional skills; as well as on such personality traits as a sufficiently strong will; self-confidence; unscrupulousness, expressed in cunning and treachery, as well as a significant share of irresponsibility, expressed in experiments that seem beneficial to themselves, but clearly harmful to the population, these subjects gain an advantage over the rest - the more inert members of the community in the form of ordinary people, highly moral intellectuals of any kind, and other members of the population who are sluggish or preoccupied with other matters, and who are not able to deftly push aside or slander their opponents, as well as really enjoy the humiliation of the lower ones, and at the same time endure mock from the side of own bosses.
  Their personality is significantly reduced, since altruism, that is, kindness, friendliness, empathy, compassion, mercy, expressed in disinterested concern for others, is practically not characteristic of them.
  They compensate a lack of mind by involvement of numerous advisers, but, because the decisions ultimately has to be made by them, so far as they, as true creators of own happiness, at first consider them from a position of the personal (corporate), but not the public good with a lurch towards retaining power, gaining a greater degree of their own domination and the acquisition of all sorts of benefits, littering, besides, the leadership of the various managing and economic structures with own mostly incompetent offspring.
  Therefore, the hopes of naive masses to correct these moral monsters and cunning, hypocritical rogues, representing the power elites of various states competing with each other, have no basis, regardless of the structure of the state and its degree of development - from despotism to parliamentary democracy.
  The informal intellectuals have the hope of reorganizing society in the direction of harmony, that is, equality, fraternity and at the same time liberty, without understanding that liberty always resists to equality, justice, destroying any stability. But this hope for harmonious world order can never disappear in their blissful consciousness: they as true humanists, are not capable to believe that horrors of our world cannot turn into prosperity of each person and all mankind eventually.
  The informally-oppositional part of intellectuals, to which various educated people from this or that generation can be attributed, are active, honest, sincerely wishing good to the people, that is, with the dominant higher consciousness, expressed in a high degree of altruism of their personalities, - have never joined and will not join to the hypocritical and self-interested governing elite of the state, especially since they are characterized by a sense of self-esteem that does not allow them to please their superiors.
  In other words, the already achieved level of higher consciousness, expressed in the altruism of their personality, does not allow them to commit mean deeds, putting material goods in the last place among the values of life. Therefore, they will always expose the unscrupulous, hypocritical and thieving powers that be, fight for the rights and civil liberties of workers, involving them in this struggle as widely as possible.
  Thereby, their opposition to imperious elite does not allow society to freeze in place, being reflection of antagonism of the lowest and highest types of consciousness in each person.
  The struggle between them when the passive behavior the most part of the rest of the population occurs continuously with the dominance of a more energetic governing elite, which is provoking self-hatred from everyone else, and thus forming that antagonism that does not allow society to stop in developing.
  Thereby, a people, willy-nilly, are involved by energy of this struggle into a forward motion, which can also be evolutionary at the consent of the power elite with the opposition from the nonconformists-intellectuals to certain compromises in the interests of the working masses, but it can jump into a different course if there is no such agreement, which is reflected in the public consciousness as a clear injustice, transforming into a more or less successful attempt to remove the ruling elite from power upon the occurrence of suitable conditions.
  Thus, informal intellectuals are characterized by such features of individuality as a high degree of sensitivity, impressiveness, the desire for communion with the masses, the ability to pry, but they are not too often decisive and quick-wittedness.
  Their personality is also largely the opposite of that of those in power. They are convinced that they are right in the struggle for the people's good, but they are not always critical of their ideas, which are mostly utopian. They are ruled by altruism. Therefore, most of all, they care about the good of the people, which, however, they do not really understand, since they unite this disunited and contradictory community into a single whole, presenting this whole as the oppressed, who must defeat the oppressors and rest on this in the goodness of the earthly paradise finally achieved.
  The representatives of the enforcement structures - from the military to police officers and security guards - differ from the philistines, on the one hand, by a somewhat higher level of lower consciousness, expressed by an increased level of egoism. Therefore, their dissatisfaction with their position outwardly looks like a tendency to aggression against the weaker ones, and, on the other hand, a certain weakening of self-awareness, as a result of which their personality does not suffer from excessive altruism, but is distinguished by unscrupulousness. Therefore, they are prone to conformism, which is not combined with self-esteem.
  That is, their individuality is characterized by a greater share of quick-wittedness, decisiveness, sociability and dominance compared to the inhabitants, but they, like their masters - representatives of the power elites - are also unprincipled, irresponsible, uncritical, prone to servility and deceit in the qualities of their personality, and besides moreover, they do not have a great desire to engage in systematic or hard work.
  Their personality, just like that of representatives of the ruling elites, as a rule, is not burdened with such traits as excessive kindness and mercy, and their cherished dreams come down to the career considerations.
  Therefore, they prefer one or another type of service for the most part to the state with the prospect of career growth even with not too great intelligence, as well as a good salary, actual impunity for oppression and even petty plunder of ordinary citizens, even more so in peacetime to the vast majority of the security officials are not in danger.
  For acquiring similar advantages, they agree to endure all the antics of their usually short-sighted, rude, but cunning bosses.
  Having given themselves to this rather humiliating occupation, which does not require special thought, after service they wander to their fruit and berry plots or apartments with a joyful sense of deliverance for at least some time from the vigilant eye, as a rule, of the jackasses-bosses, in order to play in the cards, watering the garden, and drinking and snacks, as well as bickering with his wife, who is always dissatisfied with the career growth of the husband.
  Reading the literature and other intellectual activities are inaccessible for most of them thanks to the rapid "drying out" of the brain because of the specifics of the service, which does not require reflection, since there are a charter and instructions.
  Slightly lower levels of animal and self-consciousness compared to creative persons with some predominance of the lowest consciousness, as well as weaker natural intellect (quick-wittedness) with a high quality of mental abilities are quite able to give a whole cohort of the business people, not fallen in their self-consciousness up to the level of politicians and other deceitful parasites, which make up mainly the power elite.
  The business people are able to do a lot of things, trying it is non-standard to approach economic activity, but don't forget themselves at all, and their unselfishness comes down, as a rule, to charity for decrease of tax losses.
  It is their somewhat lower level of self-awareness by comparison with true inventors and artists turns the businessmen in crisis situations into the same scammers.
  True, they reject this in every possible way, but for the most part they choose exactly themselves, but not a public good.
  Therefore, businessmen, if we turn to their individuality, like the creative people, are curious, persistent, have a high level of dominance, and therefore they are very enterprising, smart enough, although all these properties of their individuality are inferior in quality to the individuality features of the creative individuals, as a result, businessmen are not so categorical in relation to the subject of their activity, and in case of several failures they can leave it.
  Their personality is characterized by the good mental abilities, curiosity, conscious diligence, conviction in the adequacy of their actions. All this contributes to non-standard solutions in their field of activity, bordering on creativity, but a significant amount of self-confidence and unscrupulousness, together with an extremely weak touch of kindness and mercy, which they replace with charity, makes them ruthless scoundrels in critical situations, and in life they, as a rule, nothing more than egoists.
  Their life is fraught with ups and downs, but the benefits it has significantly brighten it up, and businessmen are not inclined to change their position to a calmer one precisely because of the predominance in their minds of the components of animal consciousness, which gravitates so much towards pleasant comfort, active reproduction and excellent nutrition.
  Business people who waver in morality are joined by economists and managers who are equally unstable in this respect.
  They are also characterized by the predominance of the animal consciousness, but not as high as that of the representatives of the ruling elite. At the same time, their self-consciousness is at a higher level than that of representatives of the power elite, but lower than the level of self-consciousness of the creative individuals.
  However, the level of self-consciousness of economists and managers is somewhat higher than that of businessmen, who for this reason are more prone to fraudulent transactions at the slightest opportunity, unless, of course, they see an immediate danger.
  Outwardly, if we turn to the individuality of economists and managers, then, to a large extent, their behavior is explained by the fact that the dominance of their animal consciousness does not reach the level of power-loving representatives of the ruling elite.
  They also do not suffer from a lack of quick-wittedness, decisiveness, the ability to pry and sociability.
  Their personality is characterized by a high level of mental abilities, conscious diligence, self-criticism, responsibility, will, ability to individual creative actions. They can even commit altruistic acts, but their altruism and creativity limits the unscrupulousness of their personality, provoking the conformism of managers and economists, and they rarely resist the not entirely correct instructions of high authorities for fear of losing their position in the hierarchy, which gives considerable benefits., although they empathize with people's suffering, but never sacrificing themselves for the sake of the fellow tribesmen.
  They know how to build good models of effective management in the economy, science and even in politics, but being on the salary from the ruling elite, serve it, and therefore, they can hardly be an ethical role model, even more so the final decisions are by no means taken by them, but by the same power elites, within which there is always a struggle for larger powers of authority, and the decisions themselves are, as a rule, produced not with position of the interests of the country, the people, but for their own preservation and enrichment.
  Criminals and various kinds of lumpen, in particular, chronic unemployed, tramps, professional beggars, "soldiers of fortune", have such direction into the side of the lowest consciousness that they have only a recollection of the highest consciousness.
  In other words, they have only not numerous formal ties with society. For this reason, they kind of return to the level of animals, more precisely, - on the level of sensations. Neither public life, nor wealth, nor the power - nothing is interesting to them.
  Having suddenly got money, they immediately spend on drink or skip them, they sell their votes to anyone at an opportunity, they can kill and rob just like that, and in this regard they are even worse than animals.
  And yet, individual criminal figures can be unusually quick-witted and strong-willed in their illegal actions, but they do not have enough intelligence to realize the senselessness of their actions, which rarely end in their favor, because, as a rule, established social rules win, but the criminals oppose these rules their own, which practically do not differ from the behavior of predators in the animal world, that is, in their personality, altruism is completely absent, as is conscious industriousness, responsibility to society, but - triumph self-confidence, uncriticism, unprincipled in everything, laziness and arrogance, thereby demonstrating selfishness and contempt for all others, whom they consider sheep.
  Nevertheless, the individuality of these prominent representatives of criminality such that they can be enough quick-wittedness, decisive and persistent in their actions in order to create the effective bandit or fraudulent groups as a result not bad cooperation.
  Outwardly, they resemble people, but the lack of positive in their self-consciousness and the reliance in their individuality on purely animal instincts makes them incorrigible in terms of serving society.
  It is curious that these backyards of society, by most features of individuality and personality, merge with representatives of the power elite, who, in fact, only hypocritically and skillfully disguise their animal essence, differing from inveterate criminals only by a higher level of dominance, communication, professional skills in one or more public spheres, the ability to merge with society at the right time, as well as a high degree of cooperation with other government representatives.
  However, the quick-wittedness of the criminal authorities is often higher than that of representatives of the power elites.
  It is for this reason that the most strong-willed, energetic, dominant and quick-wittedness representatives of criminal circles sometimes become large figures of power even in its highest spheres, engaged in such favorable circumstances for the most part in the robbery of their own countries, since these predators are not capable of any constructive activity.
  In turn, representatives of the rule structures for the same reason are too often unable to refrain from dishonorable acts and banal theft.
  VI
  Although mass transitions from one stratum to another do not occur, the movements of individual persons occur quite often.
  Therefore, it makes sense to determine the causes of these phenomena using specific examples.
  The lowest (animal) consciousness, passed to aperson from the primates, and was being formed tens of millions of years, during the transformation of a hominid into a person, which took about two million years, if it has undergone changes, it is insignificant extremely, since it is responsible for the functioning of the organism and its interaction with the environment, mainly in relation to survival and reproduction.
  Since the individuality is a direct external expression of the animal consciousness, then all its basic properties practically do not change during the active period of a person's life.
  That is, quick wit, sensitivity, impressionability, decisiveness, one or another degree of sociability, the ability to pry, dominance, perseverance, the cooperation in actions, which were largely influenced by the program embedded in the genome, and a person received it at birth, remain unchanged in content, but their level, or degree of expression, can vary significantly for individual persons, while the appearance, temperament, demeanor can undergo significant changes over time under the influence of the environment, as well the skills, and the life experience.
  It is individuality, due to its practical immutability in the active period of a person"s life in its basic properties that do not stop manifesting one way or another, that focuses a person"s attention on a certain stratum of society, as if directing him to it, since the egocentrism of this form of consciousness instinctively marks one or another benefit from belonging to the appropriate stratum of society, depending on the existing level of the traits of his individuality.
  As for self-consciousness, which produces a person's personality, the level of which has grown significantly only in the course of the development of civilization, the traits of personality gradually also began to have a significant impact on the introduction of a person towards a particular social stratum, especially in the form of manifestations of his personal will, mind, curiosity, the degree of which increases or weakens the corresponding properties of individuality, such as perseverance, quick-wittedness, the ability to pry, as well vice versa, in what is their interaction manifested, during which one side or the other may prevail, as a result of which an individual can move from one stratum to another.
  Familiarization with certain strata also depends to a large extent on the degree of a person's principle, his diligence, responsibility, although the most powerful influence in many cases on a person's determination of his place in the strata of society is the degree of manifestation of his altruistic properties. In particular, a high level of altruism even becomes capable of pushing the selfishness of the animal consciousness among representatives of the informal opposition to power to a secondary position for a rather long time.
  In addition, it should be noted that the aging process imposes an indelible imprint on all the properties of individuality and personality, and the vast majority of representatives of all strata, except for the criminal world, whose representatives nowhere to fall lower, turn automatically into the philistines.
  The reason for this inevitable process is rather banal: sclerotic changes in the brain, a decrease in the threshold of sensations, certain negative changes in other organs reduce significantly the level of such traits of individuality as quick-wittedness, impressionability, sensitivity, decisiveness and dominance. Mental abilities, including memory, curiosity, will, creativity, self-criticism and the degree of altruism also significantly fall, leaving the elderly out of the field of vigorous activity due to a certain helplessness.
  That is, transforming into the philistines of often quite fairly clever and fairly developed individuals is caused, with rare exceptions, by a rather rapid drop in the level of both lowest and highest consciousness among pensioners due to the loss of the labor process and the absence of its fully-fledged replacement in the free time that appeared.
  In addition, a retired person is far from young, which means that he becomes more apathetic, indifferent to everything due to the lack of prospects, except for impending death.
  Therefore, for example, public life interests him only from the standpoint of maintaining stability, if, of course, it exists, but any changes, whose essence he does not understand and which he can no longer adapt to, are only disturbing him.
  Naturally, a pensioner in this respect becomes both selfish and conservative.
  In connection with these sad circumstances, we can note the main and irreparable defect of democracy, based on the provision of voting rights from a certain age to the entire population, a significant part of which are pensioners. Due to the above-mentioned decrease in the level of properties of their own individuality and personality, they are easily amenable to propaganda by those in power who own the main sources of information, and thereby contribute to the preservation, year after year, of power held largely due to this, by open or hidden oligarchic structures, even in developed countries.
  Mentioned strata of the population are not absolutely rigid structures, because, for example, the level of personality properties and individuality of businessmen, bankers (business people) and managers and economists serving them or the state, as well as creative people are quite close.
  All of them have a high quality of mind, good quick-wittedness, a high level of dominance, perseverance and will. They are all curious and hardworking.
  However, compared to the creative people, businessmen and managers have not too much altruism, but there is plenty of unscrupulousness. Nevertheless, managers, unlike businessmen who are absorbed in their business, are still more merciful towards ordinary people and are more understanding of the needs of the state.
  Therefore, for example, the managers who have lost the share of altruism which they have due to life conflicts may well turn into the tough and selfish businessmen and even into the swindlers if they have enough energy and will, but lack responsibility and criticality in relation to their actions.
  On the other hand, the businessmen and managers, for example, having acquired during their lives under the influence of the appropriate surrounding a certain amount of kindness and mercy, and having a high degree of dominance as a reflection of the egocentrism of the animal consciousness, are quite capable of turning into effective creative people in their field of activity.
  In turn, creative individuals can also become managers or businessmen, but only under one condition - a significant loss of their altruistic inclinations and, in this regard, turning into a personality who does not have firm principles, that is, who agrees to obey orders from own superiors, regardless of their value. and legitimacy.
  Another striking example of the rather frequent transition of individual figures from one stratum of society to another can be the transit of individual representatives of the enforcement agencies into the sphere of those in power.
  This thing can be explained by the fact that the properties of the individuality and personality of the representatives of the power elite and the representatives of the enforcement structures, which dictate their behavior, for the most part coincide, but differ in the degree of expression.
  And both are quick-witted, decisive, sociable and dominant, but the level of these personality traits of individuality is higher among representatives of the power elite. The latter also have a stronger will and higher self-confidence. They have certain professional skills and the ability to skillfully distort information about themselves and around them. Their unscrupulousness and treachery have no limits. They are only interested in benefit.
  Therefore, they cling to power to the last possible moment - the fruit of the egocentrism of animal consciousness, whereas altruism, which does not give tangible material benefits, is naturally not peculiar to them. Otherwise, they would not be able to break into the upper stratum of society.
  The representatives of the enforcement agencies who support those in power, of course, cannot but have similar qualities, but more modest in their degree of expression, that is, they are less quick-wittedness and dominant. Therefore, they tend to obey the orders of higher authorities without much thought, even if these orders contradict established morality, which is impossible without a solid share of unscrupulousness and irresponsibility. Naturally, altruism in this case will also be a hindrance.
  The cherished dream of high-ranking figures of the enforcement structures is to penetrate into the upper floors of power, and they do it quite often at turning points in history - during wars and various cataclysms, since altruism is not particularly characteristic of them, and an increased level of dominance in some cases can help them. Therefore, quite a lot of generals and colonels have acquired power in due time, but they could not really use it with rare exceptions due to their unpreparedness for managing the economy and weak quick-wittedness in those areas where instructions and charters could not help them.
  At first glance, it seems that a fairly effective lever to counteract the role of individuality and personality in the distribution of people across strata is also the principle of inheritance, for example, power or wealth.
  But history shows that weak descendants of strong personalities quickly lose under the pressure of more energetic, quick-witted, cunning and unprincipled individuals.
  
  Chapter 2.
  What forces manifest personality in history?
  
  There are many opinions about who or what makes history. Some argue that the main actor in the history of mankind are the personalities, others - peoples, others believe that we are controlled by certain forces. Therefore, it makes sense to figure out what is really happening to us, or rather, what is hidden behind the personalities who, as it seems to many, are creating history.
  In itself, the civilization of homo sapiens is finite, since it has a beginning. And this beginning was laid in the era of the transformation of primitive communal formations into larger structures of various types, but with one common feature - the right of private property. These, at first, tribal communities, uniting, gradually transformed into states, the structure and functions of which then changed in the direction of complexity.
  The main tasks of the state, since they were based on the right of private property, consisted in protecting the owners from those deprived of it, as well as in their own development, without which, in a competitive environment, the state could be absorbed by stronger neighbors.
  As we already know, most of the states of the current civilization have gone through the stages of slaveholding, feudalism and capitalism.
  Who or what pulled these states forward - from barbarism to the heights of technology and culture?
  If we turn to the very beginning of the current civilization, then in the minds of people, before the mysterious and surpassing powers of nature, the consciousness reigned that they were controlled by certain forces through their own representatives in the person of rulers, priests or heroes.
  At the stage of slaveholding, these mythological ideas about the otherworldly arbiters of people's destinies have been supplemented by considerations about the possibility of a significant influence of individual representatives of the human race on changes in the life of communities, to which the rest of the citizens attributed the most energetic and self-activity people they knew well.
  However, in the Middle Ages, the place of these citizens-personalities has been occupied mainly by monarchs and their close associates, who, allegedly, driven by divine providence, knew where society should go.
  In the future, it was this idea that was transformed in an atheistic society into its opposite - the recognition of a leading role in the history of personalities.
  With the advent of capitalism with its formal equalization of the rights of personalities, destruction of the estates, the leading role of personality in history quite naturally shifted from rulers to ordinary mortals, who nevertheless differed in a heroic spirit that allowed them to actively and effectively counter the invaders and protect the people from the oppressors.
  British writer, historian and philosopher Thomas Carlyle attributed this heroic spirit to intellectuality. On this basis, he began to preach the cult of heroes: "... world history, the history of what a person has done in this world, is, in my understanding, essentially a story of great people who worked hard here on earth. They, these great people, were the leaders of mankind, educators, models and, in a broad sense, the creators of all that the whole mass of people generally sought to carry out what she wanted to achieve. Everything that has been done in this world represents, in essence, an external material result, the practical realization and embodiment of thoughts that belonged to great people, sent to our world" [1, p. 7].
  Developing his ideas about the role of heroes in changing the world in historical terms on the basis of intellectualism, Carlyle, again, quite naturally for himself, argues that by raising the intellectual level, that is, by upbringing and education on the examples of great people, anyone can be made a hero: "A full world of heroes instead of a whole world of fools... - that's what we want! We, for our part, will put aside all that is base and false; then we may hope to be governed by nobility and truth, but not before... You and I, my friend, can in this perfectly stupid light be, each of us, not a fool, but a hero, if we shall want to" [2, p. 38-39].
  Thus, Carlyle, uniting heroes with leaders and prophets, believes that it is they who rule the world, and the masses are often only a tool in their hands.
  Surprisingly, it is a fact, that Carlyle has not noticed or did not want to notice belonging to power by no means of the heroes and prophets, but only energetic, not stupid and immoral rogues who seized it.
  However, as is known from history, the heroes and prophets do not actually seek to rule the world - they only episodically try, respectively, to save it from the consequences of the mistakes or stupidity of the rulers or direct it to the path which seems to them to be true, and not to rule or govern.
  In contrast to similar views of the British philosopher, Leo Tolstoy considered great people only tools of providence, slaves of history: "A person consciously lives for himself, but serves as an unconscious tool for achieving historical, universal goals. A perfect deed, and its action, coinciding in time with millions of actions of other people, acquires historical significance. The higher a person stands on the social ladder, the more connected he is with a large number of people, the more power he has over other people, all the more obvious the predestination and inevitability of his every act... The king is the slave of history. History, that is, the unconscious, general, swarming life of mankind, uses every minute of the life of kings for itself as an instrument for its own purposes" [3].
  Tolstoy, like Carlyle, takes an extreme position on the role of personality in history, but on the other hand. And this is not surprising. If we recognize that a person plays a role, then he can be viewed from the position of weakness or strength of this role.
  It is quite natural that the problem of personality in history could not fail to find a middle view of it between these two positions.
  An example of such view is the formulation of his X. Rappoport. He cautiously states that the question of personality in history allows for "... a combination or reconciliation of subjective and objective points of view. Personality is both a cause and a product of historical development..." [4, p. 47].
  Such set of possible variants of the role of personality in history suggests that the authors of these three obvious approaches were unable to "get" to the last layer of the depth at which the true mover of the historical process is located, limiting themselves by the solutions of this problem, having laid on the surface.
  All these approaches are acquitted in their own way by the external result of their direct manifestation at various stages of historical development, but these authors have not answered the main question, what is hidden behind these generally obvious forces, whether it is the self-activity of personality or the predestination of the act of personality?
  It must be assumed that the answer can be found in the difference between the consciousness of man and his communities from the consciousness of the highest representatives of the animal world - primates.
  The chimpanzee genome coincides with the human genome by 99%, but for tens of millions of years these primates have not moved from an adaptive existence in the wild to changing this nature according to their own understanding, and the hominids could do this for two million years, which was manifested finally in the creation relatively recently by them already in shape homo sapiens of a civilization based on property rights.
  The explanation of such a phenomenon can be found only in the sphere of consciousness, since a person escaped from the animal world due to his gaining self-consciousness, thereby fitting into a state of aware change in his own time of existence.
  In general, such fluctuations of thinkers from one extreme to the other appear when there are a lot of examples in history of a visible greater or lesser influence or even impact of a person on the course of history.
  For example, L. N. Tolstoy, apparently, paid the most attention to the fact that over thousands of years of rather pathetic existence of human communities, which mostly stagnated, developing for the ordinary observe unnoticeably, and which he most likely, for this reason, represented something like a swarm, in which personalities are not given the opportunity to act of their own free will, even if they have outstanding abilities as commanders or administrators, to significantly change the state of things.
  From this follows Tolstoy's quite logical conclusion that no individual is capable of independently and consciously making cardinal changes in the world, despite the fact that he sets certain goals for himself and solves current tasks.
  Indeed, no a personality, even a genius, is able to know the sign of fate, that is, to know exactly what is better and what is worse for the world or the country, an example of which is the disastrous campaign to Russia for Napoleon and France in general.
  The fact is that in the process of finding and discovering a solution to a problem that may seem absolutely correct, there is always an inadequate interpretation of incoming data - often contradictory - from incoming information flows, especially since a person's ability to fully cover these flows and choose the necessary information from them is extremely limited both by his upbringing, education, knowledge, the ability to use the latter, memory, traditions, misconceptions of the environment around him, religion, and the ability to quickly think and make adequate decisions.
  Therefore, the changes introduced into history by the actions of a person often surprise that person himself by the fact that he assumed something completely different. And this means the incompleteness of the control of one's own actions by a person, in which, therefore, some other forces intervene - more significant, although from the outside these forces may seem by the personality himself.
  Apparently, for this reason, Tolstoy's ideas about a certain force, that predetermines the human actions, look quite convincing on the general outline of history.
  In other words, you can suppose and wish as much as you like, apply or not to the conditions, but it is impossible to foresee everything, and even more so, it is absolutely impossible to foresee the future even with the use of computers for this, capable of really only extrapolation: in history.
  All "great people" wanted one thing, but they received, as a rule, something else: or not at all corresponding to the desired model, which, for example, happened with Lenin, who ended up with not communism, but a bureaucratic fake for it, which, due to its utopian nature, disappeared relatively quickly, or such unstable formation as, for example, the empire created by Alexander Macedonian, which collapsed immediately after the death of its creator.
  You will say that there are many other examples, but all states that arose, if you look closely, did not correspond to the desires of their creators, but turned out in one form or another as if by themselves only at a certain time and in a certain place, at this, a personality or even a group of personalities could only contribute to or counteract this.
  All this, indeed, points to the irony of fate, that is, that in the end we are controlled by a kind of dissatisfaction with the existing, always aspiring the best, but not knowing this best for sure and, moreover, not knowing the right ways to achieve this or that good.
  T. Carlyle, on the contrary, saw in people the embodiment of intelligence, which, indeed, can do a lot. Therefore, he rather paid attention to coups in society, where in the foreground, as he believed, were heroes with high intelligence, who, thanks to him, produced these upheavals. And this also looks very convincing, since, for example, the deeds of Christ and Napoleon, which turned the world upside down, are difficult to doubt.
  As for H. Rappoport, he just stated that the truth should lie in the middle, not claiming more.
  With the development of science, the management of the historical motion was transferred from the intellect of historical figures, which they really often lacked, to their desires, instincts, will, experiences.
  In the future, such views were supplemented by the concept of collectivism, which implies the impossibility of reducing the community to personalities, which found its extreme expression in the involvement of the average person in social processes, and nothing more.
  By now, considerations have arisen about the separation of the personality from the management by the historical motion, whose role has been reduced to coexistence of peoples in its diversity in a certain caste space in the form of different social practices.
  All these views, again, reduce the actions of the personality in history exactly to a role, which is being associated that with will, that collectivism, that caste spaces, which in itself means wandering on the surface, and not an attempt to penetrate into the depth from which the scenario of this role floats out.
  Therefore, researchers of this problem, in essence, shy away from searching for the basis and reasons from which the actions of personalities in history really proceed.
  In particular, the desires and instincts emanating really from animal consciousness are unlikely to lead to great achievements for the good of society, since they, as animals perfectly demonstrate, are limited only to the desire for survival, reproduction, improvement of their own situation and, preferably, good nutrition.
  Will and experiences only accompany the actions of the personality.
  Collectivism, contrary to historical facts, generally denies the influence of personality on the course of history.
  Any space in which individuals are located, even if caste, does not prohibit them from acting for their own considerations, since they are not robots.
  *
  Apparently, G. V. Plekhanov approached the problem of personality in history most adequately in comparison with previous and subsequent researchers, although he did not discover one or those forces that are hidden behind the actions of personalities.
  The contradiction between the recognition, on the one hand, of the personality of the broadest role in history, and, on the other hand, the assertion that the historical movement is subject to certain general laws, he tried to resolve in his work "On the Question of the Role of the Personality in History" [5].
  Plekhanov points out: "The collision of these two views took the form of the antinomy, the first member of which was general laws, and the second was the activity of personalities. From the point of view of the second member of the antinomy, history seemed to be a simple concatenation of accidents, from the point of view of its first member, it seemed that even individual features of historical events were conditioned by the action of common causes" [5, p. 32].
  In his work, he assumed in some kind of synthesis not only to solve this problem, but to find the basis that determines the course of historical events.
  Criticizing the recognition of the role of personalities as dominant in history, Plekhanov, using the example of the French Revolution of 1789, quite rightly notes: "... the storms that France has recently experienced have very clearly shown that the course of historical events is determined by far not only by the conscious actions of people. Events are committed under the influence of some hidden necessity, this circumstance alone should have suggested that these events are committed under the influence of some hidden necessity acting like hidden forces of nature, blindly, but in accordance with known immutable laws" [ibid., p. 17].
  Trying dialectically to combine certain "immutable laws" with a certain influence on the course of the historical process of personalities, Plekhanov puts the development of productive forces in place of the driving force of the historical process, believing that it is they "... determine successive changes in people's social relations" [ibid, p. 33], but at the same time attributes the influence on the course of historical events to special causes.
  These reasons, in his opinion, are "that historical situation in which the development of the productive forces of a given people takes place and which itself was created in the last resort by the development of the same forces among other peoples, that is, by the same common cause" [ibid., p. 33].
  Along with that, Plekhanov complements the influence of special causes by the influence of single causes on the course of history, "that is, of the personal features of public figures and other "accidents", thanks to which events finally receive their individual physiognomy. Single causes cannot make the fundamental changes in the action of the common and special reasons, which also determine the direction and limits of influence of single causes. But still, it is certain that history would have a different physiognomy if the single reasons affecting it were replaced by other reasons of the same order "[ibid., P. 33].
  Nevertheless, Plekhanov believes that... "personalities, thanks to given features of their character, can influence the fate of society. Sometimes their influence is even very significant, but both the very possibility of such influence and the size of it are determined by the organization of society, the ratio of its forces. The character of the personality is a "factor" of social development only there, only then and only since it is allowed by this social relationships "[ibid., p. 23].
  Plekhanov also believes that such personality qualities as talents, knowledge, determination, courage, etc., which can play a significant role in the life of society, are explained not only by the general laws of development, but, in any case, "... the personal features of leading people determine the individual physiognomy of historical events, and the element of accident, in the sense we have indicated, always plays some role in the course of these events, the direction of which is determined in the last analysis by so-called general causes, that is, in fact, by the development of the productive forces and the mutual relations of people determined by it in the socio-economic process of production. Accidental phenomena and personal features of famous people are incomparably more noticeable than deep-seated general causes" [ibid., p. 31].
  If the properties of social relations, as Plekhanov believes, are determined by the state of the productive forces, then the state of these forces depends on the talents and characteristics of certain individuals in one or another of their ability to discover and invent.
  As a comment on the influence of talents on the course of events, Plekhanov points out: "In order for a person with talent of a certain kind to acquired, thanks to it, a great influence on the course of events, two conditions must be complied with. Firstly, his talent should make him more relevant to the social needs of the given epoch... Secondly, the existing social system should not block the way of a person who has a given feature, necessary and useful just at that time" [ibid, p. 28].
  Similar approach to the influence of personality on the course of history led Plekhanov to the following conclusions regarding outstanding personalities: "A great man is great not because his personal features give an individual physiognomy to great historical events, but because he has features that make him most capable of serving great social needs of their time, which arose under the influence of general and special causes" [ibid., p. 34].
  He adds to this characteristic of a great person that his deeds consist not in "that he can, as it were, stop or change the natural course of things, but in the fact that his activity is a conscious and free expression of this necessary and unconscious course" [ibid., p. 34].
  All these considerations of Plekhanov about the role of personality in history, despite their external persuasiveness, attractiveness, and sometimes reliability, are, in fact, superficial.
  The fact is that he, for example, claiming social relations as a consequence of the development of productive forces, did not reveal to us why productive forces arose and as a result of which they began to develop in one place, and in another they remained undeveloped.
  Plekhanov also did not clarify why the concept of special causes introduced by him, which he considers the historical situation, that is, the conditions under which the development of productive forces takes place, are caused by productive forces.
  In other words, he considers as if the causeless productive forces to be the source of both social relations and the historical situation, forgetting that, for example, for several hundred years of the domination of capitalism, despite significant changes in all elements of the productive forces - from the steam engine and its mechanics to the operators of computer networks, social relations are not have undergone significant changes, remaining at the owner and employee level, and the historical situation in the countries of developed democracy has not turned into a different one, although, of course, the system of life in different countries may be quite peculiar, but it is more related to national, religious and everyday characteristics than productive forces. That is, the development of technology does not replace these features and for the most part does not correlate with them.
  The actual equating of personal features of public figures with accidents, thanks to which events get their individual physiognomy, satisfying the needs of their time or countering them, would be more adequate if Plekhanov explained what he understands by personality, as well as individuality, and on the basis of which this random personality sometimes so fatally counteracts necessity, that it turns whole nations are in the dust, although it doesn't wish this at all, which there are plenty of examples in history on different continents at different times.
  n particular, advocate A. F. Kerensky, who became the head of the Russian government after the February Revolution of 1917, clearly understood the need for democratic changes in Russia, but his actions, on the contrary, stopped these changes for Russia for almost a century, leading Russia to collapse with numerous victims.
  In addition, Plekhanov's expression "the course of things" is extremely unfortunate, since in history events occur, and things can remain in place at the same time.
  In general, significant figures of history, as a rule, are not theorists following one scheme or another. There are very few of them, and their actions are rarely adequate.
  For example, V. I. Lenin tried to put into Marx's theories into practice, somewhat modernizing them, but this false representation of the historical motion failed, and this quasi-socialism, which quickly degenerated into a bureaucratic distribution machine, was struck after a historically short period of time in competition with more proactive and efficient capitalism.
  All these supposedly great personalities at the head of states, as a rule, are looking for their own benefit, often imagining God knows what, but, in fact, they seek to seize power first, and then keep it for the sake of what it gives, and not for the benefit of the peoples who have fallen under their wing.
  Nevertheless, their actions may or may not coincide with the natural course of events, respectively accelerating or slowing down the development of the entire civilization or local community until its disappearance, which is their impact on this course, which they usually do not try to comprehend, but sometimes smart guys like Lenin or Mao Zedong come across. They fit under it various hypotheses that are plausible for themselves, and bring their peoples to a miserable state, although, in general, all their efforts, extremely rarely justified by the true state of affairs, could not stop both the development of their countries and the development of civilization as a whole.
  The fact is that the development of civilization, despite kickbacks and inhibition, is not able to stop due to the increase in information flows produced by the expanding conscious activity of the entire population, up to an information collapse, which represents the limit beyond which the capabilities of the human brain and computer networks that complement it are already unable to cope with the growing flow of incoming information.
  Be that as it may, these "great" personalities, being in power, are willy-nilly forced to solve not only their own, but also urgent social problems, introducing new laws and rebuilding state institutions, as Napoleon had to do, who introduced a new Code, which is a fundamental codification of civil law. At that moment, he turned into the personality who became the leading force in the historical development of society, but he himself believed that he was doing this manipulation only so that his state would remain at the forefront and not lose in wars.
  Similar fundamental impact on the course of world history, unless, of course, one does not mean the backyards of the world, is due to the end of the corresponding stage of world civilization.
  Napoleon became the banner of the collapse of the era of feudalism, but the completion of this era did not happen by itself as a natural process of the evolutionary development, and not by virtue of some general laws of social development, of which quite a lot have been proposed, but was prepared by educators and technologies developed by that time that required expanded application, which gave high profits, and also, the rottenness of the power elite of France at that time, mired in debt, debauchery and lost a sense of reality.
  But all this, definitely, had a basis in a significant rise in self-awareness not only of the opposition to the government, but also of a significant part of the population, already sufficiently enlightened to understand and accept the change in the state of affairs in favor of the abolition of estates for the sake of free enterprise.
  Therefore, at great fractures of public life, fundamental changes in its way of life, "the great personalities" embody a vector of change, and in years of stability, such personalities, acting quite reasonably for themselves, are able to lead their countries into traps of their own or others' false ideas, which, for example, has been happening for a long time in North Korea, Venezuela or in Cuba.
  That is, "the great personalities" in power put the solution of their own problems in the foreground, using the resources of the state and clinging to power precisely for the sake of power, with the rarest exceptions.
  Therefore, behind any personality in power, whether she has talents or not, there is something that dictates certain actions to her initially. And this something, of course, can be neither productive forces, nor relations in society, nor the historical situation, nor the considerations of the individual himself, often quite stupid.
  In order to find out what kind of forces are forcing each person, and not just great personalities, to act this way and not otherwise, it is necessary to put the problem of the actor of history, whether it is a personality, a people or providence, for consideration from a different angle, since all of them arel in plain sight and accepted as truth, depending on the preferences of the public, as if performing a role, the true author of which is hidden from this public.
  In particular, a personality in a history, as well as an actor on stage, can play in different ways, slowing down or speeding up the course of history for a particular community, but only according to a scenario that has some peculiarities of action depending, of course, not on the productive forces directly, but to much greater extent on the national-religious, cultural characteristics of specific communities, on their own considerations about the realities of life, as well as on an incredible number of some minor or particular situations that may at the moment the moment is crucial, although these reasons for actions are not the last and determining ones.
  For example, the appearance of Christ accelerated the course of history for countries that adopted Christianity due to the fact that it provided most of all freedom of the expression of will for every person - and where are the productive forces here? - and the appearance of Buddha and Mahomed slowed down the course of history for regions that adopted Buddhism or Islam, as they put people respectively either in a passive position, or suggested that they were completely at the mercy of an otherworldly force.
  Nevertheless, the countries that have lagged behind in their development can eventually become involved in the information flow created by advanced states, and even at some point they are able to outrun them, as China has recently done.
  As for a people, it, consisting mainly of the mass of the philistines, do not show significant activity in their actions due to being crushed by circumstances that dictate a desire for survival rather than knowledge and achievements in any field.
  Relatively few members of the population are capable of these accomplishments, who are trying by all means available to them to change the miserable situation of the working people in comparison with the position of the elite part of society - and their efforts are not in vain, since the situation of those exploited from a state a slave has undergone significant changes by now.
  A significant number of people now not only acquired more degrees of freedom of action and significantly improved their financial situation, but it became quite possible for them to receive a good education, and they also got the opportunity to elect their own kind to government organs at its various levels and withdraw them from these organs.
  In given problems, it is important that the impact of single personalities or some groups of the population on the course of history is only external in any respect and depends no longer on the merits of the personality the effectiveness of groups, but from the place, time and state of a particular community, which, in turn, are determined by nothing other than the actions of those strata of the population who have the opportunity to manifest themselves in the creation of the historical process, and by themselves the actions of both the personalities and groups have only one original reason - the interaction of natural consciousness and self-consciousness. Exactly from the levels of these form consciousness everything else depends on, moreover, at this, the basis of the action of these forms of each human consciousness is one or another degree of their dissatisfaction with the existing.
  For example, the slave-owning ancient world, represented by its most prominent representatives, managed to develop both the foundations of legislation and a democratic system of government, as well as unsurpassed examples of culture and art, but remained fruitless with regard to the development of technologies that turned out to be unnecessary due to the cheapness of the slave labor.
  Accordingly, in this case, the time, place and conditions did not correspond to the manifestation of scientific and engineering thought, and the root cause of this circumstance was the low level of self-consciousness even of the leading and free part of society in its altruistic component, which has not yet reached the position of denial of the slave state.
  That is, a personality is able to appear and manifest himself only in certain conditions that are not created directly by it.
  But who or what creates the conditions for the manifestation of personality and writes a general scenario for it?
  *
  It must be assumed that they are by no means some otherworldly forces. On the contrary, these forces are entirely dependent on the actions of living beings, who, over time, create more and more expanding information flows with their actions, which are dictated by their dissatisfaction with the existing ones, provoking the aspiration for new, possibly more favorable conditions of existence, and thereby giving "food" to these otherworldly forces, that is, imparting them a certain meaning.
  For a person, this dissatisfaction is manifested, as a rule, in the search for new interests, which allows both practical use of the found interesting, changing one's own environment, and learning an immense world with its help.
  These interests divide society according to the direction of their actions, advancing both each person and society forward in their interaction and mutual influence, thereby developing their self-consciousness, which, in turn, expands the human horizon, revealing new objects of interest.
  That is, the world of nature developed so slowly precisely because its representatives lack the ability to be aware of themselves and their surroundings, and to show not just curiosity about it, but interest, without which neither cognition of the surrounding world nor its purposeful change is impossible.
  Therefore, nothing else but self-consciousness in its development up to a certain limit in interaction with the natural consciousness is the original cause of the development of civilization, and the basis of this historical process can only be the ever-present dissatisfaction with the present of both forms of consciousness, despite the fact that this historical process itself may outwardly look like a result produced by the personalities, individual groups of the population, productive forces. or providence.
  The unequal level of self-consciousness, natural consciousness in their interaction automatically identifies three main external social forces within the state, the interests of which differ significantly.
  This - the struggle of the power elite with the intellectual opposition that opposes it; the actions of creative personalities representing science, engineering and other technology; activities of representatives of all areas of culture, including art and folk art.
  The decisive influence on the course of civilization is the struggle of the ruling elite with the opposing to it covertly or openly intellectual opposition.
  The power elite is guided for the most part by selfish interests of their own benefit, the basis of which is in the animal (natural) component of the consciousness of this elite.
  Intellectuals oppose it because of their interest in improving society, which is based on the altruism of their self-consciousness, which prevails over the egoism of self-consciousness and the egocentrism of the animal component of their consciousness.
  The struggle of these strata of society, hating each other, due to the fundamental divergence of their interests and intentions, leads to a gradual change in social relations, since the rest of the masses of the people cannot help but get involved in this struggle one way or another, gradually benefiting from it for themselves in the form of improving their own living conditions, despite the cruel forms of resolving contradictions between by various groups of the population in the form of wars, uprisings, coups and even genocide, which are the invariable companions of any antagonistic public education, nevertheless, avoiding a state of stagnation precisely due to its own contradictoriness in the form of the struggle of the power elite with the intellectual opposition to it.
  As an example of the role of personality in history, which acted purely under the dictation of its own forms of consciousness - animal consciousness and self-consciousness through, respectively, own individuality and personality with their corresponding aspirations and interests, we will give a description of such odious person in history as Hitler.
  Whatever it was, but he showed himself quite impressively as the agent of the true expression of the aggressive essence of the power elites, but he still has been defeated in the battle for world domination with more powerful rivals.
  However, his actions significantly changed the balance of power in the world, accelerating the course of the development of civilization as a whole, and, as a result, greatly influenced the level of self-consciousness of even wider segments of the world's population than this was before.
  The actions of this rather vulgar figure with a silly appearance and a native of the plebeians can be represented as the behavior of an individual reflecting such attributes of animal consciousness in the aggregate as dominance, quick-wittedness, decisiveness, perseverance and the ability to organize coherence in the work of associates, ensuring the increased effectiveness of his actions achieved due to the high level of the natural (animal) component of his consciousness.
  That is, all these properties of his individuality reflected the level of the natural (animal) component of his consciousness, which could well belong to the leader of a wolf pack.
  It was they, backed up by such personality traits as high willpower, excellent memory and a calculating mind, that gave him an advantage in the struggle for power, which expressed Hitler's main interest.
  To these properties of his personality, we must also add his curiosity, conscious diligence, a high degree of self-confidence, responsibility and complete unscrupulousness.
  In addition, he was characterized by a high degree of creativity, especially in politics, resourcefulness and altruism, which was curtailed in a certain respect.
  More details about personality and individuality can be found in the article "Why and how do individuality and personality compete in a person?" [6].
  That is, Hitler's altruism was very selective, extending only to the inner circle of comrades-in-arms, animals, as well as exclusively to the German nation, each representative of which, due to lack of education and own stupidity, he considered by Aryan and determined on the role of a superman, which some part of the subhuman should serve, and the rest should be destroyed in order to avoid spoiling the Aryan race. Such were his sincere thoughts about the best reorganization of society for the benefit of the same society by such "purification".
  In he, also, because of resentment at past harassment and humiliation, hatred of Jews received hypertrophied expression - an indispensable property of any animal consciousness that does not allow the predominance of any kind of competitors, - expressed in him in the form of a high degree of distrust of other competitive communities, and Hitler considered his ideological opponents - communists as well as cunning Jews to be the most dangerous of them. which, as he believed, quietly almost achieved world domination through the most economically developed country - the United States, where they have already taken the leading positions.
  But this was completely intolerant for him, since such positions should be taken by the best, that is, the Aryans led by him, and not some lousy Jews.
  In comparison with the other leaders of the power elites of other leading countries of the world, Hitler, possessing these properties of individuality and personality, as well as using the capabilities of a giant and perfectly organized state machine obedient to him in all respects, had a clear advantage, despite his folksy origin, a lot of prejudices, lack of education and, as a result, a number of completely utopian, if not stupid ideas, which, nevertheless, were very attractive to the German inhabitants because they put them above all others.
  Hitler has played on this in many ways, having fooled during several years the weak on the head of the philistines of his country with racist propaganda, compared to whom, as his propagandists shouted at all corners, all others, with a few exceptions, were just manure.
  Therefore, it was difficult for the German philistines not to succumb to the prospects of a wonderful future, where they would live in a kind of paradise, for which, however, they would have to fight a little and endure a little.
  In addition, fanatical Hitler skillfully used his origin and courage in the battles of the last war to seduce the people with his own person, who, despite all the obstacles, got out of mud into princes, promising all Germans in view of the already demonstrated dexterity of quick achievement his goals, earlier seemed inaccessible, quick achievement of power over all world.
  Hitler's cunning also consisted in the fact that he skillfully used the contradictions in the camp of his opponents, but his short-sightedness and stupidity consisted in the inability of his strategically shallow mind to calculate the resources of his opponents in the event of a protracted hostilities. In addition, he aroused their hatred by fanatical adherence to his unscientific ideas about the racial superiority of the Germans over other peoples and the desire to destroy Jews, Gypsies and Slavs.
  As a result, he was doomed to defeat, although he caused significant damage to a number of countries and peoples.
  Paradoxically, this example shows that Hitler, having unleashed a war for world domination, did not change the progressive course of human development: after the war, the UN emerged to coordinate the actions of various states, the world from the unipolar, dominated by Great Britain, has already acquired two poles balancing each other - the USA and the USSR, eliminating for a long time is the danger of a global war due to the appearance of nuclear weapons; the military arms race, due to the dual-use of a number of types of weapons, has significantly changed the technological equipment of civilization, giving it, in particular, jet aircraft, nuclear power plants and powerful rockets that allowed humanity to go into cosmos.
  Of course, Hitler himself could not imagine all this - he had different plans and aspirations that could only throw humanity into wildness, but everything went not as he wanted, but according to a different scenario, since this scenario is not created by individuals, peoples, and not even providence, but it depends on the information flows created by the conscious activity of the same personalities and peoples.
  Those countries and peoples that form these flows most effectively occupy a leading position in the world, using it to parasitize on other peoples and countries that are less active, and these leaders change periodically in this role.
  For example, the dominance of Romans was replaced by the dominion of Spain over almost the entire world, which, in turn, was taken from it by British, and over time they were forced to give way to the leading place in the world to Americans.
  The ever-accelerating time of the historical motion of civilization itself is directly created by the interaction of the collective consciousness of the power elites and the collective consciousness of the intellectual opposition to them, fueled by these information flows, who are the most advanced layers of the population,
  The opposition of the interests of these layers of population creates that tension in society, without which the historical motion itself would not be possible.
  An example of such stagnation are the archaic communities that exist on the outskirts of the current civilization.
  All of the above, apparently, can lead to some essential, in our opinion, considerations.
  1. The root cause of the actions of any personality in history is the interaction of the animal form of consciousness and self-consciousness, at this, in their base is the inescapable dissatisfaction with the present.
  It is the level of these forms of consciousness, the priority and intensity of their interaction through their external expression in the form of individuality and personality that ensure the direction of ideas and desires visible to all, as well as the effectiveness of the actions of this personality in history, but not their results, which are not amenable to accurate predictions, since the biological essence of the animal form of the human consciousness in its aspirations is mainly it is at odds with the assessments and intentions of a person's self-consciousness, giving mostly the unpredictable results when they interact. The same applies to the collective consciousness of the certain layers of the population.
  All factors of the socio-cultural life of society, the animal consciousness of a person takes into account only for attempts to implement within the framework of a well-known triad - nutrition, reproduction, dominance, since this form of consciousness is given to a person by nature in accordance with her requests and does not change during a person's life.
  But the ability to manifest one or another degree of awareness of the environment, that is, a person"s self-consciousness, which has nothing to do with the animal world, depends primarily on the education and subsequent direct communication withown surrounding based on its cultural characteristics, into which, as a rule, a person falls at birth, regardless of his will, and only then can try to change it, moreover, the degree and characteristics of a person's altruistic inclinations in his self-consciousness depend on upbringing in him of one spirit or another, as well as on self-upbringing and self-education.
  Therefore, the innate high level of the animal consciousness with its egocentricity, as well as shortcomings or omissions in a person's awareness of the surrounding, provoking the predominance of the selfish component of self-consciousness with its self-confidence, uncriticism and unscrupulousness, make a person, no matter how he hides it from himself, by a purely immoral being, which is characterized by treachery, irresponsibility, a tendency to cunning and lies.
  But it is this kind of person, as a rule, that is present in power and other structures close to it precisely because they do not shun any meanness in combination with servility for the sake of career considerations. Hence, it should not be surprising that our world is mired in squabbles, wars, widespread hunger and inescapable inequality.
  2. Since the actions of any person are directed by his consciousness in both its forms in accordance with their interaction, which he, as a rule, is able to control through self-consciousness only partially, in so far it is not necessary to talk about the decisive conscious role of the actions of the individual in the history of mankind, which actually manifest themselves as the interaction of a set of innate properties of individuality, indicated above, and reflecting the quality of his animal form of consciousness, and a set of acquired personality traits that reflect the quality of his self-consciousness.
  These properties and features of consciousness, in principle, can be recognized and partly judged by them about the possible intentions of the individual, which psychology is trying to do, but, nevertheless, all these attributes of consciousness remain external and do not fully reveal the continuously changing and influencing at each other the forms of consciousness, as a result of which the results of personality actions often remain unforeseen even for this personality oneself.
  Thus, any personality can only perform the role temporarily given to her, proceeding, as it seems to her, from her own considerations and the cumulative aspirations of the people and phenomena around her, known to her, not really knowing as a result of what complex work, the variable successes and the interaction of both forms of consciousness all these considerations and knowledge appear.
  Therefore, it is quite natural that the temporary preponderance of the considerations of one of the forms of consciousness, adequate for it, but completely unacceptable in reality, what often happens, for example, when a person acts for "ideological" reasons, leads to the fact that the result of these actions turns out to be the opposite of the expected, that is - quite often - as the pure stupidity.
  If the collective consciousness of some local community, for good reasons, requires the resolution of an urgent problem, then there are a lot of applicants for this role, singling out in the competitive struggle one who tries to solve this problem with varying degrees of success or failure. Therefore, it seems that it is he who is the hero or the culprit, but in fact he is just an actor on the podium.
  In particular, the same Hitler sincerely reflected in himself the national humiliation of the Germans for the lost war, and also quite seriously tried to humiliate all other peoples, but it did not work out, because it was not even wrong, but stupid to transfer own personal ambitions and aspirations to the stage of the world.
  In general, the Second World War, as it was shown above, only accelerated the process of civilization development, although locally Hitler led post-war Germany to the position of a semi-colony of the victorious countries, currently a semi-colony of the United States.
  Similarly, Napoleon, who, according to the results of his wars, actually gave a significant acceleration to the collapse of the feudal system in Europe, that is, rendered considerable assistance to the historical progress, locally destroyed the importance of France as a contender for the rank of a world power, which he certainly did not want.
  Churchill, on the contrary, having won locally in the Second World War with Germany, stopped the existence of the world British Empire, which, however, for economic reasons, it was time to hand over the reins of government to the world leader in the economy - the United States.
  At the same time, such incomparably more significant and talented managers and commanders as Alexander Macedonian and Tamerlan had no effect on the acceleration or slowdown of the world historical process in comparison, for example, with the rather mediocre, albeit stubborn Churchill.
  They have seized significant territories and created huge empires, which immediately after their death fell apart, which illustrates the lack of strength, making communities sustainable at that time and in that place, since the level of self-awareness of the population of that time was too low for moving forward, unlike, for example, the Roman Empire, prepared by its cultural traditions for such motion for several centuries.
  *
  In addition to such external force as the struggle of the ruling elite with the intellectual opposition that opposes it, in any civilized society two more forces arise and operate, represented by two groups that are characteristic of their creativity, but divided by interests, since the interests of one are focused on scientific research and the development of technologies of different kind, and the interests of the other are in the sphere of culture.
  Let us first turn to the first creative force aimed at the development of civilization in line with technology.
  This force, operating mainly in the field of technology, is most interested in the knowledge of the surrounding world, applying the knowledge gained both to expand the scope of knowledge and for applied purposes of changing the surrounding reality - these are scientists and inventors, whose activities lead to the development of technologies and, as a result, to the constant re-equipment of technical means of production, trade, arms and everyday life. Most effectively, such a transformation of the environment in which the rest of the natives are found is carried out by applying a creative approach to changing reality.
  Therefore, along with the improvement of the social order, one way or another, at one speed or another, take place a change in the technological equipment of society and, consequently, its economy, including the growth of labor productivity as well as the emergence of its lighter forms.
  In other words, these creative persons make the maximum contribution to the technological development of civilization.
  They are characterized by such personal qualities as good mental abilities, curiosity, hard work, confidence in their abilities, conviction and a considerable amount of altruism, which ensure from the side of personal properties their creativity.
  However, at the same time, such high-level individuality traits as the aspiration to pry, dominance, perseverance and decisiveness are still predominant for them, forcing the person to strive, in spite of everything, to achieve something new and unusual in order to stand out from the general mass of the population and improve their social status, that is, for the sake of dominating others in a certain respectbut with an understanding of the social benefits of his work due to the rather high level of altruism of own personality.
  In other words, in society, due to the indicated combination of traits of individuality and personality, there are the persons who are always overwhelmed with a deep sense of dissatisfaction in relation to their environment, which comes to them from the animal (lower) consciousness in its desire to create greater conveniences for its own existence due to the initial egocentrism animal consciousness. However, this feeling is combined with the altruism of their self-consciousness, the dissatisfaction of which with insufficient social comfort, the development of science and culture, reaching a high degree, requires that the achievements of civilization and culture be extended to everyone.
  But herewith, the properties of individuality dominate, determined by the animal form of the human consciousness, since the activity of these persons manifests itself mostly instinctively, without much thought, giving, nevertheless, the most creatively active person of all living.
  That is, the marked combination of traits of individuality and personality of individual persons, regardless of the presence of talents or simply abilities, invariably attracts them to the creative activity, although it does not always give a positive result, that is leads to the development of new effective devices and systems, the discovery of new patterns, the invention of convenient life support systems and the creation of high standards of culture, but creative individuals are precisely that relatively small group of the population that ensures the accelerated development of technological civilization in conditions of private property relations.
  You can read more about personality and individuality, as well as about the confrontation between power elites and the informal intellectual stratum in my article "Why and how do individuality and personality compete in a person?" [6].
  Thus, the process of the technological development of civilization is provided by this group of personalities, and not by any other groups or relationships. Therefore, the creative people act as the mover of technology, but, again, their creative properties are based on the peculiarities of their consciousness, and not some other forces.
  Both of these forces, the first of which expresses itself in the struggle of the power elite with the intellectual opposition opposing it, and the second in the development of technology, ensure the process of creation both in public relations and in technology, significantly influencing each other, so that when they intersect, turns can occur that replace one way of life of a community or state with another - more perfect and convenient for the population in its ever-increasing coverage, which, in fact, is the process the development of civilization within the framework of proprietary relations - from the slave-owning system to capitalism.
  However, the action of the first force has not yet been noticed by the social sciences, replacing it in the eyes of the public with the struggle or the interaction between the working people and exploiters, although in a number of countries it is already difficult to separate the working people and exploiters. In addition, if an exploited worker suddenly becomes rich or becomes an entrepreneur, he in the same way begins to take care of himself first of all, and not of the offended and oppressed, without experiencing strong moral problems. The explanation of this phenomenon is again in the sphere of consciousness, since the vast majority of the exploited and exploiters have quite low level of self-consciousness in its altruistic component, and the level of animal consciousness with its egocentrism is high enough [6].
  Therefore, the action of both of these forces with their interests can manifest itself intensively only with comparatively high level of culture in society, including the appropriate level of education, thanks to which the development of the altruistic component of self-consciousness of at least part of the population is ensured to the level of respect not only for themselves. This is confirmed by the practical lack of development of archaic societies that still exist in certain parts of the planet, although there are certain productive forces based on the use of sometimes not so primitive tools.
  That is, any motion in society, including turns and upheavals in the social order, especially cardinal ones, occurs only at sufficiently high level of culture, if not of the entire population, then of its leading strata, the main contribution to the achievement of which is made by the third group of the creative intellectuals, manifesting itself in that sphere of development of society, which is closest to the inner world of a person, that is, to his self-consciousness.
  This group of intellectuals, more interested in the inner world of man and his communities, tries to penetrate it in different ways, correlating some people with others, comparing man with nature and society, and also finding out the ability of man to reflect these relationships in artificial forms.
  It is these creative people, to varying degrees, but still, that produce cultural values in various forms, and directly affect the minds and feelings of the population, touching the most sensitive strings of the self-consciousness of each person, due to which both individual and collective self-consciousness is gradually changing: mores are softened, the population's craving for knowledge is growing, the number of intellectually and emotionally developed people is increasing.
  Such cultural development affects the growth of the altruistic component of the self-consciousness of the population, thereby expanding the layer of intellectual opposition to the authorities, who want to harmonize social relations.
  The result of this cultural development of society, seemingly far from the political struggle, is, however, the growing confrontation of informal intellectual opposition to the ruling elite due to the spread of altruism among the masses. In addition, the growth of culture and education of the population makes it possible to increase the percentage of creative people who are, in fact, the only effective lever for accelerating the technological and cultural development of society.
  Thereby, the actions of the intellectuals of the sphere of culture have a decisive influence on the growth of the altruistic component of the self-consciousness of the population, creating conditions for the development of the social way of life.
  Therefore, cardinal revolutions in the life of society occur against this cultural and educational background in the case of dissatisfaction with a significant part of society with the existing system of life in the presence of a certain level of technological development that allows to change the economic management.
  The most characteristic and well-known example of such a coup is the resonant explosive effect in the form of the revolutionary abolition of feudal relations in French society in 1789.
  These, in our opinion, are the main forces - hidden and external, contributing to the manifestation of both personalities in history and the layers of the population highlighted above, who play roles determined by the level of both components of consciousness - natural consciousness, expressed in the individuality of each person, and self-consciousness, externally represented by his personality [6].
  Therefore, the absence or weak manifestation of all three of these external forces in society, the cause of the occurrence and actions of which are both components of consciousness - natural (animal) and self-consciousness - makes it accordingly archaic or stagnating, an example of which is currently a number of third world countries where nothing happens, and no active personalities or groups are manifested.
  When considering the entire period of existence of the current civilization, you can find an interesting fact.
  After tens of thousands of years of existence of homo sapiens in the conditions of primitive communal cells, competing with each other for the sake of survival in the wild, having practically nothing to transform it, except for their own hands and their own quick-wittedness and, therefore, not having an excess of prey for subsistence, in these archaic communities, naturally, not even a hint of the private property could arise.
  However, everything is changing, and the set of archaic communities has been replaced by a set of more ordered and larger entities with a certain hierarchy based on the emergence of private property. This is how civilization arose.
  For more information about the appearance of property and its role may find in my article "Property as the basis for the accelerated development of civilization" [7].
  The slave-owning society in the form of a number of states, mainly in places with a favorable climate and soil, existed for at least 5 thousand years.
  The Middle Ages, when feudalism prevailed, lasted about 1300 years.
  The era of capitalism lasted a little more than 300 years, and now it is clearly coming to an end.
  Thus, in this case, we can state the acceleration (densification) of time, which, of course, should have a limit in the form of a singularity point, that is, a limiting point on the time axis, where the decreasing historical cycles converge.
  The question is only in the interpretation of this process, that is, what will happen at the point of singularity with the world civilization?
  The forthcoming information collapse is a confirmation of the fact that with the approach of the point of singularity an era of fundamental changes in the development of civilization is coming.
  Information collapse is defined as a state of the network information space that threatens its stability and normal functioning. The information collapse is characterized by a sharp decrease in the bandwidth of communication channels and occurs when existing technologies are unable to transmit increasing amounts of traffic.
  The appearance of the beginning of the information collapse is reflected in the constant increase in the rate of emergence of new information and the accumulation of this information on the Internet. Familiarization with the avalanche flow of information is becoming more and more difficult and, as a result, its adequate use becomes even more difficult, since in fact the only method of ordering information is its filtering, as a rule, according to dubious criteria.
  This leads to a rapid loss of promising development guidelines by society, the replacement of true goals with corporate goals, the stupefaction of the vast majority of Internet users,
  The acceleration of the proper time of the current civilization, which until recently brought wonderful fruits of culture, science and technology almost every year, which everyone is well aware of, clearly produces the opposite product in recent decades and years.
  In particular, not only in the Western world, but also in countries strictly following traditions like China, the cultural foundations of society began to collapse. Drug addiction has become widespread, meaningless pop music, sexual freedom, homosexuality that undermines the foundations of the family, the level of education has fallen, mystical moods have expanded, wars are continuously provoked and fanned in different regions of the planet, etc. That is, chaos and degradation in the world are growing.
  On this decadent cultural basis, the achievements and the direction of action of science also acquire an increasingly negative connotation.
  In particular, from the building of a technological civilization leading to an increasingly convenient form of human life, science has become a threat to the existence of mankind, moreover, it is almost completely dependent on those in power who finance it, and these subjects, considering themselves capable of controlling world processes, do nothing but commit various stupidities that can become fatal at any moment.
  Science, under the strict guidance of power elites, has created the computer networks and artificial intelligence that destroy the creative efforts of the population and steal its working time; the introduction of science into the study of the genome eventually led to the construction of viruses that can destroy the entire population of the planet. In addition, extensive research is being carried out to study the spread of the most terrible diseases, apparently to reduce the population of the planet. Science is at the forefront of inventing and using the most inhumane weapons.
  More details about the role of science in society can be found in my article "Science as a factor in the development and destruction of civilization" [8].
  And, finally, the third in the number of forces noted above, as noted above, began to act not in favor of the development of culture, but in the direction of destroying its foundations.
  Power structures, representing mainly supranational elites and the elites of the states of the Western world, seeing the collapse of capitalism, but not wanting to lose their political and economic superiority, believe to preserve it by eliminating private property relations.
  Indeed, the capitalist mode of production, which is automatically tuned to the growth of sales of products, when it reaches the limit of this sales, collapses, because it loses the incentive for development.
  The resulting stagnation leads the power elite to the idea of transforming society into a form convenient for maintaining the power of this elite and all the benefits associated with it.
  The current, in essence, supranational power elite, imagining itself intellectual, wants to forcibly put the population under its control by digitizing the population, discredit the family, gradually liquidating it, and deprive the population of property. It proposes to give him certain benefits depending on the behavior of specific individuals, which this elite considers correct, up to the selection of this population, the number of which should be reduced to several hundred million.
  That is, this "elite" quite naturally for itself intends to reduce the population many times over in order to reduce the consumption of the remaining resources of the planet by the population, and the main way of this reduction can be, for example, the sterilization of the population with the help of medicines under the pretext of saving it from supposedly fatal diseases, and the rest of the population can be digitized with the help of modern computer technologies, putting each person under control to dictate to him the behavior suitable for the control structures, especially since the main work, as expected, will be performed not by the population, but by artificial intelligence.
  And all possible assistance in this project of the actual genocide of the population with the transformation of its remnants into voiceless and thoughtless slaves to satisfy the unworthy needs of ghouls for power, who believe that they will retain their power by introducing such stupidity, reducing all achievements of mankind and its culture to zero, is provided by science providing specialists and equipment to destroy the bulk of the population and bring the rest into obedient blockheads, divided into a kind of caste, depending on the degree of obedience.
  This idiotic project, focused on the preservation of power for worthless persons, is a typical utopia, because in it, as in capitalism, which has lost its incentive for development, this very development, which is always built on contradictions, is missing, and they are absent here.
  In this case, beneficial, as it seems at first glance, for the power elite, people turn into a herd that this elite grazes for the sake of obtaining certain products from this herd for themselves, without giving it the will to avoid its own destruction.
  Naturally, such artificial education will degrade extremely quickly in all its parts, since it loses the ability to receive updates in the form of certain innovations in both technological and cultural spheres, especially since this post-capitalist society assumes to parasitize the artificial intelligence, which, according to supranational elites, will replace human intelligence without suspecting that thereby the creative potential of a person will be eliminated, depriving society of progress.
  As for the informal-intellectual opposition that opposes the power elite, it, while calling, as always, the population to establish a just people's state, which in itself is a pure utopia, was late due to the already practically happened degradation of the majority of the population, as it was shown above, as well as initiated mainly by supranational elites to the transformation of the capitalist society into a society from a set of the programmed beings devoid of property and, therefore, any sense of justice, whatever it may be, all the more so since such society will inevitably turn out to be the final one in the current civilization, since it will be quickly absorbed by semi-savage peoples, having neither the desire nor the strength to resist them.
  The instability of the current situation, as was shown above, means that any dumbass in power who, for own or group purposes, is trying to achieve what he wants with the means at his disposal, for example, to maintain power, is quite capable of using these means, in general, at all not wishing to destroy civilization, for its actual elimination.
  Such may turn out to be the role of personality in history at the final -unstable -stage of civilization.
  Bibliography
  
  1. Carlyle T. (1841) On hero, Hero-worship, & the Heroic in History. New York. D. Appleton & Co.
  2. Карлейль Т. Этика жизни. Люди и герои. Рипол классик. 2021. ISBN: 978-5-386-14331-2
  3. Толстой Л. Н. Собрание сочинений в восьми томах. Т. 3, часть 1. М., Лексика. 1996.
  4. Раппопорт Х. Философия истории в ее главнейших течениях. СПб. 1899.
  5. Плеханов Г. В. Избранные философские произведения в 5-ти тт. Т. 2. М., 1956, стр. 300-334.
  6. Nizovtsev Yu. The vicissitudes of beingness (collection of articles and essays).
  Why and how do individuality and personality compete in a person? Part 9. 22.03.2022. Amazon
  7. Nizovtsev Yu. The vicissitudes of beingness (collection of articles and essays).
  Property as the basis for the accelerated development of civilization.
  Part 8. 22.03.2022. Amazon
  8. Nizovtsev Yu. The vicissitudes of beingness (collection of articles and essays).
  Science as a factor in the development and destruction of civilization. Part 7. 22.03.2022. Amazon
  
  Chapter 3.
  Property as the basis for the accelerated development of civilization.
  
  The duality of the human consciousness presupposes the inevitability of the manifestation of the struggle of his animal consciousness and his self-consciousness, and the latter, thanks to the understanding of oneself, is clothed in a form that contributes to own accelerated development, providing for the self-consciousness of a person rapidly changing diverse life phenomena, and such form is only the extreme antagonism of animal consciousness and self-consciousness, which manifests itself exclusively in proprietary relations, which in turn initiate the emergence of civilization, and then states. Therefore, with the disappearance of private property, civilization loses the antagonistic aspirations of the individuals that make it up, and must disappear.
  The human prototype, the hominid, which appeared about 2.5 million years ago, began to use various tools, mostly made of stone, as well as plant fibers, bones, skin and veins of the animals, to facilitate own existence in the wild.
  Over time, the tools of labor improved, as well as the organization of housekeeping, but the structure of the cells of society did not change, remaining at the level of small communities, since the extracted food was chronically lacking, and periods of satiety alternated by long periods of malnutrition.
  In particular, in a number of regions of the planet, after the end of the ice age - a few more than ten thousand years ago - people began to gradually move from simple hunting and gathering to the search for new forms of getting the food, taming animals and starting to use more efficient stone tools for tillage, as well as the devices for harvesting and processing the harvested plants.
  The growth of the food sources contributed to an increase in the population, and the increased material and human resources gradually began to divide the society into hierarchies - the stratum appeared, differing in the subject of activity, and elite formations began to stand out in the form of priests, warriors and organizers of various activities.
  Thus, the resulting surplus of labor products from various activities around 7000-6000 years BC, as well as the formation of elites, have created the basis for an unfair division of the available resources in the form of land plots, the herds of livestock, means of production of various products, which gradually passed into the possession of the most influential, strong or enterprising individuals.
  The initial division of society in accordance with the possession of the available resources and, accordingly, various interests, which, often differing cardinally in relation to their own surrounding, always cause constant irritation and dissatisfaction with the situation by the deprived, which became the main incentive for the subsequent accelerated development of the civilization thus formed, which continued with increasing acceleration to our time, while the development of the human communities before the formation of proprietary relations took about two and a half million years.
  In other words, for 2.5 million years, the natural (animal) consciousness prevailed in the human communities, and self-consciousness, due to the practical absence of culture, was only at the level of understanding its utilitarian needs and corresponding actions with the ability to plan them, that is, they led an existence close to the herd, which differed from animal existence, in essence, only by collective communication through speech for more efficient food by hunting and gathering with elements of design-abstract thinking, providing a higher level of organization of life, which changes consciously the environment for own needs, in contrast to just instinctively-reflex activity of animals.
  Moreover, the animal consciousness in people, mainly in its collective form, prevailed so much that after the victory of one human community over another in the struggle for resources, it was quite natural to eat rivals, as if justified by a chronic lack of food.
  Thus, the beginning of civilization was laid by the emergence of private property mainly on land, irrigated land, herds of livestock, small-scale production of various products to ensure vital activities, that is, on certain resources of different regions.
  Of course, the private property did not arise by itself and not as a result of the mere improvement of the tools of labor. The basis for its appearance was the attachment of the individualistic self-consciousness to the communal or collectivist self-consciousness, which completely dominated earlier. The individualistic self-consciousness, having reflected in oneself the emergence of new technologies (the metal tools of labor), was able to move some of the energetic or occupying important positions of individuals to seize the certain resources for approval and securing their position in the new society.
  The owners that appeared needed workers, which led to a move away from cannibalism or the killing of the captives. They began to turn them into the living tools of labor - slaves. In addition, as a result of the unification of economics on the basis of the tribal unions, which is more beneficial for survival in the conditions of the proprietary relations, new structural units have been formed - states. That is, they turned out to be, thanks to the division of people into strata-estates more effective tools for social development, protection from enemies or for attacking rivals.
  Thus, the most technologically advanced regions have moved from hunting and gathering to the exploitation of land plots, livestock breeding and the wide exchange of products, mainly, the products of the slave labor as the cheapest type of labor.
  Ownership relations within the framework of the slave-owning type of management, which took on different forms in different regions, set completely other pace for the development of civilization, and this type of management took not millions of years, but only a few thousand years until the transition to the feudal type of the management.
  The slave-owning system, especially at the peak of its existence - in Ancient Greece and Rome, had a significant impact not so much on the development of technology, which was blocked by the cheapness of slave labor, but on the development of self-consciousness of the free part of the population, which is confirmed by the highest level of culture of these peoples, which laid the foundations of art, science and politics of all subsequent epochs in the development of civilization.
  Therefore, the slave-owning system in its division into owners- masters and slaves, contributing to the release of time for citizens for other types of labor than physical, quickly raised the level of self-consciousness of that part of them, which was simply bored to thrive, fight with rivals and restrain the pressure of disenfranchised slaves. And these free citizens, who are now called intellectuals, have achieved significant success in the field of jurisprudence, philosophy, science and art.
  In other words, the driving force behind the emerging new communities, in particular, the polis-states, which determined their development within the framework of the slave ownership, was by no means the antagonism of the slaves and the slave owners, not class hatred, since slaves were equated only with objects of beingness, but only as alive, thereby being excluded from the social development, but this force that ensures social development could only be the opposition of the animal consciousness of individuals who make up a free part of communities, which have been reformatted into states, and their self-consciousness, which before that was expressed extremely weakly, but began to actively manifest itself only with the appearance of free citizens in the states, and not under the conditions of the primitive communal system, in which survival problems dominated, and even not under any authoritarian rule, where there are no citizens, but there are humiliated subjects forced to follow the established rules and norms without any deviation towards creativity in order to avoid punishment.
  The result of the interaction of both forms of consciousness was for the most part their struggle, since the considerations of both forms of consciousness cover various spheres of life - animal consciousness is aimed at maintaining the body in a working state, striving to provide it with better nutrition and creating more favorable conditions for its existence and reproduction, and self-consciousness tries to determine the role of a person in beingness, drawing him to the knowledge of the new, interesting and unusual, due to which, moreover, it is possible to significantly improve the conditions of both his own and group existence, for example, by improving everyday life, creating a new weapon for victories over enemies, presenting the world around us with new impressive colors in the form of works of art, etc.
  Similar discrepancy between the tasks of both forms of consciousness means their constant struggle for primacy in solving these problems, and if earlier, as a rule, the animal consciousness won, seeking the priority solution of its tasks, in essence, related to ensuring the functioning of the organism in the existing conditions, then the growth of self-consciousness, which looks further and sees what is inaccessible to the instinctive-reflex activity of the animal consciousness, expressed in the success of the culture of this type of community, gradually led, in particular, to the fact that in the Roman Empire at the peak of its existence, the freedmen appeared, which reflected a certain change in the attitude of free citizens towards slaves, which finally became more "human".
  This fact quite clearly indicates that, although the proprietary relations underlie the development of civilization, interaction is hidden behind them in the form of a mostly the confrontation of both forms of the human consciousness - its animal component and self-consciousness, at this, the source of their functioning and contradictory interaction, in turn, is the inescapable dissatisfaction of any form of consciousness of living beings, which distinguishes them from other objects of beingness, characterized by their passivity, and therefore capable of being only information carriers, not having the properties to perceive , process and transmit information to hold themselves in existence, as well as striving to improve it.
  It should also be noted that the level of self-consciousness of the free part of the population in the era of slavery was, although higher than the self-consciousness of the population during the primitive communal system, but still so low that slaves, in most slave-owning states, were actually equated with domestic animals almost to the end of existence of the slave-owning system , and, for example, previously ruling persons of the defeated state, despite their former status, also became the disenfranchised and miserable slaves.
  Nevertheless, the slave-owning system of society, as the initial form of property relations, in addition to the possession of material assets, marked the beginning of the accelerated development of human communities already within the framework of their new form - civilization, which is based on states that guarantee the property rights, and therefore accelerated the pace of development the human self-consciousness due to a certain increase in the level of self-consciousness of the free part of the population.
  And this means that the resulting technological civilization is able to exist only with proprietary relations, reflecting the confrontation between the animal consciousness of each person and his self-consciousness in their attitude to the possession of something, and at the same time reflecting the antagonism of both forms of consciousness of various social strata.
  With the cessation of the proprietary relations a powerful driving force in the form of the struggle of the animal form of consciousness and self-consciousness for the priority solution of their own tasks, that is, a kind of competition, disappear, and civilization is losing the opportunity to function at an accelerated pace and it disintegrates after a period of stagnation.
  But within the framework of a civilization characterized by an obviously unfair distribution of property, nothing more than is happening but the development of self-consciousness in its individual and collective forms, manifested as the technological, scientific and cultural progress, carried out mainly due to creativity - the product of abstract thinking with the addition of with the addition of the experiment and the intuitive approaches to solving the most complex problems.
  Be that as it may, but for several thousand years the slave-owning system did not stand still. Certain forms of economic activity developed, mainly in the agricultural sector, the form of the state structure was improved, the layer of free people grew, their level of culture increased, which indicates an increase in level of their self- consciousness, thanks to which other attitude towards the slaves, who are the same, like them, manifested, especially since the unpromising labor for slaves themselves did not have the prospects for the development of technology, leading to the stagnation of economic activity.
  Therefore, in order for labor to bring more income, it had to be released to a certain extent, that is, to interest the workers in the results of labor.
  After realizing this fact, the slave owners began to gradually transfer them from the position of domestic animals to the relatively free status of workers attached to the land plots that, of course, did not belong to them, but, nevertheless, deliver to these workers a certain part of the income depending on the results of their labor.
  Thus, the owners of slaves became landowners, controlling the labor of farmers.
  Over time, a hierarchy of land owners was formed, on which the peasant worked, who, nevertheless, had a certain independence, being the owner of tools, buildings, but did not have the right to dispose of the land, remaining dependent on the feudal lord in this respect.
  In Europe, the heir to the Roman Empire, such changes significantly expanded the degree of liberty of the population, not only due to the acquisition by workers on the earth of incomparably greater independence than slaves, but also due to the emergence of numerous trade and craft centers, cities and educational platforms.
  Thus, in comparison with slaveholding under feudalism, not only did the circle of people with a high level of self-consciousness expand, but self-consciousness began to gradually move away from its collectivist principle, acquiring an increasingly individualistic character not only among feudal lords, but also among townspeople, merchants and artisans.
  The change in the attitude towards property in the era of feudalism, caused by an increase in the level of self-awareness among the population as a whole, as well as a certain tilt towards individualism, further accelerated the development of civilization, as evidenced by the reduction of the period of feudalism several times (a little more than a thousand years in Europe) compared with the period of existence of the slave-owning system, which lasted several thousand years.
  So, in Europe, due to an increase in the level of self-consciousness of the population as a whole and its qualitative change towards individualism, mainly among rather numerous townspeople, confirmed by a high level of literacy, education and development of many training centers (universities), the use of legislative practices inherited from the jurists of the Roman empire, over time, there was dissatisfaction of the population by the behavior of the feudal lords, which is rather meaningless from the point of view of managing the economy, supported by a number of scientific and geographical discoveries, the invention of many devices and machines that significantly increase labor productivity both in the agricultural sector and in the sectors of processing agricultural products.
  Hence the need arose for the liberation of economy from feudal fetters, noticed by some religious figures.
  In particular, at the beginning of the 16th century, Martin Luther has pointed out the impossibility of opposing the worldly and the spiritual, since God predestinates people for one or another type of activity, investing in them various talents and abilities, and thus he fulfills a certain plan.
  The rejection of the church restrictions and the recognition of labor as a blessing, as and its fruits, entailed the removal of the chains from the private initiative and opened the way for various creative ideas, thereby having served the scientific and technical progress, including the invention and use of high-performance machines.
  That is, Luther has suggested removing the discredited Catholic Church as an intermediary between parishioners and God, and restoring the balance between secular and spiritual, having recognized worldly work for the benefit of society as the main contents of life.
  Thereby, from the Protestants in the person of Luther and the liberal government of the country of concentration at that time of Protestantism (the Netherlands) have appeared some kind of the permission to receiving any "fruits" of labor and their use for the greater benefit of society, despite possible violations of the established traditions, having opened the road to discoveries and innovations.
  On the other hand, the duality of consciousness in the form of the struggle of the animal (natural) component of it and the highest - extra-natural (self-consciousness) led not only to the Reformation, but also to the appearance of a significant number of the creative people.
  Self-consciousness demands all time the extension of the information flows, which it receives for the account of the conscious transformation by people by the surrounding space in the form of the change of the existing artificial and natural environment, and this transformation is got that better, than more the person knows and understands how the world surrounding him functions. Cognition demands education. Schools and universities were emerging.
  In Europe, to the time of Luther's appeal, a layer of the intellectuals and fairly the literate people with broad interests and considerable creativity who were not given developing, forcing them to engage exclusively in theology, had formed in large cities.
  Creativity is characterized by an overflow of an individual with a deep sense of dissatisfaction with own surrounding.
  It comes to the person from the lowest (natural) consciousness in his striving to create greater comforts for existence.
  However, this feeling is combined in a person with a higher consciousness (self-consciousness), whose dissatisfaction with insufficient social comfort, the development of science and art, reaching a high degree, requires extending the achievements of civilization and culture to all.
  But the lowest (animal) consciousness dominates herewith, since the activity of these individuals is manifested mostly instinctively, without much thought, with a minimum of rationality, giving, nevertheless, the most creative persons of all living.
  Having received the appropriate "permission" from the reformed Church, these creative persons did not slow down to intensify scientific research, offering as a result a lot of technical and organizational innovations.
  The machine production arose, ships and navigation improved, trade revived, mail and newspapers appeared, communications between the continents expanded.
  And country, in which originally all of this was manifested more intensely and quickly, was the Netherlands of the end of XVI, the beginning of XVII centuries.
  Therefore, the turn to the industrial production took place not in China, not in India or the Arab countries, but in Europe after a few more than a thousand years of the existence of feudalism. The accumulated dissatisfaction of an educated person in his self-consciousness requires more than a comfortable existence, high position in society: it pushes him through the struggle with his own animal consciousness with its primitive requirements, to a high, in this case, to a certain liberation of labor and its creative use, which became possible for the first time in the Netherlands at the end of XVI century.
  And this turn transferred the slow development of civilization into the accelerated consistently in Protestant countries, and then, by their example, in many others, which led to such large-scale and impressive achievements of the human civilization by now precisely because of a certain liberation of labor.
  Thus, dissatisfaction and duality of consciousness in the form of the struggle of the lowest (natural) of its component and the highest extra-natural (self-consciousness) through Christianity in the person of Luther, and through the Protestant country (Netherlands), which was determined by the high degree of development of culture, technologies and science in it, have led to a kind of resonance of the reformed Christianity and creative minds, containing in their potency technological culture,
  Thereby, the struggle of the lowest (natural) consciousness and self-consciousness, having led to a resonance the reformed Christianity and creativity in the technological sphere at the end of 16th century, turned the world towards the industrial production, having set the direction into capitalism with its openness to any form of entrepreneurship in the use of available resources on the basis of the private ownership of them, regulated only by the market relations.
  The industrial turn in the Netherlands and England provided an increase in the production of industrial goods due to the mechanization of production and, consequently, higher productivity in workshops, which turned into huge factories, giving high profit, which was facilitated by the modernization of transport and the improvement of forms of trade.
  In some European countries, a class of controllers-managers of this production rather quickly formed, who became the owners of factories and plants - mainly the former owners of manufactories and the bankers - and a class of the hired workers in production - the former artisans. At this, the production and distribution of the manufactured goods fell under the market mechanisms.
  Naturally, this process of forming new relations to resources and property was facilitated by the revolution of 1789 in France, which put forward the slogans of legal equality and liberty of the entrepreneurship in all spheres of life on the basis of the private-property relations.
  Since the class of the hired workers in factories with the intensive deployment of production began to be formed mainly from peasants, insofar as they could free themselves from feudal dependence by going to the cities, and a significant part of the land plots passed from the ruined parasites-seigneurs into the hands of the skilled peasant owners.
  The degree of liberty for the population expanded even more, and, formally, each citizen could become an entrepreneur through the loans, that is, the owner of property from which he could make a profit in one form or another and in volume.
  Thus, the gradual increase in the level of self-consciousness under feudalism led to a new economy, which established for almost the entire population of the leading European countries other - freer, that is, an open attitude to property, having strengthened the individualistic tendency of self-consciousness of this population and thereby having intensified its self-activity, due to which these countries became world dominants competing with each other, and the countries of the rest of the world remained on the sidelines of history.
  Such open system of production and distribution, in which formal equality and individualism dominated in the conditions of competition between entrepreneurs for the use of available resources in the form of private ownership of them - capitalism, began to take shape from the 17th century and, apparently, is being completed at the present time.
  Capitalism occupied a historical period of several centuries - from the 17th century to the 21st century, having accelerated the development of civilization several times in comparison with feudalism.
  It is curious that, having ensured the maximum possible openness of private property relations and the highest labor productivity, capitalism began to produce regularly the crises of the overproduction of goods, which basically had to be overcome by unleashing wars, destroying part of the production capacities and redistributing the markets for goods.
  However, the moment came when the world wars became impossible due to the invention of the nuclear weapons.
  Therefore, over the past few decades, the crisis of capitalism has become permanent, bringing the entire world economy to the stagnation and provoking the endless inflation. The capitalist system was forced to focus on financial speculation, which only deepened the gap between the rich and poor parts of the population, not to mention the poor countries of the third world.
  To get out of the inevitable ultimate trap of the production of goods that the population is unable to buy, as Adam Smith and Karl Marx talked about at former times, capitalism is not able, as a result of which the growth of capital that determines its viability becomes impossible - the credit system ceases to work.
  It follows that the development of capitalism has approached its natural ending.
  This conclusion is also supported by the fact that the individualistic nature of capitalism inevitably leads to the deformation of the self-consciousness of the entire population.
  The individual and group egoism of capitalism, the goal of which is directed not at a person, but only at itself - at its own reproduction, has a detrimental effect on both the hired workers and property owners. The self-consciousness of both those and others, due to their disunity and withdrawal into the virtual world of the Internet, provided by the latest technologies, ceases to develop, focusing not on real problems, but on meaningless imaginary games.
  In addition, the transfer of the main control and production functions to the artificial intelligence leads to a lag in the human self-consciousness from technological development, and a person, as a consciously creative subject, stops developing.
  This situation is exacerbated by the information collapse, in which there is no time to correctly determine the causes of the deteriorating behavior of the system, and random symptoms are mistaken for them.
  If efforts are directed at the eliminating the symptoms, then the true causes remain unaffected. Such an action is either ineffective or leads to a worsening of the situation. Thus, the structure of a real system, due to the lack of the ability to organize an avalanche of incoming information in a form that adequately reflects the structure of this system, remains outside the actions taken.
  In this regard, in the current situation it becomes impossible to determine those few points, to which the behavior of civilization is sensitive, especially since these points are not self-evident even under the normal conditions.
  It should also be noted that the clip nature of thinking, caused by the dominance of digital technologies that has come, leads to the destruction of consciousness at all its levels.
  A person loses concentration, the ability to remember information, becoming irresponsible and prone to the errors.
  Thus, the most progressive - open - attitude towards property under capitalism in its - rather short - term - development comes to a standstill in terms of the development of self-consciousness, since there is no place left for the manifestation of its dissatisfaction due to the general withdrawal of people from reality into a barren virtual world.
  Self-activity of a person gradually stops and along with it the basis for the development of self-consciousness disappears. The automatic desire of capitalism to transfer each person into the state of an animal chewing the gum given to him means a dead end and the collapse of civilization.
  An attempt to get out of this sad situation was made in the 20th century, when, after the revolution, a socialist state was formed in Russia, opposing the capitalist states.
  The ideology of this state was based on the idea of gradually building a just harmonious society based on the collective efforts of all members of this society using the property belonging to all the people.
  The ruling elite of Russia under the name of the USSR concentrated its efforts on equalizing the standard of living of the main masses of the population with the prospect of a gradual transition to communism.
  The basis of the socialist mode of production and development of the community is to shift the emphasis from unlimited mass consumption to the distribution of manufactured products according to labor, which too often cannot be adequately assessed, and is largely stolen by the power elite and its henchmen.
  Similar collectivist approach with an obvious bias on equalization destroys the competition of individuals, deprives of them own free expression within "no man's" property, especially as assessment of high and low results of work has no considerable difference.
  In mass terms, this approach significantly slows down the development of state, making it chronically lagging behind the developed capitalist states in terms of technology.
  Quite quickly, a comparison of the material achievements of capitalist and socialist states leads the working population of socialist states to revise their views on the ultimate goal of the community -communism, because of its obvious unattainability. As a result of this factor, there is a reorientation of this population to the consumer values of capitalism.
  Such inversion in the minds leads to the destruction of these essentially quasi-socialist states and, accordingly, the implicit stratification of the ruling bureaucracy and the working population of these states quickly flows into the obvious stratification, with the formation in place of these states, as a rule, the backward states with respect to the organization of society, in particular, in terms of feedback of masses and elite, establishing the comprador clan for the most part due to the former authoritarianism of these states in governing, that is, the rather low level of self-consciousness of the power elite, seeking to preserve their power and stolen wealth by any means. Such countries are natural victims of the developed countries, falling immediately into the "paws" of these parasite states.
  It turns out that, on the one hand, capitalism has come to its natural end, and with it, proprietary relations, expressed in the desire for unlimited consumption, have ended, but, on the other hand, the replacement of capitalism with distributive socialism (USSR) has shown its complete failure, since at the same time socialism, the private property was replaced by the corporate property of the bureaucracy governing the country, that is, it has been replaced by a worsened version of the property relations, in which the main masses of the population are in permanent poverty, and the bureaucracy is decomposing in the field of money stolen from the people.
  Unable to withstand competition with capitalism, distributive socialism disappeared, and supposedly the socialist states themselves returned to the fold of the same capitalism.
  That is, this attempt to go beyond the framework of possessive relations turned out to be unsuccessful for obvious reasons: these are the biological differences of people, which are based not only on different abilities, but also on a different level of self-consciousness, often dictating a completely opposite attitude to the realities of reality, as well as the dissatisfaction of the animal consciousness the population, which was deprived of the opportunity to improve their situation at least at the expense of the most primitive individual activity; these are the differences that arise depending on the conditions of existence of a diverse population.
  Therefore, the distributive egalitarian socialism could not but lose in its competition with capitalism under such worsened disposal of property by power structures and the exclusion of all active citizens from property relations.
  Consequently, the proprietary relations have reached their limit, and the attempt to modify them has failed, which means the cessation of the development of civilization and its natural decay, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, clearly demonstrates that the emergence and development of civilization occurs only in the property relations.
  Additional confirmation of this factual state of affairs is the modern idea of replacing a civilization based on the property relations with a civilization from which the property relations are excluded in order to preserve the privileges of the modern power elite.
  In other words, the resulting stagnation leads the power elite to the idea of transforming society into a form convenient for maintaining their own power and all the benefits associated with it.
  Therefore, the ruling elite, in essence, having borrowed Campanella's ideas about an ideal state, decided to arrange some kind of the formation, reminiscent of Campanella's "the ideal" state.
  This state - "the City of the Sun", where everyone works and there are no scoundrels and parasites, is based on an attempt to balance the various qualities and abilities of people by forced equality. The power in this ideal state belongs to the spiritual aristocracy, or intellectual and religious elite.
  Campanella offers the state to eradicate vices and the resulting wrong behavior. He also considers it necessary to destroy the institution of the family, since it leads to private property - a source of inequality. To improve people, Campanella proposes to carry out selection, which should be determined by the bosses.
  The current supranational power elite, imagining itself to be intellectual, also wants to forcibly put the population under its control by digitizing the population. This elite tries to discredit the family, having liquidated it gradually, and to deprive the population of property. It assumes to give him certain benefits depending on the behavior of specific individuals, which this elite considers correct, up to the selection of this population.
  Besides, it is quite natural for itself, this elite is going to reduce the population several times to reduce the consumption of the remaining resources of the planet by the population, and the main way of this reduction may be to sterilize the population with medical drugs under the pretext of saving it from supposedly fatal diseases, and to digitize the rest of the population with the help of modern computer technologies, putting each of its members under control to dictate to him the appropriate behavior, especially since the main work will be performed not by the population, but by artificial intelligence.
  Not even utopianism, but complete stupidity of such an approach to the preservation of civilization in a form convenient for itself demonstrates the stagnant parasitic nature of the current power elites, who, with all signs of the completion of the development of civilization, still strive to preserve themselves in their privileges over the rest of the population, transferring it not even to slavish, but animal state.
  But this is impossible, since no external influences from the current power elites in the conditions of the decline and decay of civilization are able to change the accelerated cycle of development of self-consciousness within civilization, which is ensured only within the framework of proprietary relations, and they are created not by force, but in a natural way.
  That is, the planned reduction of the population to the level of self-consciousness, at which each person has only a weak understanding of oneself, means the fall of the driving force of a person and his communities in the form of a confrontation between his animal component and self-consciousness to almost zero, which makes the accelerated development of civilization impossible, and she falls apart.
  For those who consider the existence of the present civilization eternal, despite all reasonable arguments, I propose to look into Internet, where a sufficient number of the surviving artifacts of the past civilizations of various times, relatively short-lived on Earth: tens of thousands of years ago, millions, tens of millions and hundreds of millions of years ago.
  
  Chapter 4.
  The hidden prerequisites of radical turns and coups in the course of the development of civilization.
  
  It is known, that the appearance of coups that radically alter the course of civilization"s development, is explained in different ways. Nevertheless, each coup is preceded by an accumulation in a certain combination of factors acting implicitly, but which inevitably produce the decisive action in due time. What are these factors?
  The solution to this problem will have to start from afar - with the randomness, reflected in the gene mutations.
  Mutations before emergence of a prototype of the person (hominid) were manifested and acted only within reflex and instinctive activity of living beings, and they aren't capable to lead away these beings beyond limits of similar activity for any period of time.
  I.e. the random character of mutations means for the living being an opportunity only to adapt to the environment, but not a possibility to go beyond the environment limits.
  It is senseless for this reason to consider the mutations as the major through factor, which has led finally a bacterium to the being largely outside nature - to the person.
  In other words, the animal (natural) consciousness in the person, has been supplemented with self-consciousness, which has provoked eventually the desire for the complete separation of the living being from nature, but not the best adaptation of the being to the environment.
  Consciousness of a person, unlike any living being, thereby has acquired two levels: the lowest (almost unfree) - reflexive-instinctive on the mechanism of action, and the highest - consciously-target (free), but not able to function in beingness independently, i.e. without participation of the lowest consciousness, which is a basic level of consciousness.
  In other words, randomness, as the basis of the functioning of the lowest consciousness, from one party, and self-consciousness or the highest consciousness (consciously-target expression of consciousness), from other party, are antagonists in the respect what, if the subject, having the highest consciousness, is mistaken, then he will be is capable to understand the mistake and to correct deeds, significantly having accelerated own advance on the way of development, whereas the random is some kind of the edge of consciousness, representing a basis of the lowest part of consciousness. Consciousness uses the random if it doesn't know what and how to do at this level of development, but, accepting in attention the random, though slowly - with kickbacks and zigzags - nevertheless moves ahead.
  Randomness, more tending towards chaos, isn't capable to be a reliable support to a structural order, breaking its all the time. Therefore, giving continuous changes to the living environment, it promotes also continuous destruction of the available order, forcing the living beings to obey to itself completely, especially without reflecting. The basis of this is reflex-instinctual mechanism of action, which is the same for all sentient beings, what would not occur with them.
  However, it is required to Creation both destruction, and more or less successful formation which can satisfy consciousness, having given an incentive to its development by removal from senselessness of existence only on level of consumption of sensations.
  The very same predominance of creative process means a gradual decrease in entropy, the greatest contribution in which is made by the beings, understanding themselves, but to a certain limit, the approach to which is marked by the inability of self-conscious beings to process efficiently ever-increasing flows of incoming information, and the decisions, which are made, begin to be dictated by the random factors, which are taken for adequate. There occurs the information collapse with the corresponding disintegration of the constructed system, in this case - civilization. That is, reduction of entropy is regularly replaced by its growth, that some extent reminds the oscillatory process, which means the presence in Creation of permanent integral equilibrium.
  Anyway, but in Creation the most succeeds concerning acquisition of meanings in conjugation them with sensations is only who can figure how more effectively to destroy or create something, but on this are able not accidental procedures, not some order, a prerequisite for which is stability, but only the creativity and initiativeness, always leading to rather rapid achievement of the expected or unexpected result, and its harm, benefit or even insignificant meaning can understand only the being with these properties, i.e. a being, understanding itself.
  Therefore, except the subject having both consciousness on the level of sensations, and self-consciousness, nothing and no one is able the most effective to create and destroy, that means impossibility to both single consciousness, and individual consciousness to do without it, as the most effective tool of own development and consumption of vital collisions.
  Thus, the emergence of a being with two levels of consciousness as the free and living representative of the active, forming effectively out of the passive (things) the environment (beingness) for itself in Creation is inevitable manifestation of activity of the most active live among other living beings and the passive - things.
  One can argue about the origin of this additional program of self-awareness in the genome already the person, but willy-nilly, one has to state that, apart from man, not a single living being was able to be aware of itself and go out even on a tiny fraction beyond purely natural relations, where everything and everyone devouring each other.
  As a result, human communities became owners of a powerful driving force for the development in the form of a struggle between internally contradictory forces represented by animal (natural) consciousness and self-consciousness, aspirations and actions of which are cardinally opposite.
  The primary - animal (natural) -consciousness demands to survive any cost thanks to mainly to ensuring the most suitable and best food, conditions for productive reproduction, the suppression of existing competitors.
  Self-consciousness gradually leads a person and his community to the idea of that. that it is possible to compete with the environment most effectively in large associations and planned corrective actions, which requires a certain departure from the egocentrism towards concessions to each other, expressed in conscious cooperation, friendship, disinterested help, mercy, that is, striving for a more harmonious coexistence, which can be described as altruism.
  Naturally, the emergence of self-consciousness moved apart a framework of activity of living beings, making it more free compared to the activity of mere randomness, which is producing extremely slow progress in nature (billions of years of development from bacteria to mammals). The new frameworks has made it possible for a person to express own desires and intentions much more freely, which allowed to start a systematic change in the environment, first to improve significantly own living conditions, and then - for cultural development.
  The opposition of the selfish animal consciousness to a greater degree of altruistic self-consciousness, which can therefore be described as higher consciousness, so much has accelerated the development of human communities in the form of a conscious individual and public competition for a better life, that instead of billions of years of development based on random changes in the genome, hominids took only a few million years to transition to the primitive communal system, and then then and to formation during several by ten of the millennia of a civilization, which acquired the completed form about six thousand years ago with the formation of states with a certain hierarchy, institutions and laws, fixing and protecting the private property.
  It turns out that the most effective force, driving the human communities is the confrontation of the animal (natural) consciousness and self-consciousness, which is reflected respectively as the struggle of the imperious elite and the informal-intellectual elite.
  Among the representatives of the imperious elite dominates the natural (lowest) consciousness with its desire to occupy a leading place in society and to consolidate itself in it for the preservation of power, the consumption of the greatest possible material wealth
  As for the informal-intellectual elite, the altruism and harmonization of society are its predominant aspirations
  That is, the coarse-material aspirations of the ruling elite to dominate and rob are always opposed by the informal-intellectual stratum of society.
  As for the economic, domestic and cultural characteristics of civilization, as well as a change in the stages of its development, they are the product of the struggle of these sides of human consciousness, though, of course, without the assistance of the material surrounding, any fight inside consciousness is impossible.
  In the human consciousness also could not but reflect its own difference from all other living beings by the acquired self-consciousness and thereby - the recognition of himself, on the one hand, the exceptional creation of someone so unique, and on the other hand, by the creation, humiliated by its own mortality and stay in the untamed and the cruel world of the natural survival.
  So, the reason for this partial "fallout" out of the natural cycle is the transformation from primates into hominids, and then - into Homo sapiens with the main difference from other living beings that these already people have become able to realize themselves and their actions, while remaining natural organisms, whose actions are due to instincts and reflexes.
  Awareness of oneself lifts a person above others, separating him from nature to a degree that depends on the development of his self-consciousness.
  The person, unlike all other living things, begins to understand the ruthlessness, indifference, sluggishness of nature, in which everything is built on mutual devouring, on the action of randomness (mutation in the genome), determining its development and order in it.
  It is frightening for a person to live in such hesitating world, but at the same time he is afraid of death, accompanied by the horror of the decomposition of the body.
  Therefore, he is being filled with disgust for the environment, imagining himself a fallen angel from somewhere, which again must return to that unknown, unknowable, but proper world of immortality, tranquility and benevolence.
  Such passionate and unchanging desire provokes the emergence of his two properties.
  First, a return to the other world of calm and happiness must be earned, since thou had fell out of it for some good reason into another - a cruel world.
  And a person begins to try to overcome the utilitarian and amoral nature of his lower (animal) consciousness by creating fair moral standards for all people without exception.
  The most successful attempt to formulate this moral code in relation to the distribution to the world was the Sermon on the Mount of Christ, in which everything was correct, but not applicable to real life. In other words, these moral precepts set the horizon of aspirations, separating the real from the beyond.
  The naturally disturbance from similar contradiction, based essentially on the duality of human consciousness - the highest and along with that - the animal - caused the emergence of the second remarkable quality, reflected in the emergence of churches. In particular, in the person of the Christian Church was established connection unhappy peoples with the otherworldly happy and fair world personified in the person of the highest, unattainable, incomprehensible, but all-powerful, all-penetrating, all-knowing, eternal and indestructible creator of everything, in order to having suffered here, deservedly return to his father there.
  Thus, both of these gained properties directly result from the specified duality of human consciousness - both the animal, and the highest.
  Really, time eternal happiness in this unstable and awful world only of survival is impossible, but there is an understanding of this indisputable fact, very this understanding means the latent recognition of oneself as different from everything else precisely because of one"s awareness of oneself in the world, that certainly leads one to recognize as the partial and temporary his presence in reality, since self-awareness was given by someone other, but not by nature, closed on itself.
  And it is the proof of presence of this other both in the otherworldly, and in each person, and connectivity between them which is designated by religion.
  So faith becomes the hope for each, though not all persons are confessed in it, that distinguishes faith, for example, from science with its troubles and obvious insufficiency.
  The emergence of morality means the implementation of its norms in the transformation of the environment for the great benefit of all, which can also serve to find happiness and calm in the otherworldly.
  Largely for this reason mankind is only engaged in construction and restructuring all the time, that is necessary not only for some benefit there, but the main thing - for the posthumous acquisition of what is not here.
  As a result, the world is changing, becoming more comfortable, cultivated, and people more decent, acquiring even in certain amount sense of dignity, and the otherworldly, remaining still mysterious and inaccessible, nevertheless, as you see, influences the development of everything.
  Thereby, religion, as a consequence of the acquisition of self-consciousness by the person and his communities, plays not the last role not only in the cultural, but also the technological development of civilization directly, as well as indirectly, prohibiting or allowing certain innovations in its main confessions, respectively supporting or rejecting new forms of labor relationships and their fruits.
  Christianity has turned out the most progressive in relation to the new that appeared, since in the Sermon on the Mount of Christ has been demonstrated an insoluble contradiction between that which is and that, which is worthy to be.
  It was this contradiction that subsequently pushed a significant part of Christians to try to resolve it by removing the opposition between the worldly and spiritual and by excepting the mediator between God and man, which resulted in reforming the Catholic Church with the separation of Protestants from it, for whom a professional area of activity was recognized as "God's grace".
  In addition to turning to religion, self-consciousness provides a person with the opportunity to consciously take interest in those around him both from a utilitarian position and without any gain, seeking to come closer to something unknown and, perhaps, more enjoyable than what is.
  Thus, interest as a regularly arising and to a certain extent conscious attraction to something new for oneself in current circumstances is characteristic only of a person, with the help of which he tries to take himself out of the established order to an interesting one - as a sending-surprise, the content of which can only be a hint, but its discovery promises a temporary departure from hateful reality.
  It is the ability to be aware of what is and represent what might be, which is peculiar only to the person and most important for him in the perception of vital collisions, gives a certain advantage to man in comparison with other creatures. Some idea of this ability appeared yet in ancient times, since interest translated from Latin (interest) means demonstrates "to have a meaning, to participate".
  The exclusion of the opportunity to find something interesting, for example, in a clean lonely cell, where one cannot even get acquainted with a rat, or, on the contrary, the availability of everything imaginable and desired, provided with a lot of money, quickly leads a person to marasmus.
  The term the "interesting" means translated from Latin (inter esse) "between, or to be in an interval".
  Apparently, in their time, the Romans in ancient times had understood, that, on the one hand, it was impossible to be engaged boring, sometimes nasty, but necessary things all time - need a distracting and entertaining gap between them for pleasure and suffering; along with that, it is not bad to chase the unrealizable sometimes - for happiness, love, good for all, which, nevertheless, is attractive, because of the intensive arrival of new information, which gives food for feeling and intelligence.
  On the other hand, it is impossible to linger for a long time in an attractive (the interesting, that is, intermediate place), not only because it becomes habitual and cannot surprise by anything, but also the fact that everyday work does not wait - it"s necessary to feed yourself and own family, again, the routine seizes: and the whole life is composed of "runs" from one interesting to the next at intervals of the uninteresting, but necessary to ensure a banal existence.
  The interesting, as a synonym for the consciously desired, has being expanded in the list from a dry cave, delicious food, and a pliable female for a hominid up to palaces with an artificial climate and a swimming pool, thousands of recipes for cooking only one meat, vicious spectacles on Internet and fishing for comrades in it, and along with that, paintings and sculptures by Michelangelo Buonarroti, Bach's fugues, Lobachevsky's formulas, Shakespeare's sonnets and novels of Leo Tolstoy, the invention of new devices and apparatus, the manufacture of various handicrafts and other artistic creativity, which is distinguished precisely by its originality and unpredictability.
  Thus, development for a person to a certain extent consists both in expanding the list of the interesting, and, alas, different possibilities in relation to what is interesting for a particular person, since, for example, many from us are indifferent or incapable in relation to technology, music, painting, philosophy, any creative activity, but - happily welcome brains with peas, comics, high-speed driving on cars and mockery of their neighbors.
  The variety interests include a lot of purely utilitarian, for example, the desire to conveniently furnish a living room, smash a garden at the dacha, to enchant down their own bosses, or they are completely insignificant, boiling down to reading detective stories or traveling to exotic islands.
  However, the dissatisfaction inside own self-consciousness of a person requires more than the effectiveness of actions, a comfortable existence, a high position, it pushes him to something transcendent, unreal, illogical, that is, what would show to him himself and everyone around - his uncommon, having caused respect for himself.
  Hence a conscious interest arises in the form of striving for everything unusual, surprising, revolting, or even frightening, such as lightning in a thunderstorm, or to such seemingly senseless exercise as mountaineering, what is being reflected in the concept the "interesting", and it comes closer to utilitarian aspirations only for the most limited individuals, but even they are capable and willing the extraordinary, finding the interest, for example, in the otherworldly, reflected in their belief in the unknown, which attracts them with heavenly bliss after death, and in life gives them a sense of superiority over unbelievers who do not know the ecstasy of faith and the touch to the miraculous and, therefore, to the very highest.
  Persons opposite to them - intellectually developed and rather educated to understand many things and really understand something in their chosen field of activity, - prefer to look for the interest in something unusual, which they do not understand, but would like to unravel, for example, having made a discovery or created an invention.
  So, Leonardo da Vinci has created a helicopter prototype, has wrote a still unsolved image of Mona Lisa, Franklin invented a lightning rod, Foucault - pendulum, Leo Tolstoy has written The Death of Ivan Ilyich.
  If the abilities and interests coincide, the resulting effect, similar to resonance, leads a person to creative discoveries (creativity), since in this case he sometimes succeeds in finding a truly new one both in technology and in art.
  Between these extremes all the other people of the world are located, the interest of the overwhelming majority of which lies not so much in the unusual, as in the sphere of surprising or disturbing them - usually within the limits of consumption of a certain mass product.
  It may be fashion, politics, sports, show, games and other areas of the exposure on the person, far from high aspirations, but bringing this type of people some pleasure to, which is always associated with the influx to some extent of new information.
  Along with that, in such interests and in connection with them, these ordinary people (Philistines) reduce themselves mostly not to the subjects of activity, but to objects of influence, serving, in fact, alien and, very often, selfish interests, allowing to earn on themselves every kind of rogues.
  Thereby one more category of the subjects of action trying to force the others to serve their own interests comes to light and they can be designated as parasites, since their only interest is the aspiration to satisfaction of the most primitive (animal) requirements - the best food, beautiful females, domination over the tribespeople.
  They replace by these primitive wants the cultural values and ethics of general behavior, hypocritically preaching to others the execution of rules and norms that are beneficial only for them, and also distracting the masses from destroying them as typical and conscious parasites, providing all new items of consumption.
  Nevertheless, and these parasites, the main ones of which are the power elites, perform their role in the process of development of human communities - they annoy the public and do not allow it to fall asleep, thereby making its constant contribution to the motion of civilization.
  Interest as the attraction and inclination is similar to happiness - it, when it reaches the object of its attraction, evaporates rather quickly, reaching a culmination at the stage of anticipation by possession.
  As soon as he touches the desired object, then after some reflection, or even immediately, interest disappears, because of the understanding of the insufficiency of what has been achieved, since the subject of interest was originally built in the imagination, but reality always refutes this ideal image, and it becomes traversed, unnecessary or even nasty, being replaced by newfound tastes, which, nevertheless, do not exclude a return to previous interests not only by forgetfulness, but also because of the pleasantness of some memories.
  Interest is similar to happiness precisely because the result of attraction always disappoints: you want one thing, but you get not exactly what you meant - the desired object of interest always slips away, that is inevitable, as the internal unsteady sensations and the fluctuating desires never coincide with perception of an external form of the object of interest with its accurate outlines, in which do not fit an internal cloud of dream.
  Therefore, interest, as well as happiness, passion, love, does not find final permission, staying to the death of the person in a condition of construction and destruction of images, that is in aspiration to acquisition of new information.
  The beautiful, as and the interesting, is a source of information, but, unlike the interesting, which, when addressed to it, becomes ordinary, the beautiful, attracting attention, always excites the enduring interest not only by harmoniously merging the elements of his image in consciousness, not only its stability in this harmony, but also by its eternal mystery for a person: it is possible to admire every day sunset, autumn leaves of trees, Raphael"s Madonna, though pragmatically it is absolutely senseless.
  Countless forms of the beautiful exist only for the person, and they are completely objective, since they are perceived as being constructions that find a certain refraction in consciousness, and not arbitrarily produced by his consciousness, but the fusion of the elements of beingness into harmonious images in the human mind occurs only on the basis of his awareness of himself at the moments of concentration, that is, when he consciously merges his "I" with certain fragments of the environment, which is not always possible for everyone.
  The beautiful has that difference from the interesting, that the beautiful always remains unchanged. It does not depend on current events, and therefore has no direct relation to process of knowledge like inquisitiveness or interest.
  The beautiful can be contemplated or heard, but it is impossible to copy it - it is immediately deadened - whether it be Raphael"s paintings or the performance of Tchaikovsky"s symphony on the balalaika.
  It is impossible to model the sunset into the sea or the colors of the autumn forest.
  The ancient forms of the Parthenon still fascinate us with their perfection, and making changes to the ancient architectural ensembles or paintings by great artists immediately destroys their harmony.
  o learn to create art masterpieces in the conveyor way still nobody managed, despite, for example, knowledge of all the rules of versification.
  This fact undoubtedly indicates that the basis of the beautiful is under the other side of the current beingness, and the reflection of this "otherworldly" can only be contemplated or extracted in the form of art masterpieces at the successful contact with it, inasmuch self the existence of the beautiful in the nature suggests an idea of creation of similar, and attempts to make this really gave, however, in rather few number, unusual objects of art, emergence of which is not explain by compliance of certain rules as, for example, in crafts.
  Without being crowned in most cases with success, the attempts to create the beautiful, nevertheless, get to framework of an interest or the attraction to the extraordinary, the most outstanding products of which are the emergence of such interesting as the photo, engineering, chemical technologies, bioengineering, etc. for the benefit of the population.
  That is, in essence, the emergence of entire industries that accelerated the development of civilization turned out to be a by-product of the beautiful at the appropriate level of development of human self-consciousness, which, having expanded the possibilities of the population in touching to the beautiful, not only in natural phenomena, but in music, painting, verbal expression and architecture, has drew attention of the person to technical creativity also in an attempt to get closer to the beautiful.
  Permanent and quite regular failures to find the rules for creating of the beautiful by the industrial (conveyer) way as it is paradoxical, allowed the person to take, as you can see, from them a certain benefit.
  Interest is attracted by dissatisfaction of the person with the ordinary of existence and with oneself due to the lack of an opportunity to embrace the immensity. Exactly in dissatisfaction consists the source of the formation of his interest.
  This source never runs low because it is in the eternal, developing consciousness (active), which will immediately stop in its development, if the carrier of the consciousness ceases to experience dissatisfaction which pushes him to a new one, but to bring the consciousness in the person towards a new is only capable the interesting.
  However, full satisfaction consciousness in the opened or received interesting is not capable to reach owing to immensity of the new unknown horizons, opening all the time, and, therefore, the interesting.
  Therefore, the destination of interest and its product - the interesting for a person is to ensure the consumption by him of new information that updates his consciousness and gives each time an impetus to the development of his consciousness.
  At the same time, the opposing interests of the dualistic consciousness of man (the animal component of consciousness and the highest component of consciousness, or self-consciousness), their struggle create a constant stimulus for the development of human consciousness in the direction of its ever greater humanization, since the awareness of one's own egoism and primitiveness lays the foundation for overcoming them, which, however, never happens because it is impossible to eliminate the natural (animal) consciousness.
  In society, the struggle of opposing interests of the lowest and highest forms of consciousness in the person is manifested not by the class struggle and not by the confrontation between the poor and the rich, but by the struggle of the most advanced (energetic, educated, intelligent) representatives of the dominant interests of the highest and lowest of forms of consciousness respectively, who once anyway came out of the masses.
  The first ones put at the forefront altruism, conscience, mercy, the struggle for the complete harmonization of society, the second - egocentrism and elitism, considering, like animals, but consciously that society exists only to satisfy their interests.
  The irreconcilability of these opposite and ineradicable interests assumes permanent fight between them during which one side or the other has to make concessions, which cannot but ensure advance of each community forward for the time being.
  
  Chapter 5.
  Why and when did the industrial revolution begin? and precisely in Europe?
  
  Introduction
  In the middle of the second millennium of our era, beginning with the Netherlands, and then of England, there was the turn towards the industrial production, which rather quickly destroyed the Middle Ages in Europe. What is the true cause of this epochal event? And why did it happen initially only in one - exactly Protestant - country of Europe, and not in another or others, as well as not in China or India? Convincing answers to these questions yet. Therefore, it makes sense to try to solve this problem
  It was assumed, as early as the nineteenth century, that the industrial revolution began in the second half of the eighteenth century for reasons related to the beginning of the mass use of machinery, urbanization and the transition of an agrarian society to an industrial one, and it ended in the late nineteenth century.
  A characteristic feature of the industrial revolution is the rapid growth of productive forces based on high-performance machines, culminating in the affirmation of capitalism.
  All this is not so, because the industrial revolution, more precisely, the turn towards the industrial production, was confused with capitalism.
  The term "the industrial revolution" was introduced by Jerome Blanqui, although the term "a turn towards the industrial production" is more appropriate in this case, since the revolution, by definition, does not last long, but the industrial revolution, as this is considered, continued about two centuries.
  If the main peculiarities and "fruits" of this turn towards the industry are repeated further in other countries, then it only proves the adequacy of the turn towards the industrial production somewhere and sometime for the first time.
  The turn towards the industrial production actually happened at the end of the sixteenth century in the Netherlands. And the reason for it is not directly related to technology and industrialization, which will be shown below.
  It was only two centuries after the gradual development of the achievements of this turn in the Netherlands, and then in England and other Protestant countries has emerged the capitalist production and corresponding to it relations in more countries, which therefore gained the preferential development, and now are called as developed.
  Thus, the turn towards the industrial production in the Netherlands created opportunities and showed ways of their realization for the emergence and the statement of capitalism.
  The main feature of the industrial revolution is the transition from manual to machine labor, but in order for this transition to take place, one must first invent and implement these machines, and it in turn implies a fairly wide development of education and science.
  And here "the growth of the productive forces on the basis of the large machine industry" is already one of results of the turn towards the industrial production, which is characteristic of an initial stage of capitalism, but not to the turn towards the industrial production.
  The center for Science in Europe, the liberation of labor, own inventions and the implement of other high-performance machines into the economy, the leading position in world trade, book printing first appeared or became widely used in the Netherlands.
  The regular mail, stock exchanges, and newspapers also appeared in this country for the first time. The Netherlands has become the center of world trade.
  Thanks to religious freedoms, which for the first time in Europe were granted by the government of the Netherlands, the persecuted Protestants flocked to the Netherlands, including scientists, as a result of which the Netherlands became the center of European science, which was represented by the University of Leiden, founded in 1575 by Wilhelm of Orange, the leader of the Netherlands revolutionю
  The book printing in the Netherlands has become leading in Europe.
  Manual labor in most industries has been replaced by machine labor in accordance with local conditions.
  In particular, windmills have worked intensively in the sawmills, paper workshops, milkchurns, in the manufacture of gunpowder.
  Already at the beginning of the 17th century, 30 sugar cane refineries were operating in the Netherlands. Whole manufacturing industries related to port operations were organized. Through the whole country the enterprises for roasting of a brick for supply of numerous building sites with it worked.
  In the Netherlands quickly on the basis of the shipbuilding, which is most advanced in the world, the enormous capital connected with capture of world trade by the United West Indian company founded in 1602, was formed.
  As a result, income per capita of the Netherlands has become the highest in Europe.
  Thus, by all indications for the first time, a turn towards the industrial production occurred in the Netherlands at the end of the 16th - early 17th centuries.
  Only through certain time was it repeated first in England, then in Sweden, the USA.
  In particular, at the end of XVII century, England began to overtake the world leader - the Netherlands - in terms of growth rates of high-performance manufactories, and then in world trade. By the middle of XVIII century, England became the leading capitalist country in the world in terms of economic development.
  After a while, in this country, a transition to large-scale machine production had been happened on the basis of the invention of spinning machines by Arkwright, Hargreaves, Crompton (1769); the steam engine by Watt (1775); and the use of coke for metallurgy in the eighties of XVIII century.
  We must assume that this material shows the difference between the industrial revolution, more precisely, a turn towards the industrial production, and capitalism, and, accordingly, indicates the time of this turn.
  In this regard, the reasons for the turn towards the industrial production, proposed so far, are as the prerequisites, statements about changing one on another, or signs of a turn to the industrial production.
  Consider them briefly.
  A. Saint-Simon considered the transition from the feudal and theological system to the industrial and scientific system to be the cause of the industrial revolution [1, p. 5].
  This consideration of Saint-Simon does not indicate the cause of the industrial revolution, but the external progressive course of the world economy.
  A. Toynbee believed that the industrial revolution has started in 1760 (England), pointing out that "until 1760 in England the old industrial system was kept; no great mechanical invention has yet been implemented [2, p. 13]. At this, Toynbee states that the industrial revolution consists in "replacing the medieval system of regulation, which until now the production and distribution of wealth were subordinated, by the competition (ibid., p. 121).
  Toynbee's considerations clearly state the same thing that Saint-Simone's cause, adding to it the competition. That is, he is again on positions of the external observer behind the course of socioeconomic development, without penetrating into a being of a problem, and stopping only on external signs of the process of the formation of capitalism.
  The pioneer of economic history, William Cunningham, has found only the prerequisites of the industrial revolution. He had seen them at the beginning of the Great Geographical Discoveries and the struggle for the colonies, in which England has won [3].
  Surprisingly, but a fact, the historians are completely unwilling to look at the root. Here and Cunningham evaded to identify the causes of the industrial revolution, noting only some of its prerequisites.
  The French scientist - P. Mantoux - considered that "the industrial revolution is the expansion of previously squeezed forces, the sudden blooming and lush growth of the embryos that remained until then in a hidden or dormant state"] 4, p. 415].
  This statement is about nothing at all, especially since Mantoux has not indicated, why these "squeezed forces" arose precisely in England.
  The Russian historian of economics I. Kulisher has indicated a number of reasons for the emergence of the industrial revolution: the need for technical improvements and the ability to satisfy them due to the successes of the natural sciences, the dispossession of land of peasants, which has revealed the ready labor force, the appearance of prudent and initiative businessmen, the implementation of machines [5, p. 493].
  All reasons, to which Kulisher has pointed out, are, at best, prerequisites of the industrial revolution or phenomena accompanying it, since each of these alleged causes has its own reason. For example, Kulisher does not explain why arose a need for technical innovations.
  In turn, Marxists believe that all revolutions are made as a result of the class conflict over economic resources, attitude towards property, denoting a change in socio-economic formations.
  Thus, Marxists reject the idea of social consensus, which happened not so rare.
  The very origin of the turn to the industrial production is not from the conflict of classes, and from the gradual development of the social consciousness, led to the recognition of the goodness of labor and its fruits, refutes the Marxist idea of the conflictness, consisting the change of the formations.
  Closest to the determination, at least, of one condition, promoting the emergence of the industrial revolution, more precisely, the turn towards the industrial production, in our opinion, was Max Weber who in the work claimed that the Lutheran sermon not only has given the impetus of Reformation , but also had an impact on the origination of capitalism, at this, the characteristic feature of Protestant communities, Weber has assumed, is the conducting commerce as a virtuous type of activity [6].
  Indeed, Luther recognized labor as goodness, not only duty, but this statement of the founder of Protestantism is only a condition that contributes to the emergence of a turn towards the industrial production, but it could not produce it.
  Below we will try to identify not only the conditions for the industrial turn, but also the true reason for the turn towards the industrial production, as well as the place and time of its initial appearance.
  Part 1. The conditions a turn towards the industrial production.
  The duality of consciousness acquired by man has led to the emergence of the most effective force, driving human communities along the path of progress, both cultural and technological [7].
  The egoism of the animal (natural) consciousness in human communities was thereby contrasted to the altruism of its self-awareness, and this altruism was most vividly expressed in a culture with its diverse interests, striving for the beautiful, and religion, especially in Christianity, that in total could not but contribute to the civilizational progress.
  Nevertheless, this progress was not too fast, lasting several thousand years as a result of the gradual development of the individual and social consciousness to a certain breakthrough, when it became possible, on the one hand, to "spill out" beyond the boundaries of only state to boundless terrestrial open spaces, and on the other hand, some kind of permission from religion and the state to effective and almost unlimited use of labor and its fruits without any braking in culture and in the sphere of technologies appeared.
  It is known that beingness and consciousness continuously interact, not existing without each other. Therefore, without the gradual accumulation of data, the creation of appropriate conditions, a person is not able to implement his own original ideas, for example, in the technical field, even if they have formed at him.
  An example of this is Leonardo da Vinci, who invented a parachute, bicycle, tank, robot, searchlight, put forward the ideas of an airplane and a helicopter, but they turned out to be unclaimed.
  That is, consciousness of the highest level is powerless before circumstances if the conditions for realization of the new ideas and projects did not ripen.
  What should be the conditions for the start of the industrial revolution, more precisely, the turn towards the industrial production?
  It is clear that with the slaveholding system, technical solutions that increase the labor productivity were not required because of the cheapness of labor.
  The structure of the economic management in the Middle Ages also did not need technical progress owing to the forced labor of laborers, in one way or another attached to the land, which were actually owned by feudal lords almost in all countries of the world.
  The craft disunity of artisans in the cities, the lack of a widespread credit and financial system also did not contribute to the emergence of the high-performance equipment, which also deprived the sense of the activities of artisans. They also did not promote the development of trade, the range of which was limited mainly to raw materials and luxury goods, moreover, poverty and humiliation of almost the entire population hampered the wide development of trade relations with high turnover, the more that the lack of roads of the acceptable quality, capacious and fast freight transport, numerous borders between fiefdoms, and robbery on the roads has also hindered for trade.
  Even the voyages of the Portuguese and Spanish sailors to distant continents at the end of the 15th century of our era did not lead to a noticeable industrial turn.
  What then caused this turn?
  It is known that freedom can be obtained only when your hands are untied.
  But hands of everyone were bound by strict religious rules and restrictions, which was typical up to a certain limit for Christianity.
  Confucianism in China, which established strict rules of behavior and hierarchy of social structures for more than 2.000 years, with its public ethics, political ideology, scientific traditions, unlike the rest of the world which was recognized by the Chinese, who were proud of their cultural, structural and social achievements, as the barbaric, in fact has cut off China from the rest of the world, that eventually has led Chine to stagnation.
  The Confucian idea of retribution, referring only to descendants, and not affecting the otherworldly, immortality of the soul, being essentially a primitive way of thinking of the archaic type, naturally, could not contain the contradictoriness both Creation and a human consciousness. Therefore, the Chinese community was more inclined to respect the traditions, than to try to produce something new, that is, to create, which, if it manifested itself, did not receive development. The Chinese community and now practically only copies any innovations, without asking the problems of obtaining fundamentally new knowledge and new technologies on their own.
  Similar strict regulations and restrictions are characteristic, acting to this day, for Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism, offering the flock to live traditionally, to rely on the will of the highest powers. All these confessions impede the emergence of any new one that violates the order established, that extremely profitably for the ministers of the churches.
  And since the power of the churches at that time was indisputable, nsofar any deviation from the norm was being ruthlessly suppressed
  Heretics, inventors were being simply burned at the stake or they were executed by other means, as, for example, happened in Russia under Ivan the Terrible with the inventor of the glider, who flew from the bell tower with the help of the wings, having made by him. There are also numerous examples of similar "work" of the Inquisition.
  However, nothing lasts forever.
  Unlike the rest of the continents, in Europe from about the eleventh century a curious situation was created.
  Ever since the Ancient Rome, the urban dwellers enjoyed significant privileges compared with the rural population. This tradition has not faded away in the Middle Ages. In many European countries, the urban dwellers in their status were actually equated with noblemen, municipalities were active in cities, parliaments were working, and universities were opened for young people. In particular, the first university of Europe appeared in Bologna in 1088.
  All this could not but affect the growth of self-consciousness mainly the urban population, with which the feudal lords had to be reckoned, who by the beginning of the 16th century had found a common language with the urban population in an effort to abandon extortion and the omnipotence of the papacy, especially since there was a complete disintegration of the Catholic Church, expressed in the sale of indulgences - the paid diploma of the Pope about an absolution.
  And here, quite opportunely for the ruling elites of the German states, appeared German theologian, who dared to speak out not only against indulgences in 1517, but also in his address "To the Christian gentry of the German nation" who declared the fight of the entire German people against the papal domination.
  Thus, Europe turned out to be the only place in the world in which the growth of self-consciousness of a significant part of the population clearly manifested itself and required finally eliminating at least the omnipotence of the papacy, shifting the emphasis of conscious existence from the spiritual into the mundane, in which undoubtedly should also be divine.
  And this divine was found.
  Having turning to the originals, Luther rejected the authority of the papal decrees and epistles and urged that the Bible should be the main source of Christian truths, not the church.
  Luther also rejected the juxtaposition between the worldly and the spiritual, stating that God's grace is being exercised also in worldly life on the professional endeavors, since God intends people to one or another type of activity, investing in them various talents and abilities, and the duty of a person to work diligently, fulfilling his calling [8].
  As a result, there was a split of the Catholic Church with the formation of several areas of Protestantism.
  The idea of Luther that the main vocation of man is diligent labor, has liberated Protestant public, who appeared, allowing it to take a different attitude not only to labor, but also to its fruits, especially new ones.
  In all Protestant countries the prohibition on novelties of the technology and their use was removed.
  Therefore, the reason for Reformation that took place in Europe was the progressiveness of Christianity, in which, unlike other religious directions, initially in the Christ's Mount Preaching was laid the contradiction between the existing beingness and the "world" other - the best.
  Naturally, sooner or later the idea of a "right" joining this better "world" should have appeared through the improvement of the existing world through effective labor efforts and their fruits for the common good that God cannot fail to notice directly.
  Besides, Europe which inherited the Roman traditions and many cultural lines of antiquity generally in the cities founded still by Romans, gradually accumulated in itself discontent with wildness of surrounding, remembering times of high culture of antiquity, and keeping thereby, at least, in potency the aspiration to its samples which was expressed as a result in art of the Renaissance, the beginning of which preceded the epoch of the industrial revolution, that has become an additional push for it not only by the general increase in literacy and culture of the population, its enculturation to the beautiful in sculptures, painting and new secular literature instead of theological treatises and Bible, but also by the expansion of incoming information flows into minds, which were carrying in themselves the various ideas of creative members of communities to improve life.
  And the possibility of such a life improvement was opened by the recognition of the goodness of labor.
  Thus, the unique conditions, developed in Western Europe, - countries that were mostly of Latin origin - could not but promote to еру gradual growth of the self-awareness of its urban population, and, from other side, the controversial character of Christianity has led it eventually to the Reformation, which officially recognized the goodness of labor, having opened thereby the gates to all new ideas and ensured the possibility of their effective implementation.
  The water wheel has become widely used. It can set in motion a hammer weighing up to one ton in the processing of metals. In paper production, with the help of the wheel, the presses were raised and lowered, in mining - have lifted ore and pumped out water from mines.
  On the smelters the water wheel was connected with the bellows to inject the intense air flows into the melting furnaces, that allowed to increase amount of the melted metal significantly.
  Cannons and muskets began to cast in special forms, openings in the barrels of guns began to make by means of the boring machine.
  The Middle Ages came to an end. Bullets easily pierced the knightly armor, the cannons destroyed the castle walls.
  In addition, the mills, using water or wind as a propulsion unit, began to operate in the cloth and flour-grinding industry.
  The spinning machine appeared, pulling the fiber into a thread and twisting it simultaneously, the tape units started working on weaving manufactories, on which one worker made 20 tapes of different colors at once.
  Portuguese invented light and maneuverable vessels - caravels. They were equipped with three masts with direct and slanting sails and could move in the necessary direction not only at a fair wind, but also with an oncoming one.
  The wide use has got the invention of Johann Gutenberg the individual metallic letters, from which was possible to make lines and pages for imprints on paper. He also invented the printing press.
  In England in 1589 an industrial knitting machine was invented. The device consists of a needle with a hook, which work by opening and closing sequentially, simulating the procedure of hand knitting. In 1660 there were about 650 knitting machines, and in 1844 - about 43 thousand.
  In the middle of the second millennium of our era in Europe the logarithmic ruler (slide rule), a microscope, the telescope, a silicon musket was also invented.
  At the end of the 15th century Luka Pacioli suggested to make double entry in accounting.
  In the 16th century in Europe were invented a pocket watch, granular gunpowder, a diving bell, diethyl ether, a wheeled yacht with sails, sealing wax, a pencil, a water closet, and a world map in a new projection.
  At the beginning of the 17th century in Europe were invented an arithmometer (adding machine), a steam turbine, a caliper, a liquid thermometer, a barometer, a counting machine, and a vacuum pump.
  Finally, the broadest use of credit was begun, which is the basis of mass commodity production, having making possible to fill the shortage of its own resources and bring capital into continuous circulation.
  The opportunity to mass production of various goods demanded the development of trade, finding new markets for goods.
  Part 2. Characteristics of the country - the pioneer of the turn towards the industrial production.
  Therefore, the first country to follow the precepts of Martin Luther in the form of Calvinism (the Swiss version of Protestantism) and make a leap for capitalism was the Netherlands, freed from dominion of Spain in a long war with it. Along with that here thanks to Protestantism was eliminated shackles, fettering the use of the innovations.
  In addition, the Netherlands had a hardworking, literate population, a number of large cities, including port cities, access to the sea, old traditions of navigation, a tendency to maritime trade, and could use these circumstances quite effectively thanks to the support of industrialists and businessmen by the state, which had for that time the most democratic institutions.
  Thus, self-consciousness of the population of this country due to the prevailing circumstances, the main one of which, according to Protestant logic, was the new attitude to work, supported by the reformed church, has reached by that time the highest level, compared to other countries.
  Citizens of this state had new interests which expanded the information flows covering them, that in itself created the forward trend in the technical and cultural relation, which did not disappear and by present time.
  This "Golden age" of the Netherlands began in 1576 and lasted for about a century.
  The government of the Netherlands has granted great religious freedoms to its citizens, while the rest of Europe was in fact stagnant.
  From many European countries, persecuted Protestants flocked into the Netherlands, including scientists, with the result that the Netherlands became the center of European science.
  This entailed the attainment of the highest level of the publishing. Christophe Plantin"s publishing house (Christophorus Plantinus) has become the largest in Europe in the 16th century, with branches in Paris and Leiden.
  In connection with the participation of the Netherlands in geographical discoveries the geographical science and cartography have reached great heights in it.
  The Dutch set up two services that distinguished them from other European countries that period: the regular mail and an information newspaper.
  The country by its coastal provision had a remarkable trump - windmills, and their ways of use differed in a big variety. They found use during "Golden Age" for sawmills, paper workshops, milkchurns, factories for production of gunpowder. Through the whole country there were enterprises for roasting of a brick. Natives of Antwerp have created in Amsterdam several industries of the manufacturing industry, related the work-of the port. The soap factories organized by them gained the global recognition. The plants on cleaning of a sugar cane by 1630 there were already 30. The cutting of diamonds also began in the Netherlands, having revealed in full next century.
  Thus, Dutch invent, introduce various novelties in life and the technical industries, paying special attention to improvement of the ships and navigation, thereby having quickly turned the Netherlands into the leading trade country of the world. In the Netherlands outstanding artists and architects appear.
  Except novelties from other countries of Europe, Dutch had also own inventions: the pocket watch of Peter Hoenlein (1510), the world map of Gerard Mercator (1569), a microscope Zachariah of Jansen (1590), the pendulum clock of Christiaan Huygens (1657), lenses for a microscope Antoni Van leeuwenhoek (1673).
  The leading industry of the united provinces has become shipbuilding, which brought the country to the first place in the world in size and quality of the military and merchant fleet.
  The most advanced was the financial market of the Netherlands, in the cities had acting commodity and stock exchanges. However, the economic prosperity of the country was ensured by the international trade.
  The huge capital, having formed rapidly in the Netherlands, is mainly associated with the activities of the United West India Company, founded in 1602, which allowed for the maximum coordination of shipping and trade, first with South-East Asia, and then with Indonesia, Japan, Taiwan, Sri Lanka, South Africa.
  Subsequently, this company seized trade with West Africa and America. As a result, this company was for a long time the largest trading company in the world.
  The emergence of huge trading capital brought the Netherlands into the country with the highest per capita income in Europe.
  The only competitor of the Netherlands at this time in trade was also Protestant country - England.
  Nevertheless, the status of the Netherlands was so high at that time, that in 1689 the English parliament appealed to stadtholder of the Netherlands William III to occupy English throne.
  The leading role of the Netherlands in the world was actually undermined by the victory over its army by the British in the war at the end of the 17th century. The "golden age" of this country ended, and the leading role in the turn towards the industrial production passed to another Protestant country - England.
  The flag of the turn towards the industrial production was raised by more powerful Protestant England even higher, but with a delay of a century, since the recognition of labor and its fruits by goodness was hampered by a more conservative management system and a softer form of Protestantism.in England compared to the Netherlands.
  At the head of the state in England was the monarch, who was at the same time the head of the independent Anglican church, although separated by the end of the 16th century under Queen Elizabeth from the Roman Catholic Church, but retained elements of Catholicism (Anglo-Catholicism), and therefore Luther's radicalism was not welcoming originally - Anglican church has taken a position between Protestantism and Catholicism.
  However, the "39 articles" of the Anglican faith were imbued with the Protestant spirit, denying purgatory, indulgences, the power of the Pope, and presenting the salvation not only in one spiritual quest, but also in worldly acts, that is, in fact, removed all the restrictions, imposed by the papacy, in particular, upon the free enterprise and responsiveness to innovations in science and technology, although formally these articles repeated all the canons of the scripture.
  Therefore, not immediately, but gradually both the state and the church not only stopped hindering the development of trade and industry, but also began to promote in every way the development of education, science and technology.
  By the end of the 18th century, a knitting machine, a steam engine was invented in England, and blast furnaces were widely used.
  The demand for metal parts of spinning machines, steam engines, seeders and other mechanisms led to the invention of turning and milling machines for efficient and fast metalworking.
  The displacement of the Netherlands on the second plan in world trade and the seizure of colonies, the development of large-scale machine production has led to an increase in productivity in both industry and agriculture, and the displacement of the masses of the population from the agricultural sector to the industrial sector, gradually having turned England into a leading industrial country - the main country of capitalism of that time.
  Part 3. Determining the cause of the turn towards the industrial production in the middle of the second millennium of our era.
  So, the Middle Ages could be completed only under the following conditions.
  Removal of strict religious regulations and restrictions, that impede private initiative, scientific and technical progress.
  Recognition of labor is not a duty, but a blessing.
  The emergence of a freelance and educated part of the population within a centralized and independent state.
  The emergence of the first condition was facilitated by a clear disintegration of the Catholic Church by the middle of the Middle Ages, which disgraced itself by the trade in indulgences, hypocritically asserting along with that its commitment to the spiritual.
  As a result, such failure of the papacy could not but cause the outrage among the educated and honest religious community.
  This indignation was expressed for the first time by Martin Luther, who categorically rejected the similar intermediary between God and laymen, but he did not stop on it, and pointed to impossibility of the opposition of the earthly and spiritual, as God intends the people for this or that type of activity, putting in them various talents and abilities, and by that God carries out a certain intention.
  The rejection of church restrictions and the recognition of labor as a blessing, as and its fruits, entailed the removal of the chains from private initiative and opened the way for various creative ideas, thereby having served the scientific and technical progress, including the invention and use of high-performance machines.
  This kind of trend was also supported by the autonomy and enlightenment of the urban population, since in the major cities of Europe, from the 11th century, universities were functioning, as well as parliaments, and municipalities were acting.
  And the greatest support for this protest was originally provided by the government of the Netherlands, freed from the rule of Spain. It was into the Netherlands that all Protestants persecuted in most European countries rushed.
  There the first-ever industrial revolution, more precisely, the turn towards the industrial production also began about what it was told above in more detail.
  The conditions promoting this turn at first in one Protestant country, and then and in other Protestant countries - England, Sweden, the United States are that.
  Nevertheless, all these conditions, without which this turn would not take place at a certain time and place, do not reveal the cause of its occurrence then and here, especially since the true reasons, as it sometimes happens, are carefully hidden and even distant from the event.
  Self-consciousness, which distinguishes man from all other living beings, was reflected in the emergence religion in human communities - the conservative part of self-consciousness, and - culture, with the inclusion of science, technology and art - the liberal part of self-consciousness.
  In turn, the duality of consciousness as the main driving force of the person and his communities [7] was being expressed through religion in relation to own beingness - worldly, and to some otherworldly, who is spiritualized it, at this in culture this duality has been manifested as interest in the new, acquiring the finished expression in creativity.
  The most piercing and clearly the relationship of the worldly (being) and the spiritual (otherworldly divine) in their insoluble contradictions was revealed by Christianity between what is and what should be.
  In the Sermon on the Mount Christ has expressively outlined these contradictions, which were partially realized only after one and a half thousand years for the first time by Martin Luther.
  "The poor in spirit are blessed wherefore they possess by the Kingdom of Heaven." (The Gospel from Matthew. Ch. 5, item 3).
  In essence, here it says about the horizon to which each person needs to aspire because in the Kingdom of Heaven there is no property to which here all cling, there is no fight for these or those benefits. In this Kingdom all understand and love each other. Moreover, there all are as whole.
  Therefore, the person who tries to reject temptations of the material world will come nearer to a state of pure spirit, that is, to the Kingdom of Heaven.
  Seem, that it is impossible in our world, and those some people which try to make sincerely it, are called blissful.
  If the Christian church in its main part - the Catholic - understood this statement as a person's inescapable desire from the "dirt" of the worldly to the "purity" of the spiritual, emphasizing the latter and opposing it to the worldly, then Luther has caught another facet of this allegorical thought of Christ.
  He stated, that, since God created the person to strive for spiritual things and to realize this goal, he rewarded man with various abilities and talents, then only labor can be the only real way for the manifestation of this divine gift.
  By this, Luther has presented labor not as some duty, but as grace, having removed here the contradiction between the worldly and the spiritual.
  A confirmation of this idea of Luther is also the following maxim of Christ: "Meek persons are blissful wherefore they will inherit the earth". (The Gospel from Matthew. Hl. 5, item 5), from which it follows that the goodness is the gathering of meek people who do not have a subject for disputes and who quietly live and work on the earth for the common benefit.
  Thus, it is the duality of consciousness in the form of the struggle of its lower (natural) component and higher non-natural (self-consciousness) that led to the formation of religious social consciousness, in which an attempt was originally made to completely eliminate the lower consciousness, replacing it with only by one gift from God - self-consciousness, that is, to defeat the flesh for the sake of the spiritual.
  Similar estrangement from natural essence of the person could not but lead church, in particular, and Christianity, to defeat, in view of the increasing hypocrisy of her attendants, not capable to replace animal essence of the person of one spiritual, despite all efforts.
  Such decomposition of Christian church in the person of her most powerful wing - Catholicism - to the middle of the second millennium of our era reached the latest edge - sale of indulgences the, that is, documents from the church power, which are temporarily saving Catholic from punishment for committed sins.
  To tolerate further such profanation of faith was impossible.
  Therefore, Luther suggested removing the discredited Catholic Church as an intermediary between parishioners and God, and restoring the balance between secular and spiritual, having recognized the main maintenance of life the wordly labor for the benefit of society.
  Thereby, from the Protestants in the person of Luther and the liberal government of the country of concentration at that time of Protestantism (the Netherlands) have appeared some kind of the permission to receiving any "fruits" of labor and their use for the greater benefit of society, despite possible violations of the established traditions, having opened the road to discoveries and innovations.
  On the other hand, the duality of consciousness in the form of the struggle of the lower (natural) component of it and the highest - extra-natural (self-consciousness) led not only to the Reformation, but also to the appearance of a significant number of creative people.
  Self-consciousness demands all the time extension of information flows, which it receives for the account of the conscious transformation by people by surrounding space in the form of the change of the existing artificial and natural environment, and this transformation is got that better, than more the person knows and understands how the world surrounding him functions. Cognition demands education. Schools and universities were emerging.
  In Europe, to the time of Luther's appeal, a layer of intellectuals and fairly literate people with broad interests and considerable creativity who were not given developing, forcing them to engage exclusively in theology, had formed in large cities.
  Creativity is characterized by an overflow of an individual with a deep sense of dissatisfaction with own surrounding.
  It comes to the person from the lowest (natural) consciousness in his striving to create greater comforts for existence.
  However, this feeling is combined in a person with a higher consciousness (self-consciousness), whose dissatisfaction with insufficient social comfort, the development of science and art, reaching a high degree, requires extending the achievements of civilization and culture to all.
  But the lowest consciousness dominates herewith, since the activity of these individuals is manifested mostly by instinct, without much thought, with a minimum of rationality, giving, nevertheless, the most creative persons of all living.
  Having received the appropriate "permission" from the reformed Church, these creative persons did not slow down to intensify scientific research, offering as a result a lot of technical and organizational innovations.
  The machine production arose, ships and navigation improved, trade revived, mail and newspapers appeared, communications between the continents expanded.
  And country, in which originally all of this was manifested more intensely and quickly, was the Netherlands of the end of XVI, the beginning of XVII centuries.
  To support of our theses should be noted that at the beginning of the first Millennium ad in China were invented mills, pumps, new technologies of agricultural production, as well as were invented compass, seismograph, gunpowder, paper, silk manufacturing technology, multi-tiered buildings.
  However, the turn towards the industrial production there did not happen precisely because of forced labor and slavery in the Chinese community of that time. That is, in itself the manifestation of self-awareness in the form of creativity is not enough to turn towards the industry. A manifestation of self-consciousness in the form of the liberation of labor for the main population of the country is also required.
  Therefore, the turn towards the industrial production took place not in China, but in Europe after one and a half thousand years. The accumulated dissatisfaction of an educated person in his self-consciousness requires more than a comfortable existence, high position in society: it pushes him through the struggle of the lowest consciousness with its primitive requirements, to a high, in this case, to a certain liberation of labor and its creative use, which became possible for the first time in the Netherlands at the end of XVI century.
  And this turn transferred the slow development of civilization into the accelerated consistently in Protestant countries, and then, by their example, in many others, which led to such large-scale and impressive achievements of the human civilization by now precisely because of a certain liberation of labor.
  Thus, dissatisfaction and duality of consciousness in the form of the struggle of the lowest (natural) of its component and the highest extra-natural (self-consciousness) through Christianity in the person of Luther, and through the Protestant country (Netherlands), which was determined by the high degree of development of culture and science in it, have led to a kind of resonance of the reformed Christianity and creative minds, containing in their potency technological culture,
  Thereby, the struggle of the lowest (natural) consciousness and self-consciousness, having led to a resonance the reformed Christianity and creativity in the technological sphere at the end of 16th a century, turned the world towards the industrial production, having set the direction into capitalism.
  
  List of used literature:
  
  1. Oeuvres de Claude-Henri de Saint-Simon. 6 vols. (On the industrial system). Paris: Editions Anthropos, 1966. - Volumes 1-5.
  2. Toynbee A. Lectures on the industrial revolution of the 18th century in England. London, New York: Longmans, Green and Co. 1894. Ohio State University Library, Americana.
  3. Cunningam W. An Essay On Western Civilization in Its Economic Aspects. Published by Cambridge Eng. The University press in 1911.
  4. Mantoux P. Industrial Revolution in the 18th century in England. Routledge, 1 edition (April 17, 2006). ISBN-13: 978-0415378390
  5. Kulisher I. V. (2004). History of the economic life of Western Europe in 2 v. Chelyabinsk. Sotsium.
  6. MaxVeber. Die protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus. Vollstandige Ausgabe. Herausgegeben und eingeleitet von Dirk Kaesler, 3 durchgesehene Auflage. Beck, munchen 2010, ISBN 3-406-51133-3.
  7. Nisovtsev Yu. The driving force and source of development of the person and his communities (Against L.N. Gumilev's passionarity). 2018. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru
  8. Sirota A. Regularities in German history. Partner (Dortmund), No. 6 (105) maranat.de (2006)
  
  Chapter 7.
  How can one attract randomness and take advantage of it in the process of creativity?
  
  Creativity in a person is the only thing that determines the progress of civilization in the technological and cultural spheres. Where did this creative beginning come from, science has not yet discovered, although much has been written about it. It is not even clear with what, in essence, the process of creativity is connected as the discovery of a non-obvious new one, as well as - thanks to what the creative process proceeds. It would be nice to clarify this. You can evaluate the attempt presented here by reading the text below.
  I
  It is known that the variability of living creatures is provoked by mutations, and the mutation itself is a random effect on some gene, that has a positive or negative effect on the descendants of this creature.
  As a result, over time, appear and disappear various organisms the existence of which is determined, in essence, by their adaptive capabilities in relation to the environment, but all changes in these organisms occur, as it were, automatically and over comparatively long time, that is, the being itself does not realize them.
  Indeed, randomness in any form, even in a person who, in principle, can understand the nature of this phenomenon, cannot give rise directly to conscious actions for its use, since a person understands only retroactively that this phenomenon is random, so as it emerges suddenly for human, when he can"t do anything already, and he has to either eliminate the consequences of this occasion, if they are negative, or think about whether it is possible to take advantage of this randomness for his own benefit.
  It is also impossible to predict randomness, since it is something that falls out of any known order.
  Confirmation of this unforeseen, causeless, unstable nature of randomness, and also to the fact that it is the result of the intersection of independent processes, are not only the examples below, but also well-known definitions of randomness, which were formulated as the quintessence of its many manifestations.
  V. I. Dahl qualifies randomness as follows: "It is an unaccountable and causeless beginning". (Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language).
  S. I. Ozhegov and N. Yu. Shvedova, in "Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language", give the following definition of randomness so: "Randomness - it is unforeseen".
  The explanatory dictionary "Eurasian Wisdom from A to Z" says about randomness the following: "The character of what exists as a random fact. That is, that might not be. The term was created by Fichte to mean in general everything that is given for no reason".
  The wide definition of randomness is given by the Encyclopedic Philosophical Dictionary: "Randomness is a reflection of mostly external, inconsequential, unstable, single-time connections of reality; expression of the initial point of knowledge of the object; the result of the crossing of independent causal processes, events; a way of turning opportunities into reality, in which in a given object, under given conditions, there are several different possibilities that can turn into reality, but only one of them is realized; a form of manifestation of necessity and addition to it".
  Be that as it may, but it is randomness that makes evolutionary changes in living nature, and if we leave out the disputed reasons for the appearance of a creature with self-consciousness - a person, then by one of the authors of this new phenomenon was randomness.
  Randomness was only a co-author of the appearance of man because it only evolutionarily brought living organisms to a model (primate) suitable for the formation of a being, which is capable to be aware himself, his intentions and his actions, but the author of appearance of a person - was by no means some randomness, since self-consciousness inherent only in a person is based on a different program, which is not an improvement in the program of natural (lower) consciousness, but it is completely independent, giving a person the opportunity not only adapt to the environment, but also go beyond that environment.
  It is already in the new role of a conscious transformer of the environment that a person can transfer randomness thanks to self-consciousness from the category of chaotic into the category of necessary, but only for cognition of the unobvious new, for that he is already capable, repeatedly accelerating the development process of both the community of people and their consciousness.
  In other words, as soon as this new being - a person - was able to wonder and ponder, that is, to build projects, or penetrate into the future in the form of setting specific goals in front of oneself, and strive to achieve them by a will force, but never satisfied with what has been achieved, this creature, firstly, turned out to be the only one of all, capable to this conscious "management" by time in order to obtain the desired result; secondly, the self-consciousness inherent in this creature led him to the fact, that this being has found ways to consciously use the randomness, albeit indirectly, which was previously impossible in living nature - that"s why the evolution of living things went so slowly - billions of years - before the advent of a person.
  The fact is that it is impossible to directly use randomness both for creation and destruction, even consciously, because when setting goals in the current time, it is not present in the human mind, and cannot be taken into account by it. Actually, therefore, occasions, i.e. phenomena that are interfering in specific actions of a person about which he did not know or simply extraneous factors that he could notice but did not attach importance to them, qualified by him as something spontaneous. That is, to use randomness, at least time is required to understand its nature and possible application.
  How important this is for the expansion of information flows is clear from the arbitrary nature of randomness: if a random phenomenon is akin to surprise, then randomness falls out of a known series of current events and, possibly, - available knowledge. In other words, randomness may well be the phenomenon, non-obvious and extraneous to the database of mankind, being out of a known order.
  Consequently, randomness is the direct neighbor of unobvious new knowledge, and only through it can it be achieved, and not through logic or combinatorics. Therefore, randomness and non-obvious new can quite naturally converge, if you move away from traditional research methods and use some methods of using randomness for your own purposes.
  II
  Matter of fact, that combinatorics, observation, experience, analysis, synthesis have no effect in acquiring non-obvious knowledge, being within the framework of known ideas and representations, and therefore they are only able to develop them, building more perfect combinations of the known, which, of course, is also new, but of a lower order, which does not allow to reach qualitatively other levels of cognition and development.
  Thus, randomness in the conscious actions of a person carries an important load - fundamentally different than it was carrying in living nature in the form of mutations.
  Randomness under certain conditions can become, paradoxically, by the main part of the process of obtaining non-obvious knowledge, since a person can attract it to solve his own vital tasks quite consciously, despite the different ways of its manifestation, making its contribution - mainstream - to accelerate the motion of civilization, despite the fact that initially the person did not know about her when setting the goal.
  Along with that, fundamentally randomness is something external, closer to chaos than to order. Its independence from the established one can redraw the order in a completely unimaginable way and thereby denote the unknown, and therefore also fundamentally new knowledge.
  However, randomness can manifest itself in this way only through a self-conscious being who is consciously being not satisfied with what is available, and therefore is capable to choice only what interests him, setting goals for himself, unlike all other living organisms, which only instinctively strive to the better conditions of existence, and the primary cause of instinctive actions of these organisms are uncontrolled by them mutations in the genome.
  Consequently, the activity of the creature known to us as Homo sapiens can already manifest itself in the conscious pursuit of the new in order to satisfy its needs in the best, using all available opportunities, including randomness, despite the fact that it is impossible to determine it initially.
  So, the emergence of self-consciousness in Homo sapiens creates an opportunity for his creative activity that does not coincide with his routine activity, or makes him a creative being.
  However, creativity that is realized in a person"s desire for a new one has two degrees.
  The lowest degree of creativity is mainly related to combinatorics, allowing new knowledge to be obtained by another combination of already known knowledge. Such knowledge can be very important for development, but it can also be obtained by a computer under the action of appropriate programs faster than by a person and with a lesser degree of failure.
  The main methodology for obtaining new knowledge at the specified level is reduced mainly to observations, conducting experiments, analyzing the results and combining the obtained data, checking and systematizing them on the basis of combinatorics. That is, the basis of scientific and technical research as well as everyday life are observation and experience (experiment)
  For example, by observing the movement of the sun along the sky and the movement of the shadow from the objects with its shortening and elongation, a person in different parts of the world came to the same conclusion: the course of the day can be compared with the movement of the sun, and if you stick a stick in the ground, you will be able, dividing the circle around the stick into parts, to know the time of day more or less accurately. So the first clock appeared.
  As for the role of experiment in the development of civilization, as part of the process of obtaining new knowledge, a typical example may be the improvement of the process of making paper to reduce its cost.
  During the silk production in China, after the thermal and mechanical processing of raw materials, a fiber layer remained on the mats, which after drying turned into a thin sheet suitable for writing.
  This paper was very expensive because the raw materials were expensive. Therefore, there was a demand for less expensive fiber raw materials in order to reduce the cost of paper. In the year 105 AD the updated paper-making process was proposed by the official Tsai-Lun. Instead of expensive raw materials, he found similar cheap materials: he took mulberry fibers, old rags, hemp and wood ash. All this was shredded and mixed with water. The resulting mass was laid out on a wooden frame and a sieve. After draining the water, the mass was being dried in the sun and thoroughly smoothed with stones. It turned out high-quality and inexpensive sheets of paper. This technology, with minor changes, has survived to this day.
  Similarly, in science and technology are being acquired new knowledge and applications to them, and they in further are being framed in the form of laws in various fields - from physics and mathematics to biology. However, the knowledge obtained using this method only broadens the scope of application of human skills in practice, improving living conditions, and also allows you to build various models, but rarely are turning points for the development of civilization.
  Such obvious innovations include improvements in medical and technical procedures, the creation of cartography and irrigation, household appliances; systematization of various kinds, the first example of which was the systematization of living organisms, first carried out by Karl Linnaeus in the form of a single classification system for the plant and animal world; the establishment of evolutionary changes in organisms in wildlife; Copernicus"s discovery of the world"s heliocentric system by simplifying the Ptolemy"s geocentric system; Galileo's discovery of the absence of a dependence of the acceleration of free fall on body weight empirically; Rutherford's discovery of the planetary structure of the atom, containing a positively charged nucleus and negatively charged electrons around it, based on the experience of scattering of alpha particles; Niels Bohr's explanation of Mendeleev"s periodic system based on own atom model, spectroscopic data, and considerations on the properties of elements by presenting a scheme for filling the atom"s electron shells.
  This list of discoveries of the new, obtained directly from previous knowledge in a logical way using the data of experience could be continued for a long time, but, in essence, this new lies on the surface, and with the appropriate demand, it opens to many researchers at the same time, although, of course, and this approach, associated with a lower degree of creativity, requires appropriate knowledge and skills, a set of experimental data, building a variety of models, sometimes complex mathematical processing, etc., however, methods, used in this approach, are logically consistent and quite smoothly improve or complement the already the known, without making radical turns, that is, they are quite obvious.
  A higher degree of creativity is already connected with obtaining fundamentally new knowledge, which is not obvious, that is, no combination of known knowledge, no conclusions in the form of formal logic can give it, as and experiments aimed at improving the known.
  It turns out. that non-obvious knowledge is really connected with randomness, and the explanation for this lies in the fact that both non-obvious new knowledge and randomness are beyond the known, that is, they manifest as the unforeseen.
  III
  One of the ways to attract randomness to the acquisition of non-obvious new knowledge is quite trivial: one case leads a systematic researcher of some process with a definite purpose to the idea of using a suddenly noticed completely extraneous phenomenon directly in his own study or to the idea of a new direction of research.
  The problematical character of using this method of attracting randomness to the acquisition of new knowledge is that usually the researcher concentrates on solving one set problem, which, as a rule, does not allow him to pay attention to any side incoming circumstances, and therefore he prefers to work by traditional methods, using knowledge and experience from previous studies.
  As a result, compared with the general mass of researchers, such strange distraction from work is characteristic of a few persons, and, apparently, is dictated by the coincidence of interest not only in one problem, but this distraction is also dictated by an elevated degree of dissatisfaction with the general state of affairs in their own field of research or science in general. At the same time, this person should experience great dissatisfaction with himself, all the time striving to prove own perfection not to anyone, but exactly to oneself.
  Of course, all these properties are necessary, but not sufficient. It requires a good education, increased attention to the environment, ingenuity, the ability to use your own brain, as well as, for the most part, a favorable combination of circumstances, or luck. Such coincidences are extremely rare, and also non-obvious knowledge also rarely appears, but on the other hand, it often brings a turning point in the existing routine.
  This method of using randomness to obtain fundamentally new knowledge, which do not emanate not directly from previous studies can be illustrated by several examples of well-known inventions.
  The first carbonated water, which, as you know, is obtained by saturating ordinary water with carbon dioxide, appeared in England in 1767. Well-known British naturalist and chemist Joseph Priestley once went into a local brewery and accidentally drew attention to the bubbles that appeared above the vats in which they brewed beer. Priestley did not forget about these bubbles, and returned to the brewery, placed over the vats a bowl of water, which was soon saturated with bubbles. It was not difficult for Priestley to determine that there was carbon dioxide in the bubbles. He tasted the water saturated with this gas. She was pleasant and hit into the nose wonderfully. Then Priestley made the first bottle of soda.
  In 1792, electricity researcher Alessandro Volta accidentally drew attention to the physiological experiments of Luigi Galvani, who noted spontaneous contractions of the frog muscle when touched by two strips of different metals, and suggested that the frog muscle produces electricity. Since Volta better than Galvani was versed in electrical processes, he realized that the frog muscle, twitching, only fixes the electric current. This, seemingly physiological phenomenon that is not related completely to his field of research - the contraction of a frog"s muscle - led him to think about the possibility of generating electricity chemically, namely, by means of copper and zinc plates in hydrochloric acid. Thus appeared the first electric battery-a chemical source of current, on the basis of which a few years later (1803) Johann Ritter created a battery that could be repeatedly charged. The process of improving the batteries (accumulators) is still going on, but the first battery appeared not without the participation of randomness.
  n 1896, Becquerel studied phosphorescence in uranium salts. During operation, he wrapped the fluorescent material potassium uranyl sulfate by an opaque material along with photographic plates to prepare for an experiment that required bright sunlight. Even before the completion of the experiment, he discovered that the photographic plates as if have been exposed to light. This random observation prompted Becquerel to investigate spontaneous emission of nuclear radiation. So there was the discovery of spontaneous radioactivity, which laid the foundations of nuclear physics, and subsequently - nuclear power engineering.
  The Internet also appeared by chance. During the cold war between the USSR and the USA in 1957, the Russians were the first to go into space, launching a satellite. From the position of the US military, a new threat arose from outer space, which had to be opposed with something to quickly respond to it. Since computer systems were seriously developed in the USA, it was proposed to connect computers located in different places by telephone lines, thereby having created the spaced data network, which is extremely effective in the context of the alleged military conflict to repel an attack. In 1969, the combined computer network of the states of California and Utah began operating under the appropriate protocol. To date, this network has improved, expanded and covered the whole world with the help of the same satellites. And it all started with a completely extraneous case.
  Archimedes in the III century BC puzzled for a long time over the determination of the content of pure gold in the crown of Gieron - the tyrant Syracuse, into which, possibly, a significant amount of silver was spiked. It was not possible to do this by conventional means, although the specific gravity of gold was known, but the crown was irregular in shape. Once, while taking a bath, Archimedes noticed that the volume of his body immersed in the bath and the volume of water rising in the bath coincide. This involuntary clue helped him solve the problem with the crown that tormented him, and Archimedes determined the exact volume of the crown by immersing it in water and measuring the volume of water displaced by it. But Archimedes did not limit himself to solving this practical problem, but as a scientist, he concluded that a buoyancy force acts on a body immersed in a liquid equal to the weight of the volume of liquid displaced by the body. This force was later called hydrostatic lifting force.
  After the invention of the strongest explosive - nitroglycerin in 1847 - the problem arose of its production, use and transportation due to the particular sensitivity of this substance to detonation. Nevertheless, nitroglycerin began to produce, and in 1864, in A. Nobel's factory for the production of this explosive, despite all the precautions, there was a strong explosion with many victims. Nobel had to look for ways to reduce this sensitivity. The problem was partially solved, but the danger, especially during the transportation of explosives, remained. Therefore, transportation was carried out in bottles placed in a porous soil - kieselguhr. Once one bottle of nitroglycerin broke, but nitroglycerin did not explode, but only spilled onto the ground. Nobel considered this incident a sign, and began to investigate the resulting mixture. It turned out that the explosive force of the mixture did not change, and the sensitivity to detonation dropped sharply, so that this mixture could only be exploded by igniting a small volume of explosive mercury. The mixture was called as the dynamite, and explosive mercury, placed in the capsule, became to serve as a detonator for undermining dynamite.
  Another way of attracting randomness to obtain fundamentally new knowledge implies the impossibility of achieving the goal without it, since only something unknown and so far incomprehensible can connect, for example, an almost ready, but dead or ineffective construction into a single and workable whole, or to revive a painting.
  That is, it is required either to reveal this unknown somewhere aside to achieve the set goal, or to cause it somehow from nonexistence to the right sphere, have determined its correspondence to the set goal. Otherwise, nothing can happen.
  The successful attracting of an outside element, that is, in General, a random, but, nevertheless, - the key to solving the problem can be illustrated by the following examples.
  Once, Leonardo da Vinci needed intermediate details linking the moving parts of some of his inventions, without which the structures remained inoperative. If such goal appeared, then the solution could be found. This decision occurred to him when he looked at the small metal balls that the children played. A casual look at the smooth shiny balls produced in his head the idea of getting rid of the friction of mobile surfaces provided that these balls will be placed between them. So there were rolling bearings.
  The British bacteriologist Alexander Fleming in 1928 was conducting the research with various cultures of bacteria to combat them. Once he noticed that after a month mold appeared on the same plate with bacteria cultures and at the same time the staphylococcus colonies located there disappeared. Fleming did not fail to investigate this mold and found that it was a fungus of the genus penicillinae. Continuing research, he found that this penicillin destroys not only staphylococci, but also the bacteria that cause scarlet fever, diphtheria, meningitis and pneumonia. So antibiotics were discovered that can cure people of a number of previously deadly diseases.
  One can ask yourself the following question: researchers in the world are millions, and findings like those mentioned above happen quite rarely.
  This fact can be explained so: the vast majority of researchers use their creativity at the lowest level, that is, at the level of combinatorics, formal-logical approach and available experience, drawing on known knowledge in a specific field of research. This contributes a known share to the accumulation and development of knowledge, but does not open up a fundamentally new one.
  Thus, creativity of the lowest level can be useful only for the preparatory stage of the discovery of non-obvious knowledge, as well as for the researcher to be convinced of own helplessness to solve the problem.
  What then are the "mechanisms" leading to epoch-making finds and discoveries?
  IV
  The solution to this problem can be approached from two perspectives.
  The first is as follows.
  It is known that in the human body there are 150 billion neurons that control the functioning of the whole organism - from each cell to the processes of thought.
  Of these, there are no more than 19 billion neurons in the central part of the control system - the cortex of large hemispheres of the brain - focused mainly on the management of organism as a whole and the largest parts of the body, and related to the organs of senses and thought processes.
  Apparently, the intensity of the process of thinking using the maximum possible amount of memory, covering all knowledge known to a person, even traversed in passing, and not just special ones, can be increased by involving as many neurons as possible, and not just neurons of the brain parts responsible for the operative memory and associative thinking. The search sphere will expand significantly then, attention will increase, the amount of available memory will increase, ingenuity will also increase and, accordingly, the likelihood of detecting an unforeseen element in a completely unexpected place that can connect the entire structure and make it workable, but which is absent in the studied area of knowledge, will increase.
  By such extraneous, or random elements, in particular, there were: mold that had nothing to do with staphylococci; smooth metal balls that have never been used in mechanical structures; and bicycle pedals, which was absent in any carriage devices.
  It is curious that such results are obtained not by the amount of accumulated knowledge, not by the academic nature of scientists, but by the ability attracting to the search for the right solution in the appropriate period of time all the mental resources of the organism, including memory, and only after - the ingenuity and attention. Otherwise, each educated person, if desired, could become a pioneer of non-obvious new knowledge, and such individual as the simple blacksmith Artamonov - the inventor of the bicycle - would never have reached the level, that allowed him to create a fundamentally new object of movement.
  Be success to attract to the maximum extent, strange as it may seem at first glance, the resources of the organism for research work, as a rule, - during periods of relaxation or distraction. The fact is that during these periods, many parts of the nervous system, brain and spinal cord are not loaded completely. Similar periods can be such moments of rest or relaxation, as falling asleep or exiting from sleep, relaxation of any kind, distraction from thoughts about work, that is, those moments at which in which you can get to attract the unoccupied neurons from those parts of the nervous system that are not directly related to the processes of thinking in order to solve given problem successfully.
  Of course, this is very rarely obtained by itself, but at some skill it can help find what you are looking for.
  The effectiveness of such a technique is confirmed by the stories of some researchers who obtained the desired result precisely in periods of relaxation and the like.
  These include Archimedes, who found his idea in the bath; Galileo, who, being in the church, from the swing of the lamp deduced the law of oscillation of the pendulum; Robert Mayer, who formulated the law of conservation of mechanical energy during one of his travels; Henri Poincaré, who after long work and anxious sleep in the early morning hours established the existence of "automorphic functions".
  True, it is very rare, but it happens that only their own brains are able to "grab" an extraneous connecting link - and not in one field of activity. A similar brain structure is rare, but it works aptly. Therefore, the ingenious Leonardo da Vinci, when he needed to practically eliminate friction in a number of devices he invented, drew attention to ordinary metal balls with a smooth surface that children played, so rolling bearings appeared.
  V
  The second position, leading to epoch-making finds and discoveries, is more connected with intuition (insight), which is used when, at many unknowns, one must nevertheless make some decision.
  True, it fails people for the most part here, since they do not know the necessary rules for entering this state, but also science cannot explain the mechanism of intuitive finds within the framework of its methodology.
  Quite detailed the hypothesis of the mechanism of this process is presented by us in the work "The person as hologram" [Ch. 2.8. Amazon or litres.ru], but in short, it can be described as follows.
  The intuitive find process itself, or suddenly enlightenment, is associated with currently unknown processes in the human brain and is effectively manifested only when several conditions coincide, or are met: thorough preliminary training on the lowest level of creativity to accumulate data related to the problem, which is studied; the presence of a insistently pursued goal, clearly and clearly formulated; an adequate choice or accidental advent of the right moment for insight, when the probability of the manifestation of the sought is greatest.
  This process can be explained by imagining that the basis of a person is the hologram outside the current time. Since each part of the hologram coincides with the whole, insofar each person, like his consciousness, potentially coincides with everything manifested [see, for example, Nizovtsev Yu.M. "The person as hologram" [Ch. 3. Amazon or litres.ru].
  This means that, having "lowered" in one"s consciousness to the level of one"s own hologram, which, being part of the entire hologram, coincides with it, and, therefore, with any part of it, one can choose the part that is studied or interesting, and it will reveal oneself completely. One just has to know, what is required. And a similar opportunity is opened if there is a specific goal and enough complete knowledge about this subject area. After the "rise" back into his self-consciousness, a person sometimes, but not always, can keep his understanding achieved on this "bottom" of consciousness and formulate the acquired at the level of the hologram in ordinary terms already "above" - on the level of own self-consciousness, for example, how law regularity or as a hint to solve a problem, either as an element connecting all details, either to understand the way of reviving a dead image in a art canvas, or to realize how to create a harmonious symphony from the cacophony of scattered sounds, which makes listeners completely forget themselves in its bewitching sounds.
  Quite a lot of people are able to enter this state of insight automatically, and also automatically get out of it. This condition is sometimes called inspiration. A person does not remember what happened to him, but he remembers the answer to the question asked. However, often success in this state is not achieved due to the fact that a person vaguely worded the question or lacked the necessary training - there are no necessary ideas, knowledge, skills and experience, therefore sense of the answer is being distorted or a complete understanding of the answer is not being achieved. This phenomenon is reflected in the fairy tales of all the peoples of the world, when some Ivanushka fool is being placed by a wizard in a space, where he is trying to find something unknown incomprehensibly how.
  Therefore, the successful result of intuitive insights is so rare that the inspiration or insight, that gives this result, is considered the fate of the chosen ones.
  These favorites are some inventors whose devices change the face of the world, few composers whose music lives in centuries, leading listeners to delight, a few artists whose paintings not only copy fragments of life, but revive them so much that they give us a different understanding of life itself.
  To these chosen persons, strangely enough, belong the illiterate shamans, who with unfailing success predict rain, cure certain diseases, and point out the safe way to the goal. However, shamans introduce themselves into a state of insight artificially, bringing themselves into a corresponding trance with the help of drugs or a set of rhythmic sounds.
  The essence of inspiration, or rather, insight be to the fact that a person as if "falls" into own subconscious and then - into own hologram. Thus, in his consciousness he is able to become an animal, a plant, a cloud, an ocean, and a mathematical equation. If in this state he manages to ask a pre-formulated question, he can feel the answer, but he can only understand its meaning after returning to a state of full self-awareness, as they say, being in the concrete theme.
  Therefore, shamans do not try to find out the physical or chemical essence of the phenomena, but they successfully predict the weather, hunting places for a specific game, cure a number of diseases, and some researches-experts, even when there is a lack of data on a specific theme, are able in the state of inspiration, more precisely, intuitive comprehension, to penetrate into the essence of the phenomena under study, that is, they solve problems in an incomprehensible way, as they themselves think.
  An example of this is Mendeleev, who, as he himself said, in a strange way for oneself to the quite adequate result: despite all the differences in known chemical elements. He distributed them only by atomic weight, bringing them together in a table, which made it possible to predict the existence of still unknown elements, although this was only an approximation to the truth, since, as was established later, the properties of chemical elements depend on the charge of their atomic nucleus.
  Similarly, the intuitive, that is, at incomplete understanding of the approach to solving the problem and, to some extent, its foundation, but nevertheless, Lomonosov discovered the law of conservation of matter.
  In principle, there is no "estate division" in achieving the highest level of creativity. To do this, you do not need unique brains or extraordinary experience, it is enough to have self-consciousness, but everyone has it, like everyone has own hologram. This is confirmed by tens of millions of innovators and inventors in all countries of the world. The only question is the degree of originality and scale of their constructions, and then comes into force the structure of the brain, the environment of a person, his education, inclinations, the availability of free time, etc. Successful coincidence of all this gives talents, and the most successful - geniuses.
  So, self-consciousness, automatically assuming goal-setting, in combination with the subconscious, which is, in particular, the "guide" to the hologram, provides a person with the opportunity to "deceive" time, not only stating randomness post factum, but to put it in front of oneself as a basis for the process of obtaining non-obvious knowledge.
  Exactly through randomness the human creativity provides the most effective ways to increase the rate of consumption of information flows.
  In other words, as the above examples show, the involvement of randomness (extraneous) can lead to laws of a different or higher order, where this randomness can already become a necessary or even leading element.
  VI
  Randomness is in the same row not only with non-obvious knowledge, but not a single truly deep and original aphorism, nor a really funny joke can do without it, since they also belong to a certain non-obvious, and at first glance, an outsider, manifesting relatively rarely because implement something extraneous and accidental in relation to the banal expression unexpectedly aptly and peculiarly manages to few.
  As soon as randomness intervenes in a life situation or falls into a text, becoming key to them, they will inevitably manifest with an unexpected party. This is where all famous aphorisms and jokes come from, which, as a rule, are close to the oxymoron, that is, to a comparison of often contradictory or, at least, externally incompatible concepts.
  Let us first consider in this connection some deep thoughts of famous and original persons in aphoristic form.
  Perhaps the shortest, but most unobvious and great aphorism, in which everyday respect for the mind collides with a random situation of the impossibility of its application, belongs to A. S. Griboedov: "Woe from Wit".
  David Brinkley once put it this way: "A lucky person is one who is able to lay a solid foundation of stones that others throw at him." Here the author makes an unexpected turn, showing that the true luck does not come by itself, but it can be caught only under fire.
  No less paradoxical is the statement of Albert Einstein: "Only a fool needs order - genius dominates chaos." Here, Einstein equates stupidity with order, which at first glance looks unusual, but in fact it"s true, in disorder a fool cannot get along, and not a fool can turn chaos into order for oneself.
  Victor Hugo once remarked: "We are born with scream and die with groan. It remains only to live with laughter." And what is laughter, if not the child of a random.
  William Shakespeare also did not stand aside from laconic wisdom: "Every madness has its own logic." Here, Shakespeare points out that a hypertrophied case can turn into logical stupidity.
  "No winner believes in randomness," - so Friedrich Nietzsche stated the reluctance of the most fortunate ones to accept out of pride any case on themselves, although actually they can never do without it.
  "Democracy is the worst form of government, apart from all the others that humanity has tried in its history," Winston Churchill once said, showing that even the best order cannot do without randomness that violates it all the time, which is apparently necessary for the existence of order itself.
  It must be assumed that the root cause of laughter is an involuntary understanding of the incongruity, the absurdity of the situation, nevertheless reproduced in reality in one form or another in life or artificial form. This intuitive understanding causes involuntary superiority over the situation, which finds a way out in a stormy sound form, similar a cough, or - in a concussion of the whole body resembling convulsions.
  The absurdity of the situation, which causes laughter, most often occurs at an implausible combination of its features, in particular, the transfer of a trait from one sphere to completely different one. That is, some kind of randomness that intervenes or is specially introduced into the traditional situation often makes it stupid: this is the basis of the whole physical comedy (sitcom).
  The funniest jokes also cannot do without introduction into the text of an outsider element (random in given context), which makes the situation, at least, original.
  Below are examples of jokes of famous people, none of which could do without contrasting a completely extraneous to traditional understanding of events.
  A. S. Pushkin (the brilliant Russian poet) was asked at one evening about the lady, with whom he had been talking for a long time, how he finds her, whether she is smart? "I don"t know, - answered Pushkin, - after all I spoke French to her."
  Only our person comes into the museum to warm himself.
  M. Zadornov (Russian satirist)
  I was surrounded by lovely, likeable people, squeezing slowly the ring ...
  S. Leacock
  My girlfriend always dies with laughter during sex, no matter what she was reading along with this.
  M. Bulgakov (Russian writer)
  Sleep faster, your pillow is required to another.
  M. Zoshchenko (Russian writer)
  Clothes decorate the person. Naked people have very little or no influence in society.
  M. Twain
  If a critical situation arises, then you may tear me from my sleep at any time of the day or night - even if I am at a cabinet of Ministers meeting.
  R. Reagan
  When my parents finally realized that they had abducted me, they did not hesitate for a minute and immediately rented out my room.
  W. Allen
  The best view of this city, if sit ones in a bomber.
  I. Brodsky (Russian poet)
  The love of a married woman is a great thing. Married men never dreamed of it.
  O. Wilde
  Friendship between a man and a woman is possible. True, children appear from it.
  F. Engels
  Nothing is more demoralizing than a modest but steady income.
  E. Wilson
  One awkward movement - and you are the father.
  M. Zhvanetsky
  As you can see, these persons became great and famous because they managed to take advantage of randomness correctly, having found and having put it in the right place.
  
  Chapter 8.
  About the similarity and difference between smart people and creative people.
  
  Smart people are often confused with creative persons, whereas these creative persons may be smart or not, but they remain creative for a significant part of their lives, but people who are smart, educated, versatile, who have their own opinions on everything around them, do very often not have creativity, and are only capable of, at best, develop or support the endeavors of the creators of the new. Therefore, it would be nice to find the true foundation on which both of them rest.
  As you know, the most scientists believes that the mind of a person lies in his thinking abilities, which, unlike the mind of animals, are focused on understanding the world around him, allowing a person to think rationally.
  This definition, which at first glance seems quite adequate, in fact, applies only to the smart people who think only rationally, that is, they are not capable of thinking not rationally. Therefore, despite their often outstanding mental abilities, which are reflected in a wide scope and understanding of a mass of various objects or, conversely, in the deepest understanding of a separate subject, a significant amount of memory, and the speed of decisions made, they work as if within the framework of the specific programs, embedded by them in themselves that exclude the search for completely new solutions, inventions, discoveries, limiting themselves solely to combinatorics, that is, a different combination of the known.
  In itself, this is not bad, since it gives outstanding results in everyday life and in technology, significantly improving and making life easier by introducing coffee grinders, washing machines, bread harvesters, fountain pens, and all sorts of entertaining games, of which the most advanced and popular is chess, the mass of the interesting literary works, etc.
  Millions of outstanding, smartest, most energetic, highly educated, hardworking workers in technology, science, arts, in the service and production sectors are engaged in similar rational activities, often achieving excellent results. However, combinatorics does not allow reaching qualitatively different levels of cognition and development.
  In addition, the advent of computers and the Internet has clearly shown that so-called artificial intelligence can do the same thing faster and, often, better. Moreover, this intelligence also turned out to be able to manage many complex processes more effectively than staff consisting of relevant specialists.
  In other words, the activities of these smart, educated people turned out to be similar to the work of computer systems, which are also not configured to discover non-obvious knowledge.
  Thus, original solutions, inventions and discoveries are provided not by the sum of accumulated knowledge, not by academic excellence, in particular, of scientists, but by the ability to attract to the search for the desired solution in the appropriate period of time some other human resources in addition to noted. Otherwise, every educated person, if desired, could become the discoverer of non-obvious new knowledge, and, on the contrary, the mass of ordinary people without special education would not be able to make outstanding inventions, which is not consistent with receipt by them of tens of millions of patents in the leading countries of the world, thereby achieving the unobvious technical knowledge.
  Therefore, the mysterious process of obtaining new non-obvious knowledge in the form of inventions and discoveries not only in the technical field, but also in the field of science and culture by relatively few people was called creative.
  In order to understand the difference between smart people and creative people and from numerous ordinary people (philistines), in our opinion, it is necessary to turn to the assessment of their consciousness, since the effectiveness of the manifestation of the mind depends on the level of consciousness, which is largely determined by the selection and transformation in the right way of precisely the data that lead to an adequate solution of the assigned tasks.
  However, we know that the human consciousness is not unified. It contains a kind of the animal component that a person inherited from primates, and the self-consciousness that manifested itself in the hominids from which a person was formed several million years later.
  True, in addition to these components of consciousness, which are responsible for the human behavior, it also has a kind of the internal computer, or the intelligence, which is responsible for the preserving and functioning the organism as a whole and each cell separately, organizing, in particular, metabolism and coordinated work as individual parts of the body, and in general. This process allows the body to be prepared for a variety of interactions with the environment, but this form of consciousness does not take part in usual human behavior, that is, in solving by him various problems and setting goals.
  So, we are all in terms of behavior owners of both the animal (the lowest) consciousness and self- consciousness. It was self-consciousness that separated man from the animal world mainly by the fact that it gave him, in addition to the adaptability characteristic of all living things, which has only an instinctive-reflex form of consciousness, that helps to adapt to one"s own environment by trial and error, a speech form of communication, abstract and logical thinking and the ability to express creativity.
  As a result, a person, who, unlike animals, realized his existence in the current time, gradually realized that he can not only take into account the environment, but also change it for his own needs, solving current problems and setting goals for the future, thereby significantly accelerating the passage of time of own generations, ultimately arriving at a relatively comfortable social form - civilization, having contrasted oneself with the wild world of nature.
  But at the same time, a person also remained a natural being.
  Thus, his consciousness began to contain both components indicated above, on the one hand, merged together in one subject, but, on the other hand, due to the different bases of these components - adaptive and logically-creative - they often do not demonstrate in the unity in own intentions, and thereby they are causing an internal struggle in the human consciousness, as a result of which one or another form of consciousness constantly or for some time comes to the fore, that is, their priorities and level may be different.
  The result of such interaction, and often the counteraction to each other, is a more productive correlation by a person in his communities with the environment, since each form of consciousness knows better how a person should act to obtain the desired result in own sphere, but with disagreements that are inevitable due to different genesis of these forms of consciousness, the human behavior begins to be controlled to a greater extent by one of these forms.
  Thus, similar interaction of these forms of consciousness of a person manifests itself as a new driving force for himself and his communities, more effective in comparison with the instinctive-reflex interaction with the environment of other living beings by trial and error, in which randomness rather than meaning is more manifested.
  And a person gradually acquired this meaning due to the development of his governing organ - the brain, in which, in addition to the limbic basis of the natural consciousness, many other sections appeared, thanks to which a person gained the ability to think logically on the basis of associations and direct exchange of the verbal information with fellow tribesmen, and then with the help of certain media, which is currently concentrated on the Internet.
  But, if the logical and abstract thinking appeared in a person due to the emergence of self- consciousness, then he could not help but stay an instinctive-intuitive attitude towards reality, which contributes to the survival of any organism that needs to act immediately, in order to, for example, it is not eaten.
  Therefore, a person has not completely lost this opportunity to interact with the environment. Moreover, the help of self-consciousness to this instinctive-intuitive manifestation of the lowest consciousness made it possible for a person to penetrate into the very depths of the surrounding world through a kind of the animal insight, but on the basis of logical conclusions obtained from experimental data. But this new property, which manifested itself out of all living beings only in a person, and designated as the creativity, is distributed unevenly in people, manifesting itself with particular force in a few people, and in the rest only at the level of the combinatorics.
  However, the force that drives any active being, that is, a living being, cannot exist without a source, which is an indispensable property of the active, not inherent in inanimate matter, and this source of the driving force of all living things is its dissatisfaction with others, and then with itself, demanding not only safety for life and one"s own reproduction, but also improving one"s position in the existing niche. The loss of this property or neglect of it in a constantly changing environment in living nature leads to degradation and further death of the being.
  In a person, this property of the dissatisfaction also operates in the sphere of self-consciousness, forcing a person to try to use his environment for his own purposes, and the instrument of this property cannot but be his thinking abilities, which differ quite greatly among people. Therefore, the stability of society in the shell of civilization is ensured by equalizing people with uniform upbringing and education.
  Nevertheless, the economic structure dictates to a society based on property relations the need to separate out various layers, the dominant of which is the managing layer, associated with ideological, judicial and security-military units, at this, the labor element in various fields of activity is divided into mental workers and others, the number of whom technological progress has gradually reduced many times as a result of the move away from purely physical efforts in the fields and factories to the management of various mechanisms and apparatus.
  However, the uneven development of individual regions and the inequality of people in mental development led to the following situation.
  The majority of the population, the so-called, the philistines, for various reasons, which may include a lack of education, underdeveloped social relations, a low level of living conditions, leading only to strive for survival, or a banal lack of prospects, since there are not so many "places in the sun" too much, has a low level of self-consciousness, which causes a person to focus mostly on the problems of nutrition, reproduction and improving existence in his own environment, than a person is being satisfied, without striving for more, which really turns out to be unattainable for him in these conditions.
  If these conditions persist for a long time, then entire generations of such people, despite possible giftedness, are actually excluded from the process of developing self-consciousness, with rare exceptions.
  Similar living conditions also significantly weaken the degree of dissatisfaction of their animal component of consciousness, which does not find mortal opponents within the framework of a developed civilization.
  It is quite difficult to escape from this swamp even if you have good mental abilities, which are actually not given any use.
  Nevertheless, a society in its development in the context of competition between different communities and states requires more and more teachers, doctors, engineers, scientists, managers, entrepreneurs, various service personnel, and life itself cannot do without culture and relevant specialists in it.
  All such knowledge workers, of course, cannot be called intellectuals, but they still have a certain education, and therefore opinions both about themselves and about relationships, at least in their own community, albeit limited to their own specialization.
  Of course, almost all of them serve the ruling class, which pays them for their work, or makes them subordinate to itself. Therefore, their freedom of expression is limited. Those of these knowledge workers who have fewer restrictions classify themselves as free-thinking intelligentsia.
  Almost all rest knowledge workers, especially those whose work is monotonous and unpromising, join the ranks of the philistines, and they, as you know, are mostly interested in their own well-being, but not problems of cognition.
  In principle, the mind of the knowledge workers in those fields of activity in which creativity is not required and who are not interested by the discovery of new things in itself, can be developed up to a very high degree as applied to their own field of activity.
  However, their lack of interest in creativity is due precisely to the low degree of dissatisfaction with surrounding. As a consequence of this, for a significant part of mental workers, the level of both the animal components of consciousness and self- consciousness does not reach the values that require updating the environment. That is, such people, no matter what they think about themselves, belong to the conservative-conformist stratum of society, paying the attention only to themselves, and trying not to notice all the troubles and misfortunes around them, and also, not expressing displeasure in front of their superiors, despite all his antics.
  In other words, this behavior of these persons is due to the fact. that their self-consciousness of relatively low level in terms of altruism is quite balanced by their animal component of consciousness, which is also a rather quite prosperous existence.
  Therefore, despite often having a good education and a high IQ coefficient, these people do not differ much from the philistines in their behavior and lifestyle.
  The more energetic and power-hungry part of the educated public from different sectors of the population, but mainly from the highest layers of society, is trying to break into the power elite, and really represents it to a large extent.
  This attraction is most facilitated not by their deep mind, which may or may not be present, but compared with the philistines, the high degree of dissatisfaction of their animal component of consciousness, as well as the extremely low level of their altruistic component of self-consciousness.
  Along with that, some of the people from different strata of society, but mostly from the cohort of people with mental work, have a high level of self-awareness, which arises as a result of the high degree of altruistic component of their self-awareness, and which they further develop in the process of obtaining knowledge and its application.
  Naturally, they are not able to look without indignation at all the injustices of the existing social system, in which the bulk of the population lives in poverty and the arrogant nouveau riche bathe in luxury, humiliate everyone else not only with their own actual impunity, but simply by own presence, concentrating fantastic riches that cannot be spent to themselves during thousand lives.
  Of course, these persons always think about eliminating this injustice in favor of a harmonious society, where for everyone will be equally well and pleased. Thus, the informal-intellectual opposition arises, opposing to the power elite, and not inclined to compromise with it, since this opposition considers those in power by hypocrites, scoundrels and robbers.
  In addition to these persons, the people from different walks of life always appear in society, but, most of all, from the persons engaged in mental work, whose interest, in spite of everything, is focused on the pursuit of the new and unusual. It is precisely this kind of creators who ensure the technological and cultural progress of society.
  These creative people, unlike philistines, those in power and intellectuals from the opposition to the power elite, are much less dependent on living conditions, showing themselves in the harshest conditions with their ingenuity, even without any education, but using their resourcefulness. At this, they may not have any special talent or extensive memory. There are many examples of such people, since it is they who take it upon themselves to come up with a way out of difficult life situations, having invented a wheel, a lever, painting the walls of caves with images of their own further actions, for example, hunting, in a realistic form, and taming dogs for the same hunting and protection.
  Thus, in its pure form, the caste of intellectuals does not exist. The smart people appear everywhere from all walks of life, but, for the most part, from an educated stratum, whose representatives are not engaged in hard and tedious work.
  The only question is how they show themselves and why some of them manages to come up with a phone, an automatic machine, a nuclear reactor and a computer, portray Mona Lisa ("Gioconda" by Leonardo da Vinci) and compose "Anna Karenina" (Leo Tolstoy), while others willy-nilly limit themselves to just organizational events, explaining or interpreting what others have invented, and playing chess?
  The answer to this question is as follows.
  Since consciousness leads a person, then his level, depending on the degree and orientation of dissatisfaction with both the animal component of consciousness and self-consciousness on the environment and oneself, is the true basis of his aspirations, regardless of external influences, in particular, education, upbringing, as well as natural giftedness.
  As a result, the personalities appear in society, always overwhelmed by a deep sense of dissatisfaction in relation to their environment, which comes to them from the lowest consciousness in its aspiration to creation of big conveniences to existence. However, this individualist feeling is combined with their highest consciousness, the dissatisfaction of which by insufficient public comfort, development of science and art, reaching high degree, altruistically demands to extend achievements of a civilization and culture to all.
  But, at this, the lowest consciousness dominates, because the activity of these individuals is manifested mostly instinctively, without much reflections, with a minimum of reasonableness, while giving, nevertheless, the most creative persons from all living.
  This category of any community prefers non-standard life situations owing to rejection of only formal-logical approaches to life - such a life for them is boring and meaningless, like working on a conveyor for tightening nuts.
  They do not love reasoning, logical constructions, try to avoid analytical and synthetic work, hate the actions according to pragmatic calculations; at the same time, they, as a rule, - at all not workaholics.
  Therefore, the target programs of self-consciousness in combination with programs of the lowest consciousness can be applied by these beings with great success, if, of course, they are capable to combine so contradictory forms of consciousness, for fast and resolute change of a situation in favor of the conceived.
  In other words, they prefer not the long-term reflections, not systematization of the facts and phenomena, i.e. not rational actions, but actions spontaneous, or actions at which the goal can be achieved for one-stage as if instinctively, though, of course, they should work beforehand in acquisition of craft skills and gain experience.
  Exactly such people make discoveries, create masterpieces of poetry, painting, inventions, they become by the outstanding commanders. That is their activity is manifested generally in the creative scope, which attracts them at all not with a position of consumption of some benefits and goods - they are interested in the process.
  Alas, en masse the results of their activities are very mediocre both in terms of the quality of everything they produce, and due to lack of experience and frequent laziness, and sometimes stupidity and ignorance; but defeats especially do not disturb them. It is pleasant to them to use own abilities, often - very mediocre (graphomaniacs) for receiving result without special effort of own mind.
  And they fall back into the old ways, like the card player who cannot move away from the card-table.
  Nevertheless, creators of the unobvious new is situated always among them as in the field of technologies, and culture.
  Thus, for this kind of the creative figures one of the main developmental incentives emerges - the aspiration to get out of a routine due to search the interesting, meeting the available expectations of this creative person.
  In other words, any creator person is sickened by what is, and the cause of this state is permanent dissatisfaction with himself and those around him in the current circumstances.
  Naturally, in this case, a person seeks to begin to search for what lack yet, what has not yet been passed, that is, to get into those changes, which will bring, perhaps, something pleasant or maybe not, but - certainly new: will reveal some secret, will distract him from the abominations of life, that is, will attract a person exactly their differences from an everyday routine, and, perhaps, will bring to the essence of things and phenomena.
  It turns out that behind the interest there is always dissatisfaction with the present, and the interesting is the product of the interest.
  A satisfaction is sought in any interesting, but it is never definitively because, having stopped on one, you can lose the rest, which cannot be allowed, otherwise it is not possible to get new satisfaction in another interesting, and even itself discovered interesting is not able to bring full satisfaction due to its discrepancy with an initial image attracting to itself.
  The emerging proportionality of the human interests and abilities under favorable conditions can produce personalities capable of revolutionizing both science, economics, and culture.
  Thus, if to the core of such creative personality education and talent are added that resonate with her interests, then active talents are obtained, of which, of course, there are relatively few, since such coincidences do not happen so often.
  But also quite often, although not comparable to the number of the philistines, there are people endowed with extraordinary intelligence, speed of reaction, excellent memory and the ability to make adequate logical conclusions. It was this kind of the mind, and not another, called intelligence, that became possible to measure using the appropriate test for intelligence, which was understood as the level of mental development. For this, it was used was used the so-called the intelligence quotient (IQ) was used, which was first introduced into use by the German researcher Wilhelm Stern in 1912.
  This coefficient IQ (intelligence quotient), according to a number of scientists, quantitatively shows the level of the mind, in comparison with the level of the mind of the statistically average person. A statistically average person is one who has the same age and development as the person, whose coefficient is measured, that is, IQ shows the correspondence or deviation of the level of the mind from the average.
  In fact, this test is not able to show the level of the mind in terms of the giftedness of a given person, which does not lend itself to any technical measurements, but it quite adequately reflects the amount of memory and operating speed in terms of the quick-wittedness. In this regard, this test is really applicable to the characteristics of the mind of the sufficiently educated people who do not have creativity like artificial intelligence, but who, like artificial intelligence, have good short-term memory, the ability to logical conclusions and an adequate presentation of certain judgments.
  The basis of this kind of mind lies, just as for the mind of any person, the degree of manifestation and direction of dissatisfaction of the animal component of consciousness and self- consciousness on the environment and the person himself.
  It is quite curious that the degree of dissatisfaction of the animal component of consciousness for such "intellectuals" is not much higher than the degree of dissatisfaction of the animal component of consciousness of philistines - rather weak, and, moreover, oriented, like theirs, as a rule, towards their own well-being.
  As for the degree of dissatisfaction of their self-consciousness, it is higher than that of philistines, but, nevertheless, it is significantly lower than the degree of dissatisfaction of the self-consciousness of the creative people, supporting the orientation of the dissatisfaction of the animal component of consciousness towards the same personal well-being, while the dissatisfaction of the self-consciousness of the creative persons is directed towards the public good.
  For this reason, these "intellectuals" lack a passionate desire to learn new things and persistence in discovering it, although many of them work in the field of science and may have certain abilities.
  The absence of this kind of desire cannot but lead them, in particular in science, at best, to test, substantiate and further develop new ideas and phenomena discovered by the creative people, but often in order to strengthen their own status and well-being they try under various pretexts or using connections, or a superior position to cling to the discoverers or simply to imitate the creative activity.
  This kind of "intellectuals" can indeed be very smart, possessing developed logical thinking, good memory, the ability to instantly navigate and coherently express certain judgments. Therefore, they feel great teaching children, youth and students. There are many of them among cultural figures, whom they try to lead or at least mentor artists and writers, not understanding their own limitations, but making up a fairly large army of the so-called intelligentsia in developed countries, although they prefer to call themselves by the intellectuals.
  All these persons may be interested in a particular activity, have good mental abilities in terms of logic, have a strong will, abstract thinking, excellent memory, great and varied experience and even some giftedness. But a lack of creativity, but creativity by itself is based on a correlation of a high degree of dissatisfaction of the animal component of consciousness and almost the same degree of dissatisfaction of the altruistic component of dissatisfaction of self-consciousness, can raise these "intellectuals" in terms of cognition only to the level of combinatorics, as well as a sensible explanation of what has already been discovered or invented by others.
  Since the brain is the most effective instrument of the human consciousness, in its structure one can find something, that will confirm that a particular person belongs to the smartest, but not creative people.
  Relatively recent studies of the human brain have shown that multiple (up to 40 times) differences in the morphofunctional centers of the brain may well create the inability of a significant number of people to think quickly and creatively, especially since the combination of brain characteristics that provide, in particular, a high degree of creativity or even quick wits, doesn't happen that often.
  Thus, the structural features of the brain allow to link them to separate types of consciousness, which not only indicate the inequality of people in their mental, creative and emotional abilities, but also make it possible to demonstrate their belonging to various social groups, one way or another influencing the course of development of civilization.
  In particular, from the side of the genomic features, insufficient development of DNA loci can have a certain impact on the desire for creativity, which turns out to be also insufficient, although this genomic feature does not affect the ability of logical thinking, memory, quick-wittedness and speed in making adequate decisions, which and shows the IQ coefficient, which can be high specifically for people who do not have a desire for creativity.
  In addition, a sufficient amount of the hormone of joy (dopamine) also does not contribute to the manifestation of the creative efforts with the adequate results, although it does not interfere with the logical thinking.
  The size of the frontal lobe, which is responsible for the abstract and creative thinking, in such "intellectuals" is of the ordinary sizes, as is the lower parietal lobe of the brain, which is responsible for mathematical and spatial thinking.
  However, areas of the brain that are related to logical thinking, such as the left prefrontal cortex, left temporal lobe, and left parietal cortex, may be more developed in these smart people compared to others.
  Externally, all these properties of consciousness for the smart, but uncreative people are reflected in such properties of individuality as a high degree of quick-wittedness, excellent memory, an average level of sensitivity, impressionability, determination, the ability to pry, dominance, perseverance, as well as such personality traits as the ability to think associatively and at the same time logically, sufficient volitional qualities. But their interests are more related to finding their own well-being, and the desire for knowledge is mostly associated not with the process of cognition, but with the acquisition of a higher status position in society.
  If we compare these external features of the consciousness of such smart people with the external features of the consciousness of the creative people, then the latter, in addition to those features indicated of one level or another, have necessarily a high degree of the ability to pry on the part of individuality, reinforced on the part of self-consciousness by an equally high degree of curiosity, manifested in the formation of interests in the new and unusual, and their natural abilities, if any, are consistent with the public interests.
  The noted combination of traits of individuality and personality of specific persons with developed logical thinking, but not inclined to creativity, indicates that from the deep side of their consciousness the system-forming factor is a combination of dissatisfaction of the animal component of consciousness, close to the average degree, coming to them from the limbic structure of the brain, with an equally average degree of dissatisfaction of their self-consciousness.
  As a result, these "intellectuals", who are well aware of their creative impotence, do not suffer from an excess of altruism in their own self-awareness, and therefore, with rare exceptions, serve the powers that be, receiving corresponding bonuses, and in science and culture they, as a rule, play leading roles, thanks to the properties of own calculating mind, which is not scattered on energy-consuming creative fulfilments.
  For the creative people, from the deep side of their consciousness, the system-forming factor is the combination of the maximum possible degree of dissatisfaction of the animal component of consciousness with a high level of altruism of their self-consciousness, the dissatisfaction which by the insufficient social comfort, the development of science and culture, requires spreading the achievements of civilization and culture to everyone.
  Unfortunately, over time, these creative people quite often lose their creative potential. This is especially noticeable in culture - the creativity of writers shrinks, artists is repeating themselves. This phenomenon is explained not by any significant changes in their deep consciousness, but by the fact that with age, the number of neurons in the brain, including the departments responsible for the creative process, decreases, connections between the corresponding neurons are disrupted, and thus the capabilities of the brain decrease. There are countless examples of this. Such people, of course, want to return to creativity, but they are no longer able to do this, and as a result they fall into the category of simply smart people, since sufficiently extensive connections that ensure logical thinking are more likely to be preserved.
  In particular, Albert Einstein was unable to discover or develop anything significant over the last few decades of his life, spending most of his time engaged in politics and social activities. In his declining years, Leo Tolstoy mainly has composed religious and quasi-philosophical treatises, as well as the instructions for the common people and criticized the government.
  Of course, there are exceptions, for example, Leonardo da Vinci, whose brain structure apparently did not change significantly in old age and productive connections between neurons was preserved, was still working at the age of 64 - three years before his death - on the painting "John the Baptist", and later was engaged in architectural and construction design in the area of the Chateau de Chambord in France.
  As for the smart people with a penchant for logical thinking and a high IQ, they are not able to move into the stratum of creative persons, no matter how much they want, precisely for the reason that, from the root side of their consciousness, the system-forming factor is a combination of dissatisfaction of the animal component of consciousness, which is close to the average degree coming to them from the limbic structure of the brain, with an equally average degree of dissatisfaction of their self-consciousness. And this factor allows them, at best, to shuffle the known, that is, to engage themselves in combinatorics, which is especially typical for scientific research, in which millions of highly educated scientists take part, but only a few make discoveries as well as epoch-making inventions.
  
  Chapter 9.
  Why a person isn't capable to be not free?
  
  A look at human liberty as the desire of self-consciousness to change oneself in human existence in the conditions of a resisting environment.
  Any person isn't imperious to be exempted from himself. It is possible, it seems, to draw a conclusion: If such exemption is absent, then is no liberty for him, that liberty generally - chimera.
  Really, liberty, if to represent it as independence, is incompatible with any coercion and any restrictions, in particular, with the circumstances, age specifics, education level, features of education and character (shyness, politeness, deference, coldness, vigor, sociability, etc.), views and mentality, family relationships, traditions, pressure of the employer, laws, public institutes, and, at last,the limitation of lifetime - the person is mortal.
  Such liberty - the typical phantom.
  Nevertheless, vast majority of people, judging by their behavior, which is reflected in information sources, associate liberty with independence from one or the other, supposing to untangle all vital nodes and to provide the independence, in particular, thanks to of increase in the bank account, acquisition of additional property, breakthrough to power or, on the contrary, the removal into solitude.
  But to untangle does not succeed anything, on the contrary, the aspiration to independence by the specified means results the person to difficulties in the management of property, preservation of capital, loss of power because of the instability of the material world, of the fragility of human relationships, complexity to control it all, while keeping opportunities for self-development, etc.
  From this emerges despair, mental disorder, uncertainty in correctness of its place and the direction of own motion.
  On the other hand, the removal from the world in solitude, apparent independence from the world in it - is illusory, inasmuch the person in the world should express self anyway, develop, fight, communicate, but not to become reserved or in a cave, the more that connection to the world he all the same fails to interrupt - he willy-nilly must feed somehow, he does not able to get rid of thoughts about events in the world, all the time returning to them, if not personally, then in memory, i.e. he can't be exempted completely from the world, and his aspiration to implement release from the world is no more than manifestation of egoism and fear to live, disguised by aspiration allegedly to supreme values unavailable in normal life.
  Solitude in the form of the isolation from the world leads to loss of time of life, exit from values of human community in favor of fictitious values of some other, otherworldly world, and to a stop in development of own consciousness, inasmuch only in vital collisions this development happens, but not in blissful chants which at best are meditation.
  So independence is only the negotiable side of liberty, which faces toward the external - liberty "from", but not liberty "for".
  Of course, the person can't do without this flip side of liberty, inasmuch he lives among things and other people, but it isn't necessary to associate it with liberty, denying such, owing to impossibility to get rid of vital fetters, i.e. it is impossible to forget about another - face side of liberty, which represents of liberty, namely: activity, which can't be exterminated in any living being in any way.
  The active differs from the passive exactly by internal aspiration to changes of itself in the person in an external environment, by inability to settle down safely and permanently among things, the order which the active (consciousness) cannot be satisfied, because exactly it arranged this order, but without complete confidence in correctness of this order. Consciousness in the person finds right there the shortcomings, which lead to awareness by the active (consciousness) of its own omissions and, respectively, of own certain insolvency.
  Therefore, as the source of liberty, manifested in all the actions of the person in his interaction with the outside world, things and people, can only be his consciousness in the form of self-consciousness, which is initially active, i.e. uncomforted and dissatisfied by itself and, therefore, by any order and any relations, which actually are absent without it generally, or which completely depend on him, inasmuch the person oneself produces the external circumstances (his consciousness) and he oneself is exempted from them.
  This activity is expressed in the person in his enduring aspiration to build an ideal order and to arrange harmony between people. He, naturally, never reaches of this among unstable things and imperfect people, but in this aspiration it reaches the main thing - the development of own consciousness, and that is his true destination.
  Essence of liberty is comprehended for the person only in the representation of the same person, who is not that other, as the combination of the lowest and highest forms of consciousness in the form of organic compounds of a body. Therefore, all actions of the person are expressed in the interweaving of the instinctive and the comprehended.
  For any kind of consciousness in the living being liberty is the internal state caused by the imperishable own activity which is shown in permanent dissatisfaction with self. This dissatisfaction leads any living creature forward, being reflected in conscious and unconscious actions, in particular, for the person, to the overcome the incessant resistance of the environment, and a kind of "drive belt" for the instinctive actions of a person to resolve his unconscious dissatisfaction with the situation, or the impetus for action is the subconscious persistence, whereas a similar impetus, but already to the actions to overcome the conscious dissatisfaction in his self-consciousness is the will.
  In the lowest consciousness liberty in action is manifested instinctively, i.e. without an explicit goal, by trials and errors.
  Liberty in action is manifested by the highest consciousness as the volition - in the form of the aspiration to the scheduled purpose. This type of consciousness is already capable to qualify, i.e. to understand the restrictions of aspirations to the scheduled purposes as the captivity), and the release from these shackles as liberty "from", naming therefore this liberation as independence, which can be reached by the conscious effort in the form already the will in certain direction.
  Besides, the person acquires ability to select from some set what more corresponds to his interests as at present, and also in the future. In other words, thanks to consciousness it finds ability to regulate and plan the life as he wants, but taking into account a surrounding, and evaluating consequences of scheduled acts in advance, i.e. understanding what will have to answer for them as the front of himself, and before own surrounding.
  However, this essential adding in consciousness of the living being (self-consciousness), who allows it to comprehend self and, apparently, to behave reasonably and responsibly, in no way diminishes the action of the lowest (animal) consciousness, which at any moment can start blocking all sorts of aspirations of highest consciousness, if only will seem to it, that they are contrary to human survival, or even if they can impair the quality of his life.
  Nevertheless, the person, who represents the lowest and the highest consciousness, merged together in the form of a body, is material manifestation of action of liberty as in instinctive and conscious aspirations. Internal contradictoriness of these aspirations and at the same time their unity in a common base doesn't allow to determine actions of the person as purely conscious or purely unconscious. Therefore, accurately to predict actions of any person or to predetermine them is impossible, and in this also is manifested liberty.
  Thereby the free manifestations of the person, i.e. his advance forward happen by means of as instinctive and conscious actions.
  The explicit impossibility for the person to escape from public and natural fetters led, as it seems at first sight, to the fruitful idea: liberty is the cognized necessity.
  However, this restriction of liberty in favor of some order doesn't explain ways of this cognition - necessity in a type of order, organization is manifested everywhere, but everything can't be cognized - neither in one human life, nor in life of many generations, especially as everything continuously changes, and on the cognition is required time.
  Besides, this purely external interpretation of liberty can cause bewilderment due to the fact that even if to admit of knowing or understanding of all restrictions, with which are encountered the person, it is possible to qualify such cognition only as humility before external thingness factors, which thereby are admitted as primary.
  Similar approach, in effect, denies development and can result not to liberty, but to the thought of release from similar oppression only after death, or to the paranoid idea that the course of soulless things must determine (to dictate) all motions of the person.
  Last automatically assumes the totalitarianism in the public relations, which is trying to deprive of the person and liberty, and independence that leads it as a result to crash. A notable illustration of this result is the drop during not so long time almost all Marxist regimes that have adopted this "remarkable" formula of liberty.
  This kind of result again shows the inadequacy of the domination of things over consciousness, which arranges the world for self, starting since the formation of things on own understanding, that is, in accordance with the existing form-building abilities at it.
  Whatever it was, but the person in the habitat is associated with it not only by the genetic memory, he gets the in the course of the maturation, development a whole range of household and religious precepts, cultural principles; willy-nilly, he is forced to follow the customs of the current social environment. On this basis and owing to an own experience of life the person works out certain habits, which he follows all the life.
  Thus, all this complex of communications with the environment holds the person within a certain order, and he is forced to follow by this order.
  However, necessity exists for consciousness only in order for to overcome it.
  If animals participate in this process not being aware of themselves, without separating in own consciousness from the environment, but, nevertheless, anyway change the environment, and change with it, possessing thereby, as the living beings, by rudiments of liberty, but to the person, as to the living being, which understands oneself, is capable not only to follow a habit, to established communications, i.e. - to necessity. He lowers self by this adherence to the habits actually up to animal level. Of course, the habit in the basis is the repulsion of new, unclear and frightening. The habit calms the person. But, anyway, the repose relaxes the person. He begins to lag behind from changes, which appears indispensably in life, in the environment, whereas dissatisfaction, activity force the person not only to move from place to place, to change a profession, religion, but also to consciously improve way of life, to acquire additional knowledge, to invent, extracting from self not only emotions and rational actions, but also the feelings, thoughts contradicting the existing order.
  This dissatisfaction of consciousness, aspirations for the new is fueled by the ongoing changing flows of information, penetrating the whole being of the person, which he can interpret, possessing self-consciousness, in different ways, to the best of his understanding. Thereby each person inevitably commits all the time of oscillations from a habit to destruction of an order, to the release from it. Having set one and having joined to it, it begins to be weighed upon it sooner or later, and decides to change it despite all the resistance of own external conservative nature.
  As a result of the emergence of the new originate additional communications, is being expanded the cognitive environment, that means the continuous increment of information flows, to which has to be adjusted every person.
  So occurs, the person wants this or not, the change of his own consciousness, that in fact, and is required for consciousness itself.
  As for resting state, then in respect of absolute calm it is a pure chimera, and in life state of rest is only temporal rest, a respite for a body and consciousness in a dream or in switching to other types of activity.
  This fact is explained by that the person in the basis is the information copy of the appropriate fragments of an unmanifested infinity, and this copy is updated discretely with super-high frequency.
  In other words, the person represents in a holographic projection of an unmanifested infinity the "blinking" cluster of information on a wave basis, converted into the living being in the frames of beingness, i.e. in self-acting formation, forming own time, in which it is in the move and the change among things and similar to it formations on the base of own understanding, as well as on understanding of single consciousness in the frames of this or that order.
  Chaos is excluded here because high-frequency up-date of a holographic projection automatically assumes causality of this irreversible information process, inasmuch copying of objects in the course of each update of a holographic projection is carried out sequentially on the basis of what is available, but with high frequency. Therefore, changes of copies of things in case of each pulse are insignificant and tied to previous forms. As a result, in each individual consciousness high-frequency update is reflected not the chaotic, but ordered processes of change of beingness, surrounding it, with respect for the principle of causality.
  In similar Creation, as if every instant appearing and disappearing, it is senseless to speak about calm, especially that this Creation is being kept from falling into nothingness by the living beings, which form through themselves beingness in the form time, space, things in motion without stopping, or infinitely [1. Chapter 1].
  If both sides of "coin" of liberty for the person are activity and independence, then, at least, the responsibility can't but be as an edge of this coin.
  Each person tries to comprehend the actions, aiming to reach in them maximum efficiency in achievement of a goal. The people, surrounding him, can have opposite aspirations. The consensus isn't always achievable here. Therefore, efficiency of actions of one person can do much harm others and even to him in the future. There is no output from this situation and it is necessary to be responsible for deeds sooner or later.
  Life isn't measured by successes and failures, inasmuch each human life is specific manifestation of consciousness, for which is important the process, but not local results. The person, as a rule, does not understand this, being indignant on an assemblage of misfortunes which are falling down on him, utter darkness of his short existence, coming to the end with diseases and death, regardless of, he is rich or it is poor, smart or silly, experienced or careless, visionary or obedient to destiny.
  The person finds the consolation in necessity (fatum, fortune, destiny, God or yet something exterior, outside, but not in himself), justifying own limitation and insolvency by circumstances, which always are, and from which he depends.
  In other words, the person tries thereby to avoid of the responsibility for the decisions, without wishing to take it over.
  The person doesn't understand that he creates the circumstances oneself, in order that his consciousness tested through him itself in them. During these tests his own consciousness can express itself in interaction with surroundings and understand own weak and strong sides, answering one way or another for their actions.
  Therefore, responsibility is a certain promise of consciousness to self to pass the alleged tests both with waiting of a certain reaction of surroundings, and with readiness to accept any consequences of what is undertaken. Possible consequences consist in fulfillment of the promise, in cancellation from execution of promise, in fiasco of the enterprise.
  The responsibility is connected directly to experience, inasmuch the accumulation of life experience represents, in effect, the gradual mastering by ability to be taken into account of the reaction of surroundings concerning own acts in combination with adequate planning of own actions.
  The responsibility is reflected for the consciousness in censure or in approval of itself both on character of promises, and by results of own acts, that there is that other as the manifestation of conscience, i.e. the true assessment of own acts.
  In particular, for showing the weakness and conformism consciousness in the person has to answer rolling away to its former positions and starting all anew, rebuking itself.
  As for the irresponsibility, it is deception of oneself, so how the irresponsibility consists in false promises, impunity for which is impossible - an order hinders by it.
  Violation of an order as a result of the irresponsible acts turns out for the irresponsible personality as chaos, which it didn't expect and in which heit is being lost, without being able without appropriate preparation be applied for new circumstances and, the more so, to overcome them.
  It follows that the responsibility for own actions comes sooner or later.
  It means: there is no absolute liberty and independence neither in mind, nor in acts, and liberty for the person in life actually is an opportunity conscious manifestation of the activity in frames necessity (this or that dependence), for any extension which (these frame) have to take responsible.
  However, here dominates activity (consciousness), which oneself initially puts to itself this framework (but not falls into them by accident), and, therefore, initially willing to take the responsibility.
  Another matter, how adequately each human life proceeds, but it isn't necessary to lament here because the source of liberty is consciousness, which always is present in the person, determining indispensable presence of liberty in him.
  Though, of course, the equality sign between the person and consciousness can't be set, so how the person is natural restriction of consciousness for development and expression of consciousness together with development of the person. Therefore, this restriction (the person) can't be eliminated, but attempts of an output from this restriction by consciousness proceed in beingness eternally, i.e. in time which each person separately and by all set of reasonable beings creates, without suspecting about this.
  As a result, no matter how weak was the person and no matter how peculiar to him were attempts to evade from activity and by that - from responsibility, he inevitably fails in them that is determined by his own initial essence.
  Thus, the result of life, concerning development of each individual consciousness, is determined by finding by the person of an optimum combination of own dissatisfaction in the form of desires, aspirations to these or those goals with the available set of opportunities and own characteristic features (the present frames of the reality, or order), which should be used, from which is necessary to be exempted or by which can be neglected, as well as by the attitude towards results of own activity, for which will have to bear the response. The deviation from an optimum means that the person had not found himself in life, or rather, didn't identify the true building of own consciousness in the relation to surroundings and didn't add to it new properties.
  Be that as it may, search of himself is a real face of liberty of the person in beingness that distinguishes him from the other living beings, who do not comprehend of themselves in beingness and therefore deprived of an opportunity consciously to look for and find themselves in the world.
  As for the existing definitions of liberty, they do not give an idea of its essence, precisely because their authors do not know both source of liberty, and its mission, and, therefore, to understand its essence they are not able.
  In confirmation of this state of affairs can result in some of the definitions of liberty with their short characteristic from our side [2. Chapter 1].
  Liberty - the idea reflecting such relation of the subject to own actions, when whom he is their determining reason, and they directly are not caused by natural, social, interpersonal-communicative and individual-patrimonial factors.
  Here liberty at first is an idea, then liberty is the relation, and, finally, liberty is the reason. Whether not too there are a lot of heterogeneous concepts? Outwardly all it seems very reasonable in this definition, but it is reduced to the person, who is considered by the reason of liberty. It and is so clear. But that such is available in the person, in order to he became by the reason of liberty, does not reveal.
  Liberty is the domination over circumstances competently.
  Here liberty is the knowledge, thanks to which everything has to turn out. But if knowledge does not help, what, liberty will disappear? The knowledge, information is some conditions for manifestation of liberty, but conditions are not so sufficient. The knowledge can be both without the use and with the inadequate use.
  Besides, there is no action in knowledge - in itself it is dead: information without use turns into a warehouse. The knowledge, in principle, cannot be the complete, and the person has the knowledge in large measure as misinformation, following which he comes to crash. Here more likely circumstances dominate over us, and the person - their victim. Not for nothing speak: "A lot of knowledge - many afflictions".
  Liberty is an ability to make a choice on the basis of distinguishing of good and evil.
  This definition of liberty too approves priority of knowledge for liberty, only no deeds, but certain moral categories that, in itself, is the whole problem. Still nobody knows of it. Something seems by evil for some people, it's the same - good for others. What is here liberty! Anybody has no such ability and cannot has at least because in our world all life is based on an antagonism, and for the person the purpose, the aspiration of his rival cannot be as good in any way and often promises to him death. The abstract good or the evil does not exist.
  Liberty is possibility of the manifestation by the subject of will on the basis of understanding of laws of development of the nature and society.
  In this definition to the knowledge about which was told above, the will as a certain effort for the aid to the knowledge is added. To realize even, it seems, the correct laws though in many cases, the laws formulated by limited people, at all no truth, and the delusion, for example, laws of social development, is not enough for their adequate application. Therefore, similar application of tte will on the basis of laws can lead not to liberty, and to bondage that in the history was happening too often, especially in Russia.
  On the other hand, if under the will to be understood the conscious desire of the person in the form of inducement to conscious management of the acts for achievement of the goals coinciding with his motives, or objectified requirements, as well as that the will - a product partly the genetic, but relating to the program of self-consciousness, and partly bringing up by surroundings, then the will, as well as the knowledge, cannot be as the cause of acts of the person.
  The will is more the additional motivation, it induces the person to act with some persistence, determination, initiative, but the will by itself or in a combination to the knowledge instead of liberty can send the person to slavery to a subject or a idea, to which it forces him to go, will forces the person to make acts according to the chosen purpose, i.e. is not free, but forced. Not the will accepts the final decisions, it only promotes their achievement.
  The will generally is a product of dissatisfaction of self-consciousness, and surroundings, but the will has not the direct relation, in particular, to conscious management of circumstances. The will may serve in the basic for overcoming of obstacles on the way to the purpose. The will is the aspiration into outside, and liberty cannot be outside of the person - it is not a gift.
  The will maintains the activity of the person or suppresses it, but does not define. Therefore, it is necessary to the will to add liberty as self-defining category in acts of the person. And it turns again that liberty at all does not coincide neither with the will nor with the knowledge and that this such is unclear.
  Liberty is what allows to the person according to his purposes to manipulate by the subjects of the outside world.
  Liberty is already the deputy of God in this definition, permitting to the person to live, but as and God oneself, what is liberty - not known. The definition, as such, is absent here.
  Liberty is the existence of possibility of a choice of options of an outcome of an event. Lack of a choice of options of an outcome of an event is equivalent to absence of liberty.
  In this case "unhappy" liberty gets to dependence from a choice. You will choose not so or you do not see a choice, so there is no liberty at you? Here liberty is put in dependence on external circumstances. At such liberty the person would differ nothing from the computer which, besides, is able to choose better.
  Liberty is one of types of manifestation of the randomness, guided by a free will (intention of will, conscious liberty) or by the stochastic law (unpredictability of an outcome of an event, the unconscious liberty), i.e. something opposite to necessity.
  Here liberty is arbitrariness, grasped by will. If liberty is the opposition of necessity, people could not create accidentally the whole civilization and much that in it make not accidental, but consciously and purposefully. Much of what people do based on their needs which arise not randomly. Even desires of the person are not arbitrariness, and proceed from his representations which are formed by an environment.
  Liberty is fear releasing the person from all conventionalities of a reality.
  This definition reduces liberty to nothingness. It is not visible the person in this definition. Being exempted from conventionalities which represent public life, the human is exempted from self. Liberty to the person is not needed in this case.
  Liberty is the person who is projecting freely himself on freely chosen purpose.
  Here Sartre went strongly too far, having told three times about liberty, but without having defined it, having noted, however, that liberty and the free person - same. Certainly, without person in our world of liberty does not exist, but what after all forces the person "to project himself on freely chosen purpose"? Perhaps it also is the liberty? Sartre did not give the answer on this question.
  It is curious that there is no precise definition of liberty. All of these definitions of liberty "beat around the bush". The feeling is created, that they define liberty like blind palpating different parts of an elephant: one, touching a trunk, says that the elephant is similar to a snake, another, feeling a foot, claims that the elephant reminds a column.
  All these vague ideas of liberty point out that their authors do not know to what it can belong that it is actually and what is its mission.
  This imitation of the search for the true meaning of liberty reminds the capture of a cat in a dark room in which it is absent.
  In search of liberty the people, getting rid in life from some of the external obstacles and restrictions instantly are taken prisoner to others (and even often look for this captivity to absolve themselves of responsibility for the acts: sectarians, Party members, members of corporations) that clearly specifies absence of liberty outside: how many look for it there - won't find.
  Indeed, how is possible to find liberty somewhere outside the person or in his physiological features, or in his mentality if it can be manifested only through his self-consciousness, and the foundation of liberty has been laid in holographic formations of the active as the opposition to the passive. Consciousness (the active) aims to manifest liberty, forming the passive owing to own activity, which doesn't allow the active to stop, i.e. to become in the passive and thereby to fall through in non-existence.
  Therefore, the active (consciousness in the person) in beingness can't be stayed for a long time in these or those structures, in these or those conditions, in this or that order, follow this or that necessity, it aims to change them always, but isn't chaotic, and purposefully, with a favor for itself, more precisely, forming of other structures and relations that gives to it the own changes with accumulation of the appropriate experience in this development. Similar manifestation of the active (consciousness) among the passive is the primary source of liberty, and the activity in its expressions and actions in the person is unwillingness of stops, dissatisfaction with what is available, aspiration to changes, to new, i.e. - to development or other expression of oneself in this process.
  Such conscious manifestation of the active is the greatest possible exactly in the person, because he has self-consciousness - it gives the most complete liberty. Any necessity cannot restrict this liberty on the contrary necessity is a support for the free expressions of the person, so how only on the basis of the known order the person can set consciously another order, reveal other regularities. But all it is required not in itself, but it means the accumulation of knowledge and abilities to go from one order to another, and so on successively for the development and the expression of consciousness in the changing conditions.
  Thus, only necessity, or resistance of the environment give to consciousness the chance of manifestation of own activity through thoughts, feelings and actions in the process of overcoming this resistance - in the airless environment birds don't fly: absence of contradictions is the calm and kindness; but only in the struggle liberty can be manifested and thereby occur the infinite motion of consciousness forward.
  So, the main feature of any active (alive), distinguishing it from the passive (lifeless) by the mandatory internal tension, is the expression of the dissatisfaction with what is available, thereby creating an incentive to search for better conditions: the active is forming something only in order that afterwards to destroy it, replacing the other - more, as this seems to it, suitable. This variable vector in the form of the opposite aspirations to creation and destruction certainly indicates a preference, given up to other before the established, that has as a basis the full update each position of a holographic projection by the subsequent position.
  Therefore, liberty is constant aspiration to the release from one for creation of another, not necessarily better, but other.
  However, let us ask ourselves the question: what is man in essence?
  Apparently, the person is an animal that had found self somehow in the world, i.e. had comprehended in it own existence, thanks to what it has been able to separate self from the environment, adapting it already purposefully under self with smaller or bigger success, and being changed in this process of interaction with the environment much quicker, than the other organisms.
  The greatest rates in this development the community of people reach in the frames a civilization, forming it at that level of development of self-consciousness when the last requires for itself bigger, than can give almost equilibrium coexistence with the environment (primitive-communal system).
  Opportunities which are given by a civilization for an acceleration of development of the public relations of technologies, science and culture mean the constant growth of information flows, leading to time compression, so how own time of a civilization, or its "now", is a consequence of manifestation of information interaction of the active and the passive [see higher].
  Inevitable compression of own time as a result leads any civilization to information collapse.
  In place of the collapsed civilization come other civilizations, in which again are manifested somehow the person, and is repeated, but not literally, life cycle and decay of civilization, because the other option for the development of, apparently, doesn't exist at this level of self-consciousness in its interaction with the natural consciousness.
  All this partly reminds the proceeding series of human lives, inasmuch with the death of the specific human beings the life doesn't come to an end; there appear and live approximately the same people.
  Thus, both the person, and a civilization as the finite can't be self-sufficing, but are tools of infinite consciousness [3. Chapter 3].
  The extremity of the person and his civilization doesn't allow to accomplish aspiration of the person to complete separation from the environment, to the release from it, it doesn't manage to dominate unconditionally over the environment, how doesn't manage to monks to get rid of own corporal shell completely.
  Here can only be envied of the flora and fauna, which are poured naturally in the environment and which does not seek to break away from it, being in all completeness of sensations, which are inherent in them and compose their life. Thereby, they, and quite "happy" the fact that don't know about own death.
  If, on the one hand, complete separation of the person from the environment is impossible, and on the other hand, is manifested his difference from other living beings, consisting in awareness self with all that it implies, then, probably, liberty (release) for the person can be expressed only in his aspirations somehow escape out of fetters of all that surrounds him with that difference from the fly, which trembles in a web, that his main aspirations are conscious (are free), and have the base in some eternal and depth, which is behind beingness, and along with that - inherent to beingness, moreover, is incapable to be eternal and steady without beingness like a fish without water. In this regard the person is the highest. self-conscious expression of the active in Creation, without which the last loses the meaning of existence.
  If further to analyze that is a person as the single free being in beingness known to us, then it is necessary to mark the following.
  Thingness components of a body of the person (lifeless) and things around him (the environment) give to the person in his consciousness a support, provide a natural order, filling surroundings and alternating in time. Of them are formed a fairly convenient place for the person.
  Along with that things create the permanent resistance to actions of the person hindering manifestations of his activity and not allowing to the person to be rid owing to the prevailing habits from a everyday situation.
  Thus, things are the indispensable means, "food" for human mind and abilities. Thanks to ingenuity, derivative mainly from self-consciousness, people in communities are being engaged by the bringing the things to such combinations, which can be more suitable and even favorable to them. For example, unlike other living beings, the personhas been capable to compare fire not only with a devastating fire (wildfire) and disastrous tongues of flame, but and with cooking and heating.
  That is, the conscious actions of the person on the basis of cogitations and comparisons, as it appears, can quite result in other understanding of things and phenomena, exempting him from these or those misconceptions and leading to overcoming the existing order.
  The natural-living essence of the person provides his communication with the environment in framework the sense organs which are available for him, i.e. by means of sensations in the form of action of instinctive and reflex programs.
  Self-consciousness of the person, on the contrary, separates the person from the environment, but thanks to this it allows to take a detached view on it and on himself from the side, and to estimate own opportunities to more or less plan change of both the environment, and himself.
  As can be seen, all most important in Creation is aggregated in the person: and the passive (things) and the active (consciousness of both levels), but is lost infinity of existence.
  This loss is explained with the fact that the infinite - in this case consciousness - can be expressed only through the finite, i.e. - by means of some kind of "ruptures" in infinity, otherwise the infinite isn't capable to exit out of nonexistence.
  In this interaction of the infinite with the finite over and over again consciousness in continuous updating and development remains eternal and Creation doesn't lose the stability.
  Thus, any finite (the person, civilizations, planets, universes - everything, except consciousness - is exactly that, in what only consciousness can discretely be implemented.
  Therefore. consciousness in the person (in beingness) as if localizes self in the restrictions, determined by it, only to overcome them as the active, being exempted from one for the sake of formation of another, just as one holographic pattern of a unmanifested infinity is updated by the next.
  So overcoming restrictions within the finite structures is liberty of consciousness based on own inescapable activity, which is expressed in the person preferentially in his consciousness, and in remaining living beings - in the spontaneous activity, which anyway is becoming complicated in the application to changing conditions in process of development of the living beings.
  In conclusion it is necessary to mark that in the dual Creation there is nothing, except the active and the passive, which are being disconnected and united in the eternal interaction, owing to the form-building abilities which are available for the active, which allow through information influence to perform "building" of beingness from things by discrete update of a holographic projection of unmanifested infinity. This beingness is evolving through time and space, in which can be determined and exist the living beings, including people.
  For the human consciousness the changing world pattern in the form of the phenomena, but not essences of the deep levels, is formed not by sensations and not by thinking, though they are means, but it, in general, is a product of processing of information, coming to the person, similar to that which occurs in the computer or in any living being without self-consciousness; the difference consists only the fact that human consciousness is capable to separate self from reality and to interact with it already on this new basis - a basis of own self-consciousness, purposefully using memory, cognitive abilities, language, different communications, imagination, experimental data, and all this is against the background of emotions, but not by means of only the software or instinctive and reflex actions respectively.
  Therefore, can be noted that every human possesses the highest form of matter from all available forms precisely because he is self-conscious being with the highest possible level of liberty, the presence and the manifestation of which he understands but cannot explain its source and mission.
  Eventually, the person isn't subordinated to anybody and himself disposes by self, since he initially himself in own consciousness "throws" himself only into such world, in which he can purposefully be implemented so, as he only can in the conditions of the resisting environment, including and his direct competitors. The person differs exactly in this from all remaining living beings, also having consciousness, but with the lower level, which only adapts to the environment, formed by them with the participation of a single consciousness, - from bacteria to the highest mammals.
  The person, thanks to the main property - self-consciousness, is free even in death, which is available to him practically at any moment of life, inasmuch he knows about it, though fears it. But in certain circumstances the person is decided on death, unlike all remaining living beings, who, without understanding itself, but possessing sensations, are never capable to refuse from them voluntarily.
  Another relation to death on comparing with all remaining living beings is the result of the conscious dissatisfaction oneself, inherent to the person, leading sometimes to a premature end owing to an insuperable rupture of circumstances, created by him, and circumstances, wished him.
  The person from all living beings, famous to us who create themselves and the surrounding by means of own sense organs and the centers processing information, is the single being, who comprehends self in individual and collective actions, i.e. a being, who understands that it is in the frames of time.
  But the person doesn't understand that the information pulses (packets of information), received by him through sense organs from an unmanifested infinity, are converted into his own time and his own surroundings within the general (external) time, formed by all set of the living beings, connected in consciousness, but along with that separated in a holographic projection of an unmanifested infinity. Therefore, he "places" himself in "external" time which he watches directly in connection with daily allowance, seasonal and to annual changes of surroundings, without noting the often very considerable oscillations of own time [3. Chapter 2].
  Whatever it was, in information interaction of consciousness with things, manifested in beingness, is expressed essence of consciousness of all living beings, consisting not in intellect and not in sensations, which are just some means, but in own inescapable activity.
  This activity is the main property, which doesn't allow to stop to each living being, and in the beings, understanding themselves, activity is manifested in conscious dissatisfaction by themselves and surroundings: the person has no limit to any ideas or desires (needs). Therefore, the person can't follow to the same order, but always aims to change it, and it is unimportant how this at he turns out. The main thing - there are changes during which the person, more precisely, his personal consciousness gets experience and development together with the changing life, new shades of feelings, comprehension of these changes with all excitements on this occasion.
  Exactly in these eternal aspirations of human consciousness to a new on the basis of its enduring dissatisfaction with self and surroundings is expressed liberty, or action of releasing and creating the forces of consciousness.
  The aspiration to violation of the customary order for human consciousness adjoins to aspiration to creation of a new order. Actually, in these step and contradictory activities consist human lifetime, in which consciousness finds itself and loses, and then - again finds. And so everything goes unceasingly - from one life to following.
  Liberty is the inescapable product of activity, which is manifested in actions of the person in life as the state of a dissatisfaction of consciousness by oneself, which is realized into development of ways of own change by means of exposure on existing beingness taking into account counteraction of beingness.
  In other words, the everlasting dissatisfaction of consciousness with itself evokes its aspiration to the change oneself in the frame of own existence in the person in the conditions of the resisting environment.
  If living conditions do not allow the person to dominate completely over circumstances, nobody and nothing prevents him to strive for this: the approximation to an ideal is also, in a sense, finding of larger liberty.
  Known expression: "At last I broke loose" means transition of the person to the intense activity, i.e. the blocked aspirations start being implemented. It is not necessary to think that liberty can be outside, round you. If there are no aspirations, be all to your services around, but anything it will not be necessary for you. The rich idlers who are quickly tired from life know about this well.
  
  Bibliography
  
  1. Nizovtsev Y. M. Everything and Nothingness. 2016. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon
  2. Nizovtsev Y. M. In what, how and for what liberty is acting. 2014. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon
  3. Nizovtsev Y. M. Miracles in a sieve. 2016. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon
  
  Chapter 10.
  Freedom as a product of dissatisfaction of consciousness.
  
  It is difficult to dispute the assertion that satisfaction disposes a person to the relaxation and serenity, that is, inactivity. Therefore, there must be something that promotes his activity, and it cannot but be the opposite of satisfaction, namely: dissatisfaction, which, one must assume, prompts him in self-consciousness to change himself in his existence in the conditions of a resisting environment through freedom of the expression in thoughts, feelings and actions.
  There is hardly any doubt that the key link of beingness is its creative component - consciousness. There is nothing higher of it in beingness. At the same time, consciousness cannot close in on itself, cannot stand still. If we admit this, then consciousness, as such, disappears. Therefore, consciousness cannot exist without development, but development cannot be without support and does not happen without the flow of time and the influx of information. Therefore, consciousness is not able to do without them, but it also cannot be only in them, that is, in the current beingness, since beingness still needs to be created. Therefore, consciousness as the active has to be both in beingness, i.e., in the current time, and along with that - outside of it, i.e., outside of time.
  If we look closely at the reality around us, this is exactly what we observe in beingness.
  Indeed, no one has yet succeeded in proving that there is no consciousness in us, and it is unlikely that they will succeed, since without it there is no life. However, there is also clearly no consciousness itself. We do not feel it with our senses. This means that it must also be somewhere else. It turns out that consciousness is in us during our life, and along with that - outside of us, appearing in us at birth and disappearing at the moment of death.
  All this indicates that besides beingness with its current time, which is necessary for the development of consciousness, there is also something timeless, and it is difficult to imagine, but from this it does not cease to be outside us, and, nevertheless, with us, since without us it becomes non-existence, but and we are simply not able to manifest ourselves without it, since timeless infinity contains everything potentially, which can be "unfolded," in our view, by an irreversible arrow of time in the present, which for us seems to contain the future and the past, forming, as it were, the current flow of this artificial time, which is related only to alive, since it is being formed by it, on the one hand, for the deployment and, thereby, the manifestation of an infinity out of time in it, and, on the other hand, for the sake of development in this manifestation of the same living and with it - consciousness in it.
  In other words, the timeless infinite nothingness manifests itself only in the current time, which is being created by living beings - the alliance of the active (consciousness) and the passive (inanimate matter) - on the basis of information provided by the infinity outside of time, in which everything potentially exists. It follows from this that consciousness (active) for development must have support in the form of the passive, informationally connected with each other, which we observe in any living organism. And from this it follows that outside of time, potentially only the active and the passive are "available in stock", containing information about everything possible in beingness.
  Thus, there is no one to advance consciousness except itself. This means that the ability to develop must be embedded in consciousness itself, that is, it must be active, but its activity cannot be locked in itself, since the manifestation of activity requires the current time with finite objects within a certain environment, in the flow of which one can think and act, receiving and transmitting the corresponding information, which is possible only in the current time.
  That is, beingness, that by us, in the face of scientists, is equated to the Universe, is in fact nothing more than a manifestation of an infinite timeless nothingness, which potentially "contains" everything
  And from all this, only the living beings are capable of extracting the information copies, converting them into finite objects of beingness, and constantly renewing them and themselves.
  It is precisely the living beings that are the only ones capable of this, since they are the optimal unification of the active (consciousness) and the passive (structured matter), capable of converting information from a timeless infinity into the current time, which appears to us as the environment, surrounding all living beings, which, in essence, is the infrastructure for the existence and development of alive.
  This development for consciousness in alive is not just a complication, it is the acquisition of new qualities in the course of solving emerging problems while updating the existing order of beingness in the process of endless and diverse external manifestations of consciousness in beingness, characterized by the fact that in these manifestations of consciousness in beingness, consciousness through alive can think, feel and act in the current time in the finite material forms, which in his presence turn out to be alive, infinitely, but discretely, remaining itself, nevertheless, in general and in its parts as endless, but changing in this process of its own development through the finite.
  The path to new forms in the process of the consciousness development can provide the presence of corresponding states at it, that ensure the production and implementation of the new. The established order prevents this. Therefore, a corresponding "mechanism" is required to change or destroy the old order.
  In other words, consciousness must constantly strive to make a room for the new. This corresponds to the state of dissatisfaction of consciousness in the living both with itself and with the surrounding, rooted in the consciousness of any living being unlike inanimate objects, and, in particular, being a stimulus for the conscious striving of consciousness through a person to the new, the unknown.
  It turns out that without freeing up the space occupied by previous structures for the new, that is being created by consciousness in alive, consciousness cannot do without. And this suggests that dissatisfaction in alive as an active creation inevitably produces freedom, first in the minimal expression of the liberation from the unnecessary at each stage of development, and then in its manifestation by the living beings choosing one or another in its surrounding from the multitude, and in a person freedom is not being limited only to the choice from what is, but makes him strive for the new, the unknown as a result of the creative efforts of the joint activity of the natural consciousness of a person and his self-consciousness.
  Thanks to this, a person is the most effective tool for the development of consciousness.
  Generally speaking, we know nothing about consciousness except its external manifestations in living beings, including a person, but consciousness itself does not arise before us directly.
  Therefore, one can only guess what it is, but, nevertheless, one thing is clear: consciousness is not capable of existing individually and independently in beingness, since it is fundamentally located outside of time, but with its particles in the living it creates this current time, thereby getting into beingness and alon with that remaining along with that out of time, that is, it has to associate itself with the passive matter in order to ensure its own existence and development as an active one.
  Thanks to this alliance, a kind of intermediate state of temporarily merged active and passive is obtained, which acquires finite diverse forms, but only in a single complex of protein molecules, thanks to which each such form, regardless of its complexity, has sensors for the perception and transmission of information in the form of sensory organs, a center for processing this information (the brain in a person) and a program that ensures the possibility of existence, growth, reproduction (copying) and development of this formation, which comes to life in the presence of consciousness and disintegrates with its departure, turning into the passive matter.
  It is this state of the living and the dead that we know, but it is impossible to deny that consciousness, the material forms of which are unknown to us, makes the dead alive.
  Nevertheless, judging by the indispensable susceptibility of living beings to information, and, moreover, the impossibility of existing without it, consciousness is directly connected with information processes, and they are possible only in the current time, which, naturally, does not appear from nowhere, but arises only as a result of the actions of consciousness in alive.
  In other words, alive, in order to ensure its own existence and development, must somehow form the current time.
  We can find an analogy to this process in our world, noting that the transformation of the discrete pulse packets of information into a current time picture occurs along the corresponding channel from the transmitter of these pulse signals through the ether up to the television receiver.
  That is, it is reasonable to assume that information coming from somewhere in the form of pulsed intermittent signals of ultra-high frequency, not recorded by any devices of our measurement, is nevertheless perceived by the sense organs of every living being and is transformed in the center for processing incoming signals into a continuous picture for this living being, similar to how it happens in a television receiver, but not flatly, but in a three-dimensional picture, thereby creating a changing environment, surrounding this living being, which, depending on the number and functions of the available sensory organs, can differ accordingly for different living beings, which are, nevertheless, in a single environment, the current time of which is being formed by the entire set of living beings of beingness.
  You can get acquainted with these processes in more detail, for example, in my work "Everything and Nothingness". (2016. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru and. Amazon).
  In this, a kind of the world of the artificial current time, that is being formed by consciousness in alive in the form of the common time and the own time of each living being, as if inscribed in this common irreversible current time, living beings, including a person, can live, develop and reproduce.
  In particular, for a person in his communities, various unpredictable collisions are created, a struggle, clashes, alliances arise not only at the natural level of survival and adaptation of the living organisms, a struggle also arises in the sphere of conscious transformations, waged by te emerging conscious beings, that is, people. Together with them, in the course of development of the appeared society, not only they themselves change, but also their consciousness, merged with each person and moving in the course of their development from one carrier of consciousness to another.
  As a result of such alliance of the natural consciousness, inherent in every being, and another part of consciousness inherent only to a person, who is therefore capable of realizing his own presence in time, a kind of "cocktail" of sensations, perceptions, instincts, reflexes, feelings, thoughts, desires, intentions, passions, etc., is being formed.
  That is, a personality always unlike anyone is being formed, capable of acting not like an animal or a robot, but as doubting, sensitive, but, be that as it may, a being projecting own actions, capable of learning in communication with its own kind to acquire new knowledge and skills, able to quickly adapt to changing conditions of existence and at the same time consciously and independently change these conditions, able to set and achieve goals, direct, control and correct their actions.
  ***
  If we admit that information is at the basis of beingness with its current time, then we have to, in turn, pay attention to the fact that information by oneself in the singular does not exist, since it is being appeared only when perceiving data selected from the general information flow. However, a problem immediately arises, consisting in the fact that all objects of the material world, except for living beings, are indifferent to information. In other words, they are capable of reacting to certain influences, like film to light, but they cannot interpret these changes in any way (analyze, structure), turning them into something understandable for themselves, which can be used in one way or another, that is, into information.
  Therefore, all objects that can only carry information without knowing about it, to those objects that are able to perceive and use this information, can be designated as the passive, and the latter - the active.
  Hence it follows that information can be defined as data about the state of material objects, which are somehow perceived and recognized for subsequent use.
  Only living beings are capable of this kind of decoding and use of information, that is, not objects, but subjects of reality, who have the means to extract information, that is, those data that they understand, from own surrounding.
  And in order to understand whether you need some data or not, you need to have at least some consideration, that is, to separate the necessary from the unnecessary, at least for own retention in the existing environment.
  In other words, information arises only in consciousness, rather, at the carrier of consciousness by means of the sense organs and the data processing center or centers that it has, as well as form-generating abilities, or a list of applications, thanks to which what is needed is separated from what is not needed for a specific living being, but not otherwise/ The information is a completely material copy of an object or objects, recognizable to one degree or another by a living being, accessible through sensations for consciousness, that is, accessible for their subsequent converting inещ a specific surrounding of a living being.
  Information cannot be qualified as something immaterial and independent, since it is copies of data about objects from the vast environment, surrounding consciousness, selected and deciphered by consciousness by corresponding means.
  Consciousness these decrypted copies of material objects through the corresponding center (centers) are also processing into images, meanings, feelings. They are also completely material components of consciousness, entailing subsequent actions of the carrier of consciousness. On their basis, together with memory, the carrier of consciousness interacts with the surrounding objects every moment of his "present".
  Thus, all interactions of the being having consciousness are carried out in this end-to-end, irreversible process only on condition of arrival in his consciousness of the appropriate portions of information, each of which is processed, being laid down in a certain duration, making a row of sequential moments from the birth to death of the carrier of consciousness.
  And if all objects, except for living ones, are passive fixers of data from the environment, interaction with which for them is reduced to responding to it by changing their own properties up to decay and emergence in a new quality, however, not chaotically, but according to some rules in current reality, which are being established by scientists, that is, if these inanimate objects do not show any initiative (activity) of their own, then living objects are able, thanks to the appropriate processing of incoming data , to figure out, how the information received can be used, making certain changes into own surrounding for own benefit and changing accordingly their behavior.
  Naturally, the living beings first of all want to stay in the information flow that they are able to perceive and comprehend - each at the level of own consciousness, - distinguishing themselves from things, which are not understanding anything by the fact that they use them for own benefit and preservation, competing in this with other living beings.
  Therefore, all living beings are active, that is, they use the environment at the instinctive-reflex level of consciousness to maintain themselves in action (nutrition and metabolism), trying to push competitors away from food (domination), including copying themselves in one way or another (reproduction) for further spread in time and space.
  Thus, the finiteness of their own existence, which they, except for humans, do not understand, but feel due to the deterioration in the functioning of certain parts of the body, living beings overcome by procreation (transfer of their own genome) by all possible ways, which requires a special growth program and development of both individual and general (generic).
  In order to hold oneself in the information flow, which creates for a living being a sense of presence through his senses in the current reality, which is constantly changing, each living being has to fight with similar creatures for a place and food.
  Any stop or delay in this struggle for life (sensations) in a changing environment means death, that means disappearance of sensations, which no creature wants to lose.
  Therefore, each living being is forced, in order to avoid stagnation, and hence death, to replenish its own database with new information, not being satisfied with the one has.
  Hence, it is clear that the basic property of the activity of any living being consists in the dissatisfaction of its consciousness with oneself and the surrounding, transforming into aspiration for a better position, or at least for keeping what this creature has.
  In other words, without dissatisfaction it is impossible not only to develop oneself and consume thereby more pleasant and more varied sensations, but also to survive.
  Consciousness in every living being realizes itself through the sense organs and data processing centers, coming from the available sensory organs, as well as it realizes itself through a program on a protein carrier in each cell of the body (genome), which partly manifests the form-building abilities of the creature on basic on the organs of sensations and the available intellect.
  Thus, the consumption of information flows is limited primarily by the available sense organs and their capabilities.
  However, the aspiration to change own situation for the better, that is, in addition to just survival, - to more pleasant sensations, in particular, and through reproduction, and not only by increasing comfort and improving nutrition, is boundless, and always manifests itself, and a natural obstacle to this aspiration is the competition of other organisms with similar aspirations.
  As a result, a fairly stable environment of living beings is formed with various niches that make up a certain hierarchy, which, it is true, is continuously updated, but structurally preserved.
  Thus, the inescapable striving of each being in its activity for a better position in its own competitive niche of existence can be defined by the term "dissatisfaction", the external expression of which is quite multifaceted, since the activity of a living being cannot be satisfied only with survival and reproduction - it always strives for greater satiety and variety of food, more pleasant external conditions (warmer, safer, more organized).
  In other words, the state of dissatisfaction of consciousness with itself in a living being, which is transformed into the development of methods of its own change by influencing the existing beingness taking into account its counteraction, provides any living being with a certain degree of freedom as the realization of its aspirations for the better, expressed in its change of the environment in accordance with the emerging demands and available means.
  However, this freedom for all living beings, except a person, is limited to the freedom of choice from what is, without attempts to consciously create new conditions for existence, that is, it is realized only within the framework of one adaptability to the environment. Nevertheless, dissatisfaction of consciousness always requires a greater degree of freedom, that is, greater freedom of choice, which gives a living being more opportunities to obtain more pleasant and varied sensations, which happens in the course of evolution, producing the living beings that are increasingly complex in structure and functions of organs.
  As it were, the data coming through the senses, which, after being processed in the corresponding centers of the body, turn into information (understandable reports), may be insufficient or inaccurate to understand the situation, or a living being evaluates them incorrectly, especially since every living being, excluding a person, can only use its genetic and personal experience, its own memory and it is not able to more or less accurately predict and correct its actions, since it does not set itself goals for development and improvement , but it is limited only with adaptation to the environment.
  Therefore, all these creatures are forced to act by trial and error, where randomness plays the main role. This is what caused such slow evolutionary development of living beings in comparison with the accelerated motion of the human population in the direction of technological and cultural progress.
  Thus, each organism must be inevitably active in relation to obtaining additional and, preferably, new information about the changes taking place, if it strives for survival, and any activity is characterized by dissatisfaction, because constant satisfaction deprives the being of a initiative aspiration towards change both its position and towards own change, that is, the creature becomes passive, indifferent, which is equivalent to death, since in the community of living beings, the loss of the aspiration to change in accordance with the changing environment, that is, the loss of timely adaptation to the environment, means imminent death.
  Therefore, the basis of activity is always laid on dissatisfaction with what is available, and this dissatisfaction leads to a permanent and most beneficial adaptation to the environment for the most convenient arrangement in it, both for the most primitive organisms and for a person, and the loss of dissatisfaction means a quick and inevitable death with preceding degradation.
  Similar obligatory activity of a living being, in which dissatisfaction with the present is manifested for the sake of a better arrangement in the future, provides an overall ascending change in both the beings themselves and their environment. That is, due to the activity of living beings, the content of flora and fauna, as well as the objects (things) around them, changes, becoming more complex and gaining more and more diversity. In other words, living beings oppose the growth of the entropy of beingness, keeping Creation as a whole in a stable state.
  This activity of living beings with all its attributes, the main of which is dissatisfaction, distinguishes them, for example, from computers, since the latter seek and process only the data that their masters need, without understanding their meaning and purpose of the search, thereby acting only according to programs put in them by their masters without asking for anything in return.
  If the response of any organism to the impact of the environment can be characterized, respectively, by the greater or lesser persistence of the organism in resisting it, or in other words, by the natural attraction of the creature to the best adaptation to the surrounding in its aspiration to survive and create the most suitable conditions for reproduction and food, that is encoded in the genome, then the awareness of the goal, characteristic of any person, just as the perseverance, in order to avoid the extinction of the aspiration for the intended through various obstacles, creates an effort to overcome obstacles to the goal.
  Thus, in the course of striving for a goal, whether it is achieved or not, overcoming obstacles, a person receives a visible development for himself.
  In other words, in the process of developing self-consciousness, the most important thing is not the result itself, but the change in self-consciousness that is obtained in the course of moving towards the goal.
  As for the essence of the human consciousness, in addition to natural consciousness with its egocentrism, it also has an awareness of itself in time, and this understanding of its own temporal existence pushes it not only toward itself, but also toward its own surrounding, which should not be rejected for own favor, but, on the contrary, it should be attempted to be attracted to its side, putting forward certain universal human value approaches, the consequence of which can be universal happiness and contentment. This is how altruism with all its attributes is produced in society, which becomes a counterweight to egoism both in the consciousness of a person himself and in the collectivist consciousness of the human communities.
  Naturally, the dissatisfaction of the consciousness of a person becomes dual, manifesting itself in its egocentric natural consciousness and, to a large extent, altruistic self-awareness.
  Therefore, it makes sense to look at dissatisfaction from this side in a little more detail.
  It is precisely the striving for pleasant sensations, characteristic of all living beings, that most thinkers in the history of civilization, apparently due to a lack of understanding of the content of human consciousness, has qualified as the aspiration of a person for happiness, but they have missed such feature of a person that distinguishes him from animals as self-consciousness.
  Self-consciousness not only radically expands the horizon of events and a person's attitude towards them, but also enters into an incessant struggle with natural consciousness, which does not disappear anywhere from the consciousness of a person, who is mammalian in structure.
  The result of the struggle between both forms of consciousness was the rapid development of the human communities, which relatively quickly came to civilization, high technologies and culture in comparison with billions of years of evolutionary development of living nature.
  As a matter of fact, the agents of this struggle of both forms of consciousness in a person are dissatisfaction of the natural consciousness in a person and dissatisfaction of his self-consciousness, which most often have opposite aspirations in relation to existence in the environment.
  It is this factor that ensures the passionate struggle that occurs when solving various life problems, both in each individual and in human communities.
  This is explained by the fact that the dissatisfaction of a person's natural consciousness is guided only towards survival and the striving for the best possible nutrition, reproduction and comfort, which is not least facilitated by the striving for domination. All this really provides a living being with the achievement of the main thing, what is it guided by, more precisely, what does it strive for in the end - pleasant sensations, which are only required from life life on considerations of natural consciousness, and which really contribute to the evolution of organisms.
  A look at life from the side of a person's self-consciousness, and, accordingly, his dissatisfaction with life is not limited to the specified set of aspirations dictated by the dissatisfaction of his own natural consciousness.
  Human self-consciousness in the qualities of the main guidelines for itself puts happiness, knowledge of oneself and the world around it in the form of finding interesting and beautiful things in everything, searching for truth, and it also always tries to find harmony in life, having saved a person forever from troubles and hardships, which is an enduring delusion self-consciousness.
  Therefore, the dissatisfaction of a person's self-consciousness is constantly looking for and finding appropriate means to achieve established benchmarks in the form of will, interest, high intelligence, creative imagination, creativity as the ability to search for unobvious solutions to emerging problems, own memory and experience as well as the databases accumulated by humanity over the foreseeable time.
  However, the aspirations of a person in his self-consciousness to the indicated guidelines collide with constant distancing of the indicated guidelines, like the ever-elusive horizon, and partly the natural consciousness opposes these aspirations of self-consciousness, which they only interfere with, distracting the natural consciousness of a person from receiving directly pleasant sensations in the course of life.
  Be that as it may, but the dissatisfaction of self-consciousness did not arise out of nowhere.
  The aspiration for pleasant sensations for him transformed into a desire for happiness; which is helped, like perseverance in achieving pleasant sensations, by already conscious effort to achieve the set goal - will, as well as imagination, both in abstract and figurative forms. As for prolongation getting sensations beyond life, a person found it in the form of a religion, that promised him both heaven or hell in the afterlife, depending on his behavior.
  Natural curiosity as an external manifestation of dissatisfaction of natural consciousness has been turned for self-consciousness into inquisitiveness (intellectual curiosity) and aspiration to the interesting, that is, the new, in particular, - in the aspiration to know oneself and the world around in search of the final truth - clarification of the purpose of one's own existence, which is also promoted by the emerged means for external display of dissatisfaction of self-consciousness - will, interest, high intelligence, abstract and imaginative thinking (imagination), creativity, backed up by accumulated and recorded data in various databases of human civilization.
  Many delusions and beliefs, not supported by anything, also distinguish humans from animals, which are not inherent in such stupidity - they use what they have, but a person, considering himself the crown of the creation, mistakenly believes that the future can be turned into the present forever.
  However, first let us turn to the interaction of natural consciousness and self-consciousness, since they, as it follows from the above, are present in a person, making up his consciousness as a whole.
  Note that the emergence of self-consciousness in a person, which made him a person, partially removed the limitation of subjectivity in him, which forced all living beings only to adapt to the environment.
  With the acquisition of self-consciousness, a person, unlike the rest of alive, lastly realized oneself, that is, understood, that he is situated in time, that he is mortal, and therefore life must be used not only to satisfy his own urgent needs, adapting to the environment, but deliberately change this environment at his will in order to obtain other sensations compared to animals in accordance with certain goals that turn him into a subject of action, promoting him to awareness oneself in the form of new considerations, not only in the utilitarian sphere, but in all directions that lend himself to his mind, which makes him by the most free of all living beings.
  A person begins to understand the meaning of his actions, drawing up projects and correcting them on the go, that is, while remaining part of the environment, he at the same time rises above it, becoming partly its master and even creator both in various man-made structures, mechanisms, processes, so and in sphere of creations spirit, that is reflected in various areas of art, science and culture.
  Such actions change significantly and with acceleration not only the environment, but also the content of self-consciousness of a person, increasing his educational and cultural level, that is, allowing him to become gradually in awareness himself all higher and higher. Therefore, this type of consciousness, which is complementary to the lowest (natural) consciousness, can be qualified as the highest consciousness of the living beings, or self-consciousness, which is inherent only in people.
  Thus, in human beings there are two components of consciousness - the lowest, often called unconscious, or subconscious, and the highest consciousness, or self-consciousness. the level of which can differ significantly depending on the degree of development of the person or his communities - take, for example, the person of the Stone Age and the current Nobel laureate, - the level of consciousness and in that and other case significantly other, however self-consciousness is present both here and there, without disappearing anywhere, but the lowest consciousness, which is responsible generally for functioning of an organism (body) to hold it in a live state and to do it by adequate concerning stay of a body in the environment as well as to fix and spread an organism in the environment, remains almost invariable, i.e. almost does not depend on time.
  Both these components (hypostases) exist and act in the body and through the body in an indissoluble connection, but the highest consciousness is incapable to exist without the lowest, as the last is responsible for preservation of the living being in the environment - to do without it not possible, while self-consciousness - above all for project and target activity of a person as individually, and in the human communities which are in a certain environment, and other natural beings always do without self-consciousness.
  It is these deep entities in the form of the lowest consciousness and highest consciousness, hidden and intertwined in every human consciousness, and, consequently, in the public consciousness, with all their antagonism because of the need to solve various tasks for the most part contradicting each other, really determine development of human communities at any stage.
  New projects and ideas develop the mind of a person, his insight, contribute to the most effective manifestation of various abilities during life, lead to the thought of beautifying life, that is, the culture of one's own beingness and beingness of the public.
  In a person both these antagonistic in relation to himself and to the surrounding, hypostasis, are merged together. Therefore, they do not manifest themselves separately, but operate in a hidden way, and the degree of their domination depends on the degree of development in a person of the highest consciousness.
  And the person himself often cannot predict what in the next moment will become predominant: love or hatred, anger or sympathy, sincerity or hypocrisy, timidity or courage, discretion or recklessness.
  The lowest consciousness "feeds" only on the sensations that give it everything, including the harmony of existence, i.e. something acceptable and even pleasant in our understanding in a certain combination of feelings if, of course, to distract from fight of each being for survival. Therefore, it does not wish to lose the sensations at all.
  Similar type of consciousness has natural egocentrism, i.e. seeking automatically to survive, no matter what.
  In the process of development of the living beings, this type of consciousness undergoes relatively minor changes, since never one of them is not able to withdraw own basic property - an unconscious desire for survival, based on the primordial activity of any living thing.
  The highest consciousness which is contained in the person at any level of its development is radical contrast to the lowest consciousness.
  In the presence of the highest consciousness in the living being, it begins as though to see the light, becoming not so much "poured" into the environment, how many separated from it, and, so it acquires the opportunity to look at it and on oneself from the outside, to appreciate this relation in attempts to consciously set to oneself goals in mind certain shortcomings in one's own existence, which, in the opinion of this being, could be overcome, and to try to obtain implementation of goals in actions.
  All this obviously drops out of an instinctive and reflex sphere of action of the lowest consciousness, and even begins to contradict it as the highest consciousness often neglects utilitarian reasons, chasing something to unattainable, but kind for heart and mind.
  Being separated in self-consciousness from the environment, this being, in the course of time, in its development in relationship with the beings, which are like him, begins to feel the need for new forms, different from the primitive communal relations of still wild people, absorbed completely in the struggle for survival. In mutual communication these beings reache such limit that their various conscious aspirations begin to pour into significant changes in the environment, and not just on its use.
  From gathering, a person passes to cattle breeding, growing cereals, other forms of economic activity and the corresponding exchange of the labor products. Inequality, ownership, the struggle for the preservation and augmentation of property, for power and et cetera are arising, that in turn requires establishment of some institutions of order in order to avoid chaos - the local states in the bosom of a growing and improving civilization were being formed.
  New forms and institutions, on the one hand, ensure the accelerated development of communities already in a structured form, that is, as the states with the bodies of governance, security, courts, etc., and on the other hand, do not allow to the states to fall apart because of the contradictions, invariably tearing-apart the last.
  Despite a certain progress in development of the human communities according to development of self-consciousness, the essence of the human consciousness which is expressed in dualism, more precisely, in divergent life-aspirations of the lowest and highest forms of consciousness does not disappear anywhere, and cannot be substantially modified.
  Both these parties of consciousness continuously conflict both in the person, and in the interpersonal relations: discontent with, visible inability to change quickly, the felt limitation of intelligence, abilities, etc.; the envy and hatred to competitors instantly would rip to shreds any human community if not the state with its institutes.
  Nevertheless, each person manifests also qualities of the highest consciousness which are expressed not only in the intellectual and production sphere, but also in inquisitiveness, various religious and cultural forms and also in the affectional relations, somehow: friendship, love, experiences for relatives, for the fatherland, etc.
  If the relationship between people on the basis of self-awareness slowly but steadily develops, then the lowest consciousness in the person remains practically unchanged.
  Therefore, the ideal persons do not appear, and the lowest consciousness, despite any form of its disguise, acts at any stage of the development of human consciousness, being expressed in deep-rooted egoism (egocentrism) - personal and corporate, hypocrisy (masking), suspiciousness (caution), contempt for people of other circle (mistrust to other communities), animal instincts concerning an opposite sex, etc.
  Thus, the highest consciousness in the course of its growth begins to oppose itself to the lowest consciousness more and more effectively - the struggle between them just distinguishes the person from animals, being manifested at early stages of development is hardly noticeable, and then - all stronger and stronger.
  In other words, the growth of self- consciousness, or raising the level of the highest consciousness in the struggle with the lowest consciousness, gradually, but with an acceleration, expands the human sphere of activity, ensuring the permanent development both certain persons in their generations, and the development of their communities.
  With the growth of self-awareness and, thus, the increase in the self-sufficiency of civilization, the action of the majority of the above-mentioned natural factors are increasingly leveled, which means that they really manifest themselves as necessary external, but not the fundamental to the human consciousness.
  Consequently, the intensive development of communities of the living beings - previously barely noticeable, and the main contribution to which was made by mutations (random changes in the genome) - begins only with the appearance in them of self-consciousness, and accordingly - with its interaction with the lowest (animal) consciousness, which does not disappear anywhere from these living beings. This interaction is expressed practically in incessant fight of these consciousness forms, merged together, as they mostly have opposite aspirations, what was discussed in detail above, i.e. their interaction mainly is expressed in hostility.
  It should also be noted that each individual consciousness through a person and human communities itself has to examine in things, comprehending them essence at appropriate levels of knowing in dependence on conditions. This is the main task of consciousness in a person, which he solves in beingness, not just the life that is given to consciousness in any living being. In the solution of this task in the conditions of the resisting environment, i.e. in life, each individual consciousness in a person receives or no receives own development, raising the status in own eyes in the infinite change, altering conditions of own existence.
  And in this process, one cannot do without dissatisfaction of self-consciousness by oneself and surrounding, especially since dissatisfaction has the means by which a person in his self-consciousness is able to find himself in the world in search of truth, and even try to find some harmony in life, which again contributes to the development of self-consciousness.
  These means are known to everyone - they are will, interest, high intelligence, abstract and imaginative thinking (imagination), creativity as the ability to search for non-obvious solutions to emerging problems, own memory and databases accumulated by mankind during the foreseeable time, and relevant experience.
  Of course, they can be defined in different ways, but the result of the work of these means of manifestation of dissatisfaction of self-consciousness of a person is the development of his self-consciousness, which we observe with our own eyes, being able to compare people of different historical eras - from the Neolithic, with the terrifying savagery of people, who have devoured the defeated opponents, to the stage of the emergence of the Internet, when people of different nations get to know each other, understanding and respecting each other, despite the distance and belonging to different peoples.
  ***
  Freedom for a person, produced by his dissatisfaction with his own surrounding and oneself, is no longer limited to just freedom of choice from what is available.
  Since the main difference between a person and other living beings lies in his conscious actions to change the environment and himself for certain purposes or to implement planned projects, he also has, together with already the expanded freedom of choice, the freedom to express his own will, which is capable of being realized even when it is limited circumstances for a person within the framework of the internal freedom, limited only by his own intellectual and sensory resources.
  Thus, another task arises for a person, which each person should solve in life is an independent creation of new opportunities for actions which aren't given itself as in the first case, but can be absent, simply. Therefore, the person should most create the situation which is necessary to him, or space for actions according to conceived in order to the project didn't "hover" in consciousness, and was realized.
  Actions of consciousness in the similar case could be characterized as creative-destructive. The liberty of actions here already is defined by not available situation, and imaginary: the purpose is set, there are tasks, it is projected actions, identified barriers to them, methods of their overcoming or bypass. Space for this liberty of creative-destructive actions of a person is extremely insignificant. It is determined only by narrow frames of the goal, but the action for achievement of the purpose is initially caused by dissatisfaction of consciousness with itself, considering to itself capable on bigger that requires change of a present order - otherwise goal wouldn't putting - and this dissatisfaction of consciousness stimulates a person all time to aim at one purpose, then at another, etc.
  It is curious that, depending on the level of development of consciousness, being put a goal can be the negative (to take away, to ruin, to tease, to mock), and to it is a lot of examples in life, but its achievement helps to the individual consciousness to understand depth of own falling and its reasons, to learn the price of treachery, avarice, egoism, hatred, rage, disrespect for people. The aspiration to purposes of this sort gives the chance to consciousness understanding itself in the attitude towards other people in order to further to overcome feeling of own superiority over others. It, by the way, explains absence of an evil in the world as separate category.
  The goal can be and unattainable, but aspiration to it means manifestation of liberty which has been initially put in dissatisfaction of consciousness, or the aspiration to own completeness, to boundless development.
  However, mostly, in well-known to us routine life the goals happen, as a rule, small-sized, passing, momentary. But even aspiration to the goals of this sort from a line item of growth and development of consciousness and finding by him of bigger degree of liberty of own expression to outside is unusually valuable that hindrances to the tempting goal force a person to work, in every possible way to contrive for their overcoming, i.e. freeing a way to the scheduled purpose, to liberate, to develop itself. It also is required to consciousness from the resisting environment: struggle, sufferings, disappointments, losses, victories and findings.
  Here all complex of the qualities which are available for a person can be manifested: intuition, imagination, memory, abilities, skills, will, character. Generally, everything is used. It is, of course, not liberty over circumstances, and, rater, impulse, conscious aspiration to the local goal, despite hindrances to it. The similar aspiration doesn't do the human by wise and immortal, but allows to use to him all own best qualities and most to define the goals of the life himself that introduces sense in his life and in his consciousness - development.
  Thus, the conscious aspiration to a goal is supported by special "mechanism" - will which, integrating in itself natural and genetic inclinations of the individual, results of education, trainings, conscious installations to the direction of move, the plan of actions, creates tension, effort for achievement of a goal.
  Will helps to be implemented of projects of consciousness, without leaving them only in imagination or on paper.
  Conscious choice of goals, ensuring their achievement willed stress causes not only the need in the presence of the base for this process in the form of knowledge, memory, attitudes, intentions, desires, and so on., but also - necessity of formation of the space for actions which isn't occupied by the existing structures arranged by known rules and intended for the decision other tasks, and therefore not helping, but hindering implementation of new projects.
  In other words, development demands cleaning of the territory from hindrances for forward move.
  However, function of will includes overcoming of hindrances on a way to the goal, instead of planning of this path with a minimum of hindrances to making of the necessary maneuver conceived by consciousness and being brought up to the purpose by effort of will, inducing the person to aim to achievement of the purpose.
  But what or who can scan a field of actions, can change and outline methods of demolition of the existing order hindering action?
  Such "tool" is ability of consciousness in the form of self-consciousness after the creation of the project and determination of the goal to pass into another state, so to speak, from the state of the creative speculation to pass into the state of an assessment of methods of achievement of the goal earlier set and determination of ways of overcoming of found hindrances, i.e. to promote to the liberation of the path to the goal for will which without similar "reconnaissance" becomes powerless.
  Consciousness in the form of self-consciousness scans by means of the sensors-feelings space of alleged actions, on the basis of assembled information, memory and experience determines the hindrances to achievement of a goal, finds possibilities of their bypass or overcoming or elimination and, further, launches to will as conscious aspiration of a person to a goal. In the limit case when hindrances seem to consciousness as insuperable, but the problem should be solved by all means, it passes to an assessment of demolition of hindrances at any cost. And here everything depends on existing level of consciousness of the individual. If this level is enough high, then the instinct of a survival will be overcome by self-consciousness, and the person either will win, or he will perish.
  This ability of consciousness, more precisely, corresponding state of self-consciousness, unlike will which is only influenced self-consciousness partially, to create the diagram of destruction of this or that order for promotion of the project with the help of will to the goal, without allowing chaos and, thereby, promoting receiving something new and, so - to own development, is freedom in the relation to the reality.
  Thus, freedom in the material world manifests itself in its highest expression as a state of self-consciousness, which provide the space for the implementation of own latent ideas even if these ideas have not a direct bearing on the reality. Hindrances do not exist for such freedom, it is not limited by the choice out of available, it looks for new lacunas for implementation, perhaps, absolutely delusional ideas of self-consciousness and rater the carrier of consciousness will perish, rather than the "mechanism" of the liberation of a path by consciousness together with will for search of something new ceases to work.
  In this regard the freedom is invincible and absolute. And it is clear: development of consciousness is unstoppable.
  On the other hand, the level of the natural human consciousness and the level of self-consciousness of a person can fluctuate from the lowest to the unusually high. Respectively and of freedom can possess by set of facets: from a pathetic choice out of something absolutely insignificant up to almost complete domination over vital circumstances.
  Freedom can be closed on time in itself, into the "internal space" of self-consciousness in case of feeble consciousness if it doesn't see in this moment of ways for development, and can give a command to a person in case of his strong spirit to advance to the attack regardless of obstacles without any hope for a victory, without wishing to live in darkness of unacceptable circumstances. This property, by the way, was called the passionarity, and introduced this term L. N. Gumilev.
  However, an explanation for such seemingly unreasonable the human behavior, unlike what was said above, was not given to them (see, for example., "The driving force and source of development of the person and his communities." 2018. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon. Yury Nizovtsev).
  The concept of freedom in this context means process of determination by consciousness of the space which is necessary for implementation of the project, conceived by consciousness in a state of speculations. Process consists in estimate of opportunities of the solution of the task and in search of ways of achievement of a goal within a certain space of actions.
  Space for implementation of the project and making of corresponding actions can be different that defines a degree of manifestation of liberty - from caressing if difficulties are insignificant, up to all-destroying if they seem insuperable.
  Freedom as the product of an initial dissatisfaction of consciousness by itself doesn't disappear anywhere but only changes own approaches to the solution of appearing tasks, attracting other people or changing the direction of move. The main thing for this state of consciousness is not receiving result, but process itself, during which the new and unknown is being found. By the way, reading books, consuming of any other information is the same process of satisfaction of insatiable aspiration of consciousness to the new, not necessarily coming to the end with specific result, but giving to him food for thought.
  Thus, in structure of consciousness in the relation to the human activity freedom is the state which is responsible for a finding of "breaches" in a settled order, and in case of their absence - responsible for development of diagrams of elimination of existing hindrances on a path to the scheduled purpose which overcoming is promoted by the effort by will inducing a person to act in the given direction. The project itself, or idea can't be brought to implementation without incentive power of will.
  Therefore, in this, so to speak, the "production" sphere consciousness in the form of freedom, produced by dissatisfaction, appears, as a rule, as the virtual destructor for creation of possibility of the implementation of the project, created by it.
  Freedom in the human relations as a state of consciousness often loses rigidness. A person in this state of consciousness hesitates, selects, tries to agree in a tangle of contradictory forces and goes on compromises. The matter is that, practically, there is nothing to select in antagonistic society: any choice - a road to nowhere Therefore liberty as a state of consciousness here can be expressed only in ignoring of an existing order in favor of disinterested service to people. And it, as we know, doesn't promise any material benefits. There are few sincere impulses of this kind, but only this path reflects the true degree of the human freedom and leads to an increase in the level of consciousness.
  All this means very slow, step-by-step, but inevitable extension of space of freedom at consciousness in the world which is resisted to it: consciousness in a person eventually ceases paying attention to conditionalities of beingness, its temptations, own diseases, death of own body, thereby expanding itself and passing into another state.
  It also is true meaning of the life of consciousness in a person and together with a person.
  The internal freedom, i.e. possibility of internal development always remains in consciousness, in any conditions. The level of this liberty depends generally from aforetime stages of development of consciousness, experience of former lives and, partly, from information influx from outside. More perfect and potentially more free consciousness always contradicts the imperfect outside world though they and mutually supplement each other.
  Therefore, this state of the consciousness which always is not satisfied itself, finds a support for move, developments not only in itself, but also in the surrounding which consists not only out of the nature, but also of other people, changing all congestive, seeking to destruction of an existing order.
  That is, the peak of the manifestation of freedom of consciousness in a person is the inner freedom, unlimited except for the "volume" of the inner world of a person, reflected in his thoughts and feelings.
  From all of the above it follows that freedom is an inexhaustible product of activity, its inevitable consequence, it manifests itself in human actions as a state of dissatisfaction of his consciousness with itself, which is transformed into the development of methods of self-change deliberately by influencing the existing beingness, taking into account its counteraction.
  
  Chapter 11.
  What is the true difference between intellectuals and intelligentsia?
  
  Introduction
  There is no such term as the intelligentsia, except Russia, generalizing all representatives of intellectual labor. In the rest of the world, the cultural layer of the nation is called intellectuals, and the term intelligentsia is not applied.
  However, in reality, representatives of intellectual labor in any country in the world are divided into four groups, indicated below, among which there is also the intelligentsia. Therefore, it makes sense to demonstrate with the example of Russia what properties one of these groups (the intelligentsia) possesses, who can be attributed to it, and what its role in public life is.
  In any state with an established education system, there is always the possibility of an expanded appearance of individuals required to serve in various government offices, the education system, medicine, science, engineering, law, military affairs, entrepreneurship, etc.
  In fact, this educated public serves the state as a system, having the appropriate specialized knowledge, and therefore being one of the foundations of existence of the state, so how it to a large extent ensures success in the competition with other states for resources and leadership in the world.
  Such educated people working in a particular field of mental work are usually called intellectuals, in contrast to the broader term - professionals, since the latter can include both individual intellectuals and individuals without education in universities and colleges, capable of skills to achieve success in agriculture, engineering, manufacturing, trade, small business, serving people and equipment of different levels in the form of cooks, waiters, maintenance technicians, repair workers, guards, etc.
  There are few intellectuals compared with the entire mass of the population, since education is expensive and the time taken to get it, is also quite significant. Therefore, the vast majority of people from an early age are forced to engage in unskilled or low-skilled labor only for food and are not able to get an education.
  Since the intellectuals serve the state, they are mostly forced to be loyal to it, somehow supporting the power elite. For this they receive an increased monetary content, breaking away not only in educational, but also in the material level of life from the majority of fellow citizens.
  The propaganda of the developed countries of the world in the form of mass media always focuses exactly on the specialized-educational aspect of the activities of intellectuals, deliberately eliminating the other side of education, which provides not only special knowledge, but also a number of general information that broadens the mind and gives a clearer picture of world events, as well as representing the opportunity to reflect on the meaning of life and ways to improve social relations.
  Thus, only fairly well-off strata of the population, which are a minority, can actually get an education.
  However, in the competitive struggle of States and large corporations with other States and corporations, the decisive contribution is made not by educated and qualified specialists, but by the most quick-witted and talented, but they are scattered covertly throughout the entire population.
  Having realized this fact, the powers that be have created certain benefits for low-income families, allowing their offspring to education.
  On the one hand, it strengthened the state, but, on the other hand, there appeared persons from the people among intellectuals, knowing on their own skin the troubles, insults and oppression of those in power.
  In this regard, intellectuals had been dividing into four main groups.
  Some still remained loyal to the state or their masters, solving problems as usual in their own sphere of activity, and rejoicing at high material wealth.
  They can be attributed to the philistines, who are mostly interested in their own well-being.
  Their intelligence can be developed up to a very high degree as applied to their own field of activity. However, their self-consciousness does not reach a high level, since they think only of themselves, and try not to notice all the troubles and misfortunes around, without expressing displeasure with their superiors, despite all their antics.
  In this regard, their self-consciousness of a relatively low level is quite balanced with their animal consciousness, which is also completely contentedly by a well-off existence.
  The more energetic and power-hungry part of the educated public from different sectors of the population, but mainly from the highest layers of society, is trying to break into the power elite, and really represents it to a large extent.
  Taking away from the highest consciousness the appropriate share of intelligence, which includes increased ingenuity, and from the lowest (animal) consciousness - speed of reaction, quite good strong-willed qualities and energy, skill to communicate, sufficient dexterity, cunning, insidiousness and unprincipledness, these individuals get advantage before the others - more inert members of the community in the form of philistines, highly moral intellectuals of all sorts and other relatively sluggish or anxious with another matters of representatives of the population, who are not able deftly to push aside or slander a rival, as well as really enjoy by the humiliation of the subordinate, and at the same time to endure the mockery from the side of their superiors.
  The lack of intelligence at the persons, broke into the power elite, is compensated by the involvement of numerous advisers, but because the decisions eventually have to be taken them, insofar they, as the true creators of their own happiness, initially consider their activities from the position of personal (corporate), and not the people's good, with a roll in the direction of retaining power, gaining a greater degree of their own dominance and the acquisition of all kinds of privileges, clogging up in addition to it the various management and economic structures with own mostly incompetent offspring.
  For the representatives of the power, a dominant inevitably is the lowest consciousness, that is, in their consciousness there is a clear lack of awareness of themselves as self-sufficient personalities and not as consumers.
  Power and practically the unlimited access to privileges and property belittles them so much that they see in the masses only a source of wealth for themselves and a field for the manifestation of their own low instincts.
  However, fearing the anger of the people and the counteraction the informal opposition, they are forced to resist anarchy, retaining, in particular, through reforms, the order that ensures the functioning and development of society, but, naturally, not from noble motives, but only from a sense of self-preservation.
  The third part of the intellectuals - a relatively small number - is mainly immigrants from the people. As a rule, they already have a high degree of self-consciousness and further develop it in the process of obtaining knowledge and its application. Naturally, they are not able to look without indignation at all the injustices of the existing social system, in which the bulk of the population lives in poverty and the arrogant nouveau riche bathe in luxury, humiliate everyone else not only with their own actual impunity, but simply by own presence, concentrating fantastic riches that cannot be spent to themselves during thousand lives.
  Of course, this part of the intellectuals always thinks about eliminating this injustice in favor of a harmonious society, where for everyone will be equally well and pleased. Thus, the informal-intellectual opposition arises, opposing to the power elite, and not inclined to compromise with it, since this opposition considers those in power by hypocrites, scoundrels and robbers.
  In Russia at the end of the 19th century, these were revolutionary democrats, and at the beginning of the 20th century - Bolsheviks.
  And finally, the bulk of the intellectuals is an oscillating mass. Their self-consciousness is at an intermediate level between the informal-intellectual opposition and the intellectuals representing the power elite. They, as well as the informal-intellectual opposition to the ruling elite, see injustice around and understand its roots, but are afraid to fight the existing order for various reasons.
  Basically, these reasons are as follows.
  The fluctuating intellectuals fear chaos due to revolutions and coups, believing that it is always possible to negotiate with power on certain reforms, or, as a last resort, to replace the power elite with a more suitable one, without changing the substantially established order, and most importantly - maintaining own privileged position.
  In addition, this part of the intellectuals considers itself to be the highest caste in comparison with the rest of the population, and it agrees with the opinion of the power elite, which is not inclined to attract of a significant number of representatives of the masses to management.
  Similar individuals are rather cowardly. They are afraid of reprisals and, as a rule, are inferior in conflicts with the authorities, trying however to preserve their own privileges in every way. Moreover, their word is constantly at odds with deed, and they, while advocating in speeches for the coming people's good, in fact do not participate in the real struggle for this people good.
  In developed countries, these subjects, predisposed to palliative measures, that is, not prone to decisive action, but preferring half measures, are represented by social democrats of various kinds and formations, contiguous to them. In Russia, this educated always wavering public is called the intelligentsia.
  Over time, for most of them, self-consciousness decreases, and sense of own dignity disappears, and they pour in into a group of intellectuals -philistines, who are indifferent to everything except their own well-being.
  Nevertheless, some of them - with a relatively high level of self-consciousness - prove capable of joining the group of opposition-minded informal intellectuals trying to radically change the existing order. Their typical representative is one of the creators of the hydrogen bomb in the USSR and later a human rights activist and supporter of humanistic values A. D. Sakharov.
  Rest intellectuals, who have a lowered level of self-consciousness, over which animal consciousness prevails to some extent, may try to break through to power if events provide an opportunity, such as, for example, what happened in Russia after 1991, when such average figures on the intellect and position like the economist A. B. Chubais or the editor and head of the department of economic policy in the journal of the Communist Party "Communist", E. T. Gaidar, penetrated the governing structures of the power of the whole country and strengthened in it. The same average intellectual was lawyer A. F Kerensky, who became the first minister of the interim government of Russia in 1917.
  Despite their failed actions in general, they felt for a while a taste of power, gained certain benefits and became famous figures in the world.
  1. Definition, genesis, properties and differences.
  Usually, the intelligentsia is defined as the cultural layer over the dark or insufficiently educated mass of the rest of the population of Russia, who is busy mainly of physical or other monotonous labor. The intelligentsia usually includes such intellectual workers as scientists, engineers, lawyers, artists, teachers, doctors, students, some of the civil servants. Moreover, it is assumed in advance that intelligentsia is the color of the nation, and that exactly it leads the people to the heights of progress.
  If this were so, then just like in other developed countries of the world, such people of intellectual labor would be called intellectuals.
  This means that in this definition there is not enough that distinguishes the representative of the intelligentsia in Russia from the intellectual as a person of mental labor.
  What is the specific difference between these educated Russian individuals-representatives of intelligentsia from ordinary intellectuals who are specialized in the corresponding field of mental work?
  To find him, you must turn to the past of the country.
  Since the end of XVII century, thanks to the reforms of Peter I, Russia has moved from a long medieval Asian hibernation to the accelerated development, trying to become like the leading countries of Europe both civilly and militarily, without which Russia would have remained the secondary, powerless state, which would be further divided among more developed neighbors. From a formal point of view, these reforms of Peter Great were successful in many respects, but they did not affect the general population.
  Various educational institutions appeared, including universities. However, only representatives of the "noble" estate was trained in them practically. The vast majority of the population remained completely isolated from European culture and was almost completely illiterate. Moreover, this majority of the population of Russia had no rights, being attached to the landlords, more precisely, the serfdom has dominated in Russia, which meant for people"s consciousness not only humiliation, but also complete stagnation, or lack of development. Nevertheless, in Russia, as a result of being introduced to European values, a small, but quite educated and, to some extent, cultural layer appeared among the nobles. Thus, the foundation was laid for the appearance in the future in Russia of representatives of mental labor.
  In the nineteenth century, this layer increased with the inclusion of various representatives of the non-noble estate. However, in comparison with the total mass of the downtrodden population, the cultural layer of the population was numerically insignificant.
  Thus, we can state, on the one hand, the growth of social and individual self-consciousness in Russia from the end of the 17th century to the beginning of the 20th century, but, on the other hand, the non-mass nature of this growth, unlike, for example, from Europe, the population of which was educated relatively good in mass respect.
  The main thing, if you take a closer look, it can be noted that in two hundred years in Russia between the vast majority of the lower layers of the population and the stratum of intelligentsia, more precisely, people of mental labor, a huge gap has formed.
  These parts, which are heterogeneous in terms of the level of consciousness, represented essentially two different continents, more or less fastened only by their place of residence, language, some traditions and religion.
  At the same time, the consciousness of the Europeanized upper stratum of Russian society, which joined the individualistic aspirations of Western society, which captured it after the era of bourgeois revolutions in Europe, was in sharp contrast with the collectivist consciousness of the peasant population of Russia.
  The life of the mostly illiterate peasants was still patriarchal, and for the most part was based on communal running of the land and collectivist aspirations. This, in particular, showed the "going to the people" of the Russian intelligentsia, to which the "people" (peasants) did not react at best.
  If we turn to the basics, we must assume that the division of the people into more or less educated parts is due to different levels of self-consciousness, or the highest consciousness, and its corresponding interaction with the lower (animal or natural) consciousness.
  For the sake of explanation, we note that two irreconcilable beings coexist in each person.
  One of these beings is determined by the lowest consciousness, which is the only inherent in all flora and fauna, except the person; This type of consciousness manifests itself in inseparability with the environment on the basis of sensations.
  Beings with this type of consciousness are in the general stream of life, but are not capable "to rise" over it, they do not understand that they live. In this regard they remind in advance programmed mechanisms capable to sense, forming own environment and adapting themselves to it, but deprived of spontaneous or conscious memories, fantasies, notions of time, they have only a genetic memory in the absence of oral or written memory of generations, and are not able to consciously influence the habitat.
  These beings do not even know that they will die, but can feel approach of death only instinctively. Similar restriction of consciousness for these beings means impossibility of any purposeful change of the environment even for the most developed their representatives - these beings are completely subordinated to it, though, at the same time, quite reasonably and effectively interact with surrounding from the position coming from their sense organs to the processing information centers of an organism, which for them is not distorted by reflections, the reminiscences and experiences peculiar to human consciousness as a whole.
  In this respect, these natural organisms are more perfect than humans, and ignorance of their own essence makes them completely "happy" in existence, despite the fact that in the common natural circulation they only do that they devour each other.
  And such "creature" necessarily "sits" in every person, and it cannot fail to determine his existence in one way or another, no matter how tried the person to distance himself from it.
  Another "creature" in the person is represented by the highest consciousness, which separates it from the environment and from fellow tribesmen; it manifests itself in the realization of its own existence, for example, in the form of abstract ideas about the world and about oneself, a return to the past in the form of memories, designing subsequent actions based on consciously selected data from memory, combining them with newly received information, responsibility for the committed, the ability to make any decisions, even the most unprofitable and useless, which in fact is the most vivid manifestation of liberty of the human consciousness.
  On this basis the person tries to set to himself the purposes, to solve various problems and to change thereby by means of the developed representations the surroundings. For example, this being is capable to build to itself the dwelling not according to the standard, but as it is pleasant to it more, thinking out new ways of supply of materials on the course of the construction, changing a palette of walls and a roof, bringing into the extent of his intelligence, these or other innovations, in contrast, for example, from the invariable standards of the anthill.
  New projects and ideas develop the mind of a person, his insight, contribute to the most effective manifestation of various abilities during life, lead to the thought of beautifying life, that is, the culture of one's own beingness and beingness of the public.
  In the person both these antagonistic hypostasis of the consciousness in relation to himself and to the surrounding, are merged together. Therefore, they do not manifest themselves separately, but operate in a hidden way, and the degree of their domination depends on the degree of development of the highest consciousness in a person.
  And the person himself often cannot predict what in the next moment will become predominant for him: love or hatred, anger or sympathy, sincerity or hypocrisy, timidity or courage, discretion or recklessness.
  The lowest consciousness "feeds" itself by only sensations ones, that give it everything, including the harmony of existence, i.e. something acceptable and even pleasant in our understanding in a certain combination of feelings if, of course, to distract from fight of each being for survival. Therefore, it does not wish to lose the sensations at all.
  Similar the type of consciousness has natural egocentrism, automatically seeking to survive, no matter what.
  In the process of development of the living beings, this type of consciousness undergoes relatively minor changes, since it is not able to withdraw own basic property - an spontaneous desire for survival, based on the primordial activity of any living thing.
  The highest consciousness which is contained in the person at any level of its development is radical contrast to the lowest consciousness.
  In the presence of the highest consciousness in the living being, it begins as though to see the light, becoming not so much "included" completely into the environment, how many separated from it, and, so it acquires the opportunity to look at it and on oneself from the outside, to appreciate this ratio in attempts to consciously set to itself goals in mind certain shortcomings in one's own existence, which, in the opinion of this being, could be overcome, and to try to obtain implementation of goals in actions.
  All this obviously drops out of an instinctive and reflex sphere of action of the lowest consciousness, and even begins to contradict it as the highest consciousness often neglects utilitarian reasons, chasing something to unattainable, but kind for heart and mind.
  Being separated in self-consciousness from the environment, this being, in the course of time, in its development in relationship with the beings, which are like him, begins to feel the need for new forms, different from the primitive communal relations of still wild people, completely absorbed in the struggle for survival. In mutual communication this creature reaches such a limit that its various conscious aspirations begin to pour into significant changes in the environment, and not just in its use.
  From gathering, a person passes to cattle breeding, growing cereals, other forms of economic activity and the corresponding exchange of the labor products. Inequality, ownership, the struggle for the preservation and augmentation of property, for power and et cetera are arising, that in turn requires the establishment of some institutions of order to avoid chaos. As a result, the local states in the bosom of a growing and improving civilization were being formed.
  New forms and institutions, on the one hand, ensure the accelerated development of communities already in a structured form, that is, as the states with the bodies of governance, security, courts, etc., and on the other hand, do not allow to the states to fall apart because of invariably tearing-apart the last the contradictions.
  Despite a certain progress in development of human communities according to development of self-consciousness, the essence of human consciousness which is expressed in dualism, more precisely, in divergent life-aspirations of the lowest and highest form of consciousness does not disappear anywhere, and cannot be substantially modified.
  Both these parties of consciousness continuously conflict both in the person, and in the interpersonal relations: discontent with, visible inability to change quickly, the felt limitation of intelligence, abilities, etc.; the envy and hatred to competitors instantly would rip to shreds any human community if not the state with its institutes.
  Nevertheless, each person manifests also qualities of the highest consciousness which are expressed not only in the intellectual and production sphere, but also in inquisitiveness, various religious and cultural forms and also in the affectional relations, somehow: friendship, love, experiences for relatives, for the fatherland, etc.
  If the relationship between people on the basis of self-awareness slowly but steadily develops, then the lowest consciousness in the person remains unchanged.
  Therefore, the ideal persons do not appear, and the lowest consciousness, despite any form of its disguise, acts at any stage of the development of human consciousness, being expressed in deep-rooted egoism (egocentrism) - personal and corporate, hypocrisy (masking), suspiciousness (caution), contempt for people of other circle (mistrust to other communities), animal instincts concerning an opposite sex, etc.
  In itself, the development of self-consciousness in various human communities does not proceed at the same speed. Some local communities find themselves in more favorable conditions, while others, for example, due to natural conditions or isolation from other communities, are delayed in development.
  It was the local community of the main part of the population of Russia (peasants) that was actually divorced from culture, progress, and even fell into serfdom, becoming for the most part slaves, who could be traded.
  Therefore, the level of their self-consciousness was extremely low compared with the self-consciousness of the intelligentsia, and relatively weakly could resist the action of the animal consciousness, which for the most part opposes intentions self-consciousness.
  The dominance of such individuals in the bulk of the Russian population explains both Russia's lag in civilizational development, and the instinctive dislike of the common people to the educated stratum of society, which is characterized for the most part by a relatively high level of self-consciousness.
  But, paradoxically, it is precisely the comparatively high level of self-awareness of the educated layer of Russian society, which somewhat weakened the effect on the self-consciousness of this layer of animal consciousness, in contrast to the peasant population of Russia, also puts an almost impenetrable partition between the peasant population and the educated layer of society, which its representatives in different ways trying to overcome, realizing that nevertheless the people (the peasant mass) are the foundation of the nation, from which they themselves emerged, but could not do anything because of the slower increase in the level of self-consciousness of the people masses.
  The fact is that the growth of self-consciousness is produced not only by education, which in tsarist Russia was developed quite insufficiently, but also by a combination of favorable conditions, including not only cultural actions, but also the alleviation of domestic duties, the intensification of information flows aimed not to the stupefaction of the masses, but at the manifestation in them of interest in their own development, which requires a large number of free hours in a day. But this process of improving the culture of the masses is very difficult and time-consuming, that Russian educated individuals still do not understand.
  And all this, even in today's Russia, is not observed.
  If it is impossible to eradicate either of the two levels of consciousness in a person, then, of course, they must somehow interact and this interaction should imply something.
  It is clear that lower consciousness necessarily assumes egocentrism, as well as primary sensory experiences. It is the basis of passions, crude rationalism, habits and pragmatism. However, only it provides a natural combination (coexistence) of a person with the environment. In this respect, man is an animal, and there is nothing to be done.
  In turn, self-consciousness involves the distraction of a person from the world and rapprochement with the environment on a new basis - in a form the aspiration for a conscious change in the world. True, in this desire a person can go too far, believing himself to be the king of nature and its eternal leader, forgetting about his limitations both in the set of sensory organs and in the limitations of reason, memory, and life itself.
  Thus, egocentrism, rationalism and pragmatism, stemming from the lowest consciousness in a person, always struggle with high ideas of self-consciousness, which are characterized not only by purposeful aspirations to improve life in general and in particular, but also by an unselfish aspiration to universal harmony.
  What is the result?
  The result for a particular person, Russia and humanity as a whole is deplorable, which we observe firsthand.
  However, it is precisely this duality of consciousness of a person that provides a comparatively quick development of human communities in comparison with other natural communities, but uneven, both by territory and within communities, as philosophers have long noticed, pointing out the leading role the struggle of opposites in the conscious sphere of activity in the development of mankind.
  If we go back to the 19th century and the educated part of Russian society, then the enlightened layers of Russian society, to a large extent having absorbed the spirit of Voltaireanism, visiting Europe and getting acquainted with its cultural and technological innovations, democratic institutions, the high level of education of the entire population, which participated quite actively in the then public life and influencing to some extent upon the governance of the state, could not help but come to opinion on the possibility of a similar transformation of Russia [1, Ch. 2].
  However, the idea of such a transformation of Russia did not grow up on its own soil, but came from outside with all the consequences that follow from this circumstance: all the ideas that appeared at this time in the Russian educated stratum were borrowed, and in many ways inapplicable on Russian soil because of the other quality of masses of Russian people compared to European people, having developed technologically and culturally for almost a millennium on the basis of ancient culture, and in many ways have overcome the legacy of the feudal system.
  Therefore, it is not surprising that this idea was most effectively and effectively expressed in Russia not in the harmony of social or technological development, but in the literary work of individual individuals, having given the world of such geniuses as Pushkin [2], Leo Tolstoy [3], Dostoevsky [4], who on the contrasts of the pathetic Russian reality and the high humanistic values developed in Europe, how volcanoes, have threw out the burrowing flows of true feelings, ideas and aspirations - truly alive, because in them, unlike individualistic Europe, which was brought up on the reasonable selfishness of Hobbs [5], was reflected in general a literary successful attempt to combine the aspirations of an individual person with the interests of certain communities, which were so characteristic for Russia of that period, in the person of its peasant communities, or rather, the collectivist consciousness of the bulk of the population. The main thing, that they succeeded in, was to show the true aspirations of the human spirit in rather miserable bodies and confined circumstances through often fatal errors towards the most complete expression of oneself, despite irreplaceable losses and the obvious unattainability of the desired, without loss of fortitude, unlike, for example, heroes of Kafka [6].
  Such intense outburst, nowhere and never again repeated, did not arise by chance, but at the peak of the contradictions between the high ideas of humanism and the lack of rights of the peasant population of Russia, which could not but torment the sensitive souls of Russian geniuses of the word.
  However, geniuses are often similar to beautiful flowers that suddenly have grown on a pile of manure.
  So the cultural layer of Russia, which appeared under the conditions of a decaying, but still formidable autocracy over a clogged and disenfranchised population, could not but undergo decomposition. Educated youth (students), at first striving to at least somehow move the peasantry to culture and education, did not find understanding in this at peasants. From disappointment, youth either was being turned into ordinary educated specialists, either into servants-opportunists, or into active opponents of the autocracy, who did not really know how to deal with it, and therefore joining into terrorist activity or rewiring themselves to the seductive, but the fundamentally false, or rather utopian ideas of Marx, consisting in the inevitable triumph of communism with its sweet banks, or to the idea of replacing autocracy with a European democratic system at the complete unpreparedness of the majority of the population to democracy and freedom, that, however, it is also characteristic of the present time - with the country 's clear desire to dumping again into state of authoritarianism.
  The main part of Russian intellectuals found themselves in a kind of swamp, since the ideas of communism or obvious groveling before the authorities were not close to them, but they had to somehow survive in the harsh conditions of tsarist Russia
  As a result, unlike other developed countries of the world, where the majority of intellectuals are turned to their specific responsibilities and most of all care about their own well-being, in Russia, for the most part, has formed mainly the layer not of intellectuals (specialists), but - the layer of humiliated, offended educated people - humiliated by the autocracy of the Romanovs, and later on of Stalin and other "autocrats," who had to endure and somehow adapt to this autocracy, and withal offended by unsuccessful attempts, beginning from Decembrists to the present day to undertake at least something effective and at the same time positive for all segments of the population in this unwieldy Power.
  They themselves called themselves intelligentsia, apparently, in order to distinguish themselves from ordinary educated officials by some independence in their opinions and aspirations, but implicitly acknowledging their own weakness in decisive actions, because they doubted everything.
  An honest and knowledgeable representative of intelligentsia in Russia, who did not understand the essence of the relationship between the ordinary people and the cultural layer, and therefore hesitating all time, is helpless and indecisive in the decisive periods of history, which, in particular, was demonstrated by A.F. Kerensky in 1917.
  Some part of the intelligentsia pinning hopes on extremism to quickly solve the problem of organizing a harmonious human community. This part is being separated from the intelligentsia, despising the latter for its perpetual hesitations. In particular, this part believes that the entire course of history follows the laws of social development, discovered by Marx: to these extremists belonged Lenin and Bolsheviks under his leadership.
  They exactly are known to have contributed to the plunge of Russia into the abyss of a cruel adventurous experiment.
  By the way, at the end of his life, Lenin also has understood this, turning the country back to capitalism in the form of NEP (New economic policy).
  The rigidity of the tsarist regime instilled the most intelligentsia to automatic adaptability, thanks to which it acquired the ability to get used to any regime - be it the Romanovs, Lenin, Stalin, Brezhnev, etc., decomposing inevitably in progress picking up crumbs from the "authority pie".
  The habit of hovering in high spheres outside of rational practical actions, or the unsuccessful and even catastrophic attempts at fundamental positive transformations of oneself and society in own radical branch, impatience in everything, laziness and neglect to the lapotniks (peasants), failure to communicating with them, fear of losing handouts from the authorities, did not favor the inclusion of the intelligentsia in persistent and heavy job, but brought up it to the endless pity to itself, sterile criticism at excessive talkativeness, a tendency to shameless compromises with the authorities in order to preserve own relatively well-fed existence, that, for example, and now is clearly manifested in election fraud, the main decorators of which are such representatives of intelligentsia as teachers [7].
  A representative of intelligentsia in Russia always wants something good for the people, but at the same time, with rare exceptions, he is not able to sacrifice his own well-being, since you need to live - family, children, the habit to certain comfort, etc., but the masses ordinary people, which he does not understand, considering them secretly resembling a cattle, who does not like to read smart books, although he himself has not read Kant, Marx or Berkeley and is not going to read, picking up someone else's thoughts on Internet.
  The passivity in thoughts and the lack of one"s own fruitful ideas specifically for the Russian people, even at such radicals, who came out of the intelligentsia and were distinguished by their extraordinary resourcefulness and dexterity in in matters, but - pure adventurism and irresponsibility, by incomprehension of the essence of things and events, like Lenin and Trotsky, led them to the primitive assimilation of other people's ideas with the unsuccessful attempt to use these even generally unsuitable ideas on Russian soil with innumerable victims of ordinary people as a result.
  The characteristic confused in mind the leading public figures of Russia, the lack of understanding of the enormous lag of the self-awareness of the masses of people from the self-awareness of an insignificant cultural layer, the temptation to obtain a quick positive result had led to the catastrophe 1917, and then-1991.
  Therefore, at present, the most advanced representatives of the modern intelligentsia of Russia, who in practice have understood the futility of both the socialist and capitalist world order, are either at a moral impasse, or have switched to the banal robbery of the people for a "happier" life in the more comfortable capitalist West, having arranged to themselves something like the feast during the plague.
  Thus, the people of intellectual labor in Russia, both externally and internally, are divided into intellectuals in the form of educated philistines, open servants of power, various kinds of oppositionists to power, as well as the suffering, but futile in the sense of the real impact on the authoritarian power, intelligentsia, who do not really understand where go, what to do, and therefore prone to compromise, down to joining compradors, Most of all, such figures are among various managers and businessmen, since the very nature of their acts in direct contact the authoritarian regime makes them unprincipled, and least of all among students who, on the contrary, are massively prone to informal-opposition actions.
  Along with that, the intellectuals who are mainly interested in the effectiveness of their own labor are found in the maximum number among scientists and artists, the most talented of whom long operate abroad.
  2. The people masses in Russia.
  Forever half-starved, clogged, illiterate slave - this is the main representative of Russia of the XIX century. The reform of Alexander II, which freed the peasants from serfdom, made them eternal debtors to their former owners, since they were left in debt for the land transferred to them, and the debt was such that, as a rule, was problematic for an ordinary peasant to pay for it.
  Illiterate or semi-literate peasant fed on fairy tales, songs, epics, biblical stories, ritual actions, old customs, being extremely far from the busy city life, politics, receiving a minimum of information, which withal was in the form rumors and gossip. That is, his life was pretty close to plant life, and so he would have remained far from technological, social and cultural progress, if not for his regular autumn-winter "trips" to the city to earn extra money in accordance with one or another skill, working, as a rule, in artels like a rural community.
  The stratification of the peasant communities after the reform of 1861 led to the outflow of a significant number of peasants into the cities to factories. Thus, the information flows for the masses became more intense, but familiarizing with the culture was reduced mainly to fairgrounds on and drunkenness, as a means to forget oneself after hard work.
  Nevertheless, the people masses in their peasant base had and has subjectivity, expressed in reflection and corresponding conscious actions, having both a collectivist and personal character, which is evident from the opposition not only of the whole mass of the people, but and each individual both to enemies and nature (epic sagas, the taking on themselves of the resist to Napoleon's and Hitler's troops, and victory over them, despite the apparent weakness of the governing and organizing structures, that does not coordinate with the assertion that the people masses have only social instincts with a complete lack of subjectivity), with the prevalence of the first property {collectivism) due to the specifics of peasant labor and survival in difficult conditions of short summers and cold winters. Therefore, his self-consciousness differed and differs mainly in archaic-collectivist specifics, manifested in the form of communal labor.
  At a certain period, from this initial self-consciousness with the rudiments of an understanding of self, which could not have been other in the break from social development, technological innovations and high art, stands out that part of self-consciousness, usually represented by the managing layer, which captures others - mostly the external (European) flows of information, transforming them into a cultural and technological upsurge. Representatives of this level of self-consciousness over time, in an intensive transformation of around them everything , increase this level by acquiring an already voluminous personal awareness of oneself with the understanding of the possibility of a more independent existence - outside the framework of a cohesive collective, in which obedience to collective decisions and old-time customs is immutable, eventually having formed kind of advanced detachment engaged in organizational, cultural and managerial activities.
  In Russia, this new layer was called the intelligentsia, apparently in order to distinguish this educated layer of the nation from the representatives of the authorities, although in fact all structures of power were staffing not from someone, but from the most educated people of various specializations, only a part of them are engaged direct management of the state, while others conduct affairs by education of the population, care for health of the population, provide the state"s technical and technological development, scientific research, and the protection of the state, and conversations about the intelligentsia generally as the conscience of the nation are empty, since the vast majority of the intelligentsia in Russia was a typical servants of the tsarist regime with the appropriate ranks and monetary content.
  In Russia, for the above reasons of historical development, which resulted in a significant cultural and technological lag behind the countries of Europe, the gap between the parts of the self-consciousness of the nation, personified in the peasantry and the nobility-raznochinsky layer, increased to gigantic proportions, since for the peasants, life realities did not undergo significant changes, but for the managing layer of Russia, under the influence of European culture and technological innovations, the realities of life became as close as possible to the European ones, acquiring not the collectivist, but, to a greater extent, the individualistic character, peculiar of the European self-consciousness, thereby erecting an almost impassable barrier between these two now different parts of the single initially self-consciousness.
  The people of mental labor in Russia, beginning with Decembrists, wanted for the country the same forms of democracy and liberty as in Europe, while the mass of the peasant population still believed that under the god is the Christian sovereign - his anointed, and under this sovereign - all others, and they must obey the ruler from God, and in this series the peasants remain the last - after the landlord.
  In the future, this situation in Russia, in spite of all the changes, did not swapped substantially - the people did not want to take the burden of management, delegating it to the authoritarian ruler, still not trusting the democratic institutions, which, as we have already seen, are quite quickly in Russia are turning into a talking room and a means of enriching people's representatives.
  Therefore, the "good" in the form of democratic institutions, which was being imposed by the intelligentsia on the people in Russia for almost two hundred years, turns out to be evil both for the people themselves and for the cultural and governing layers of the country: significant parts of them in the struggle for this "good" were destroyed only for that to return to the same authoritarianism in one form or another.
  In other words, the low level of self-consciousness of the people masses in Russia, which is based on collectivism and Christian-pagan traditions, that is, recognizing the certain personality as the divine representative and father of the nation, thereby positioning himself as the personality in last place, prefers paternalism and fairness to liberty in public relations according to concepts developed over centuries, and not according to laws, and these concepts were clearly others, differed in this respect from the European order, and these masses will not come to an consensus with the intelligentsia in relation to civil liberties and democracy until there is a convergence of the levels of self-consciousness of the people masses and the intelligentsia up to a value that will make it possible for them to understand each other. And this can happen only during a long economic and cultural upsurge, when free time, appears thanks to technological advances, will be used by each individual, based on their own interests and needs, without any pressure whatsoever. That is, people will not be divided, as at present, into individuals of mental and physical labor, where the former despise, or at least condescend to the latter, but they will be divided only according to their interests, doing what everyone can do better, just experiencing a specific interest in this matter.
  That is, rapprochement, not opposition to each other of the people masses and intelligentsia, can occur only when the people masses will come, As has already happened with the intelligentsia, to the dominance of the highest consciousness over the lowest consciousness, although, must be said, that even the level of the self-consciousness of the intelligentsia of Russia due to its relatively short-term existence with continuous borrowing of culture, Ideas and even fashion from Europe, has not acquired a stability, and self-consciousness - of an original character, distinguishing besides for the most part by the groveling both before autocracy and before the West [8].
  At such gap between the levels of self-consciousness of the people and the intelligentsia, as well as the conformism of most of the intelligentsia itself, the introduction in Russia of democratic institutions and statement of the pretentions on liberty, by now have led the people masses of Russia towards brazen and open robbing the fellow tribesmen by the "democratically" elected representatives and officials of all stripes, as well as in the substitution of the interests of the nation by these same figures by their own interests, backed up by relevant laws, for example, by the introduction of the free circulation of currency, which allows tens of billions of dollars to be freely exported abroad, moreover both the elected representatives of the people with their primitive considerations, which boils down to the acquisition of power and money, and the representatives of the intelligentsia, who have come to power, unite in this wildness, and at a fast pace destroy the country, and the enemies of Russia applaud to these acts.
  If we turn to the 20th century, then, compared to the 19th century, little has changed for an ordinary Russian person: the remnants of the peasantry fell into collective farms, which are mostly caricatured likeness to the rural communities. The others former peasants found themselves in factories with strict discipline and an extended working day under the yoke of all-encompassing propaganda for the struggle for a bright communist tomorrow, which never comes, but which, nevertheless, has to be earned by hard labor and by the military struggle with neighbors.
  In this struggle, the Russian people suffered innumerable, but in vain sacrifices, since the power built on a utopian basis collapsed relatively quickly.
  The peasant, deprived of property, excluding the communal property, so has not received it, since it was taken away from him all time - first by a socialist state, then - by the state represented by oligarchs, as well as all kinds of state and semi-state associations, leaving to the people stalls in the streets, that is, continuously deceiving the people in various ways - from supposedly free distribution of land, the near coming of communism, the issuance, in fact, of "phony" vouchers and other unfulfilled promises.
  So the main property of the country has remained under socialism in the hands of state bureaucrats, and then they have divided it between themselves and "oligarchs" appointed by them.
  The difference between the current population of Russia and the previous consists only in its consumption of cheap television shows instead of fairs, and to drunkenness it added narcomania.
  In other words, if the level of self-consciousness of the bulk of the population of Russia has risen, then - not significantly.
  Therefore, the people of Russia, represented in the vast majority by recent peasants, are not ready for democracy, which involves the initiative of the population, the establishment of effective feedback between the power structures and ordinary residents, which is impossible with complete passivity of the population, which paternalistically hopes on a strong personality - it, finally, must understand the people's aspirations, fix everything, but for now let her let us live in peace, without especial overworking.
  True, a certain part of the sane persons, more precisely, people who did not succumb to laziness and propaganda of life without normal operation or to temptation of the work in force structures, that don't produce anything, is trying to leave the country for interesting activity in order to use your abilities, and these people - mainly highly qualified intellectuals-specialists, and not semi-educated Russian representatives of intelligentsia.
  Therefore, the weather in Russia is currently being done not by intellectuals, but by semi-intellectuals - recent immigrants, as a rule, from peasants, having still rather low level of self-consciousness and therefore recognizing only the laws of power, money and strength, who have made their way to the upper strata of bureaucracy, where special knowledge is not required, but there are required: the ability to maneuver in bureaucratic labyrinths and the ability to please the authorities, stealing at the same time - exactly therefore they decided to engage such boring matter. It was they who, using the power of authority and the necessary connections, not knowing or not paying attention to the existence of the highest values worked out during the existence of civilization and culture, primitively understanding the time of life, as the accumulation of the largest number of different properties, have seized oil and gas fields, forest plots, mines, agricultural plantations, banks, etc., quietly earning billions and carefully transferring them to foreign banks, offshore companies, etc., but not investing them in the development of the country, that is, turning into compradors who, for own peace of mind, dump crumbs from their table to various servants from the intelligentsia, who are singing for them glory on TV and in the press and in the press at complete non-resistance of the fooled masses of people.
  So, an example of the West, where it is customary to think that only a thinking, comprehensively educated and moral person can express national interests and aspirations through a system of representative democracy, does not work in Russia.
  In Russia, in the ranks of "representative democracy" and bureaucracy of all stripes, operate just irresponsible and immoral individuals who are brazenly robbing their country, despising their people, dreaming of getting away with the stolen quickly to warm countries, but very loyal to their superiors.
  By the way, the West, in the person of its deep-thinking scientists-sociological, exaggerates the role of the personality in history, since even a thinking, comprehensively educated and moral person is often mistaken, unconsciously deceiving his voters, often going to meet ill-conceived desires of the voters. What can we say about the realities of representative authorities in the West, where representatives of the people are very far from ideal?
  In fact, the main role in accelerating the development of the nation is played not by the personality or the masses of the people, but by the level of self-consciousness of the masses, which should be close enough to the level of self-consciousness of the ruling and cultural layers of the nation, and this last, in turn, should be as high as possible and moral. Only in this case is feedback possible between them with a positive outcome.
  Otherwise, the course of history is slowing down and there are even obvious kickbacks, as, for example, it happened more than once in Russia, and also happened in Germany when Hitler came to power democratically.
  At the same time, self-consciousness, or the highest consciousness is not able to completely dominate in any person due to the presence of the lowest (animal) consciousness in it, which at the critical moments of human existence can temporarily displace any higher consciousness for self-preservation, which undoubtedly indicates the illusory of the emergence of an ideal human person.
  That is, in this respect, a person from the people masses and the most advanced intellectual differ little from each other - both, but at different speeds is driven by the struggle between the lowest and highest forms of consciousness in the human mind. And there can be no equality between people, since equilibrium is a synonym for stagnation. Therefore, the worst inequality can still lead to certain changes and give the people the opportunity to come to a more positive state, while stagnation does not lead anywhere.
  However, the course of history is basically determined by the growth of information flows, which only increase exponentially, leading to the information collapse, that is, to the situation of impossibility for the human brain with all its resources to digest the incoming information even with the help of the computers, that becomes redundant, which leads to fatal errors and irreversible changes in the functioning of the civilizational system [8].
  But still, it makes sense to examine in more detail specific facts, which in themselves can testify to the true role of the intelligentsia for Russia.
  3. The role of the intelligentsia.
  It is pointless only to speculate about the role that the intelligentsia played for the people and the country. This has already been done countless times with different accents. Therefore, let's consider its influence on everything that happened over more than two centuries, based on the facts known to all. At the same time, it should be noted that this part of the people itself cannot be either bad or good, but is only as the one, which came out in the course of historical development, or rather, the development of its self-consciousness in the appropriate conditions.
  The Russian intelligentsia of the late XIX and early XX centuries had a high opinion of themselves, believing that she would be able to somehow eliminate the tsarist regime and arrange a parliamentary republic in the manner of developed Western countries, if, of course, to exclude the extremist wing in the person of the Left Socialist- Revolutionaries and Bolsheviks-Marxists.
  At the peak of the people's discontent over the protracted war, the meaning of which the peasants in soldier's overcoats did not understand, the intellectuals from power structures and intellectuals from Duma with the approval of the entire intelligentsias in February 1917 managed to remove the weak and unfortunate monarch-commander from power.
  However, they failed to agree with the people masses in the person of Soviets on the gradual establishment of a democratic system, as well as among themselves, on the forms of this system. In the course of the slowing down affairs and the impatience of the people, extremists led by Lenin, who had long dreamed of reforming of the state in accordance with the principles of Marx, raised their heads sharply.
  Having promised land to the peasants and the end of the war, the Bolsheviks drove off the indecisive Provisional Government, for which no one had initially stood up for it, have transferred all property to themselves, have ended the war with the Germans and did not prevent the peasants from seizing the land, which was subsequently taken from them.
  The intelligentsia in its bulk and its allies, by which were all opponents of the Bolsheviks, with the support of the Entente powers, began to actively resist the new dictatorial regime. After some hesitation, the people masses from the two evils chose a more familiar one, namely: autocracy - even the Bolsheviks, and not an incomprehensible for them democratic republic. This course of events over time led to the establishment in Russia even more cruel, than the tsarist regime, of Asian despotism, the purposes of which were absolutely utopian, but the means in the form of complete control of national property and human resources under the slogans of building socialism in a hostile environment were enormous, as a result of which the Bolsheviks managed to contrast themselves with the rest of the world for a short time. However, the country broke down in that incredible effort and gradually fell into decline, and the people suffered incalculable losses, becoming a victim of the manic aspirations of the Bolshevik and then Communist leaders to world domination.
  Thus, the first attempt of the intelligentsia to influence the course of history as they considered it expedient and most reasonable did not work, the "dark" masses of the people preferred the autocracy of the Bolshevik experimenters. As a result, both of them have suffered during the implementation of the utopian project for the construction of communism, as, incidentally, the Bolsheviks themselves, - mostly representatives of intellectuals-extremists; for the most part they were executed or exiled with their replacement by a new bureaucracy out of the people, quickly trained in the educational institutions specially organized for semi-literate "proletarians" such as the Industrial Academy, whose typical representative was future head of the USSR Nikita Khrushchev.
  The next attempt of the intelligentsia to leave now the decaying communist authoritarian power to the parliamentary republic was made in 1991, but, like in 1917, the state bureaucracy in the person of the same repainted party apparatchiks at the silence of the indifferent people quickly intercepted the power, effectively removing Parliament from it, having decided to take advantage of the remaining resources of the country for their own enrichment, again having deceived the people masses, like the Bolsheviks in 1917, but already allegedly by the need for some destructive at first reforms, in order to associate the country with a developed and rich Western community.
  As a result, the collapse of the state began at such pace that had to go back again to the authoritarian regime, which still exists with all its negative features, the main of which is not corruption (it is a consequence), but the rejection from development, that gradually transferred Russia into the category of the raw-material power controlled by compradors, whose families and capitals (financial resources) are in the "happy" West.
  As it can be seen, the intelligentsia played a significant role in this moral fall and the total decline of the State and statehood, and the intelligentsia has not yet understood what people masses it is dealing with, and how it is necessary to interact with them, as well as it found itself with a fair share of rottenness, in fact supporting the looting of the country for the sake of own well-being.
  However, in fairness, it should be noted that the Russian intelligentsia was purely objectively in no way able to gain a foothold on the borders of Western-style parliamentary democracy either in 1917 or in 1991, because too low and very slowly changing level the level of collectivist self-consciousness of Russia"s main population still gravitates precisely to the autocracy of the leader, no matter how he is called and no matter how unworthy he may be.
  Now it is worthwhile to examine in more detail the relations between the intelligentsia and the peoples of Russia of the 19th, 20th centuries and the present.
  It is believed that the intelligentsia in Russia, as the most educated and largely highly moral layer of the population, is its advanced detachment, in every possible way trying to pull the mass of people up to its level, caring by all available means when participating in management about wellbeing of the people, in the person of teachers - about a high educational level , in the person of medical personnel - about high-quality medical care for the population without dividing it into privileged groups.
  However, in all designated periods, essentially, the opposite picture is revealed.
  The people of Russia in the 19th century remained in the majority by illiterate or semi-literate due to the small number of sufficiently well-trained teachers, which made it difficult for it to access higher education, social elevators and general development.
  It is generally difficult to speak positively about health care: its coverage and the level of training of doctors was extremely low, epidemics and tuberculosis dominated, as a result of which mortality was high, and the average life expectancy of the population was about forty years.
  The managerial staff of Russia was poorly trained in terms of effectiveness of the management and organization; the entire management system was bureaucratized to the extreme and even, as in Peter Great's time, all employees were assigned ranks in accordance with the ranking table.
  Thereby, the representatives of the Russian intelligentsia of that time were part of a practically closed corporation, and in the vast majority they regularly served the estate system of the autocratic power, receiving relatively good money content. And this autocratic power continuously humiliated the people masses with medieval oppression, kept them in poverty, a half-starved and unpromising existence.
  The role of the intelligentsia in the turning point of 1917 actually have been come down to the fact that it has picked up the mood of the peasant masses in soldier's overcoats and with rifles, dissatisfied with the war and at the same time the unresolved land issue, but it did not penetrate into the essence of the people's demands and it didn't understand, how to organize the power to meet their demands, hereupon practically immediately having yielded power to extremists.
  For almost the entire 20th century, the people in Russia spent, participating in a utopian communist experiment, in the shameful and terrible conditions of actual satrapy under the rule of poorly trained for the management people, and ideas that lead d to nowhere, which in reality resulted in a fantastic waste of the country's human and other resources, continuous wars, conflicts and confrontations on ideological grounds, the constant poverty of the population, and ended with the collapse of the state and its disappearance from the world map called USSR.
  The population losses in this fight against windmills were such that they have called into question the further normal development of the country.
  In this dubious global experiment-enterprise of the adventurous sense, if to remove its ideological shell and seductive slogans, the intelligentsia of Russia took an active part, composing the basis of the Communist Party, hiding all its doubts, and helping to fool the people with false ideas using quite vile propaganda.
  After the events of 1991, the intelligentsia, without much struggle, again delegated power to their most corrupt representatives, having contributed to the formation of a bureaucratic-oligarchic system, and having found themselves in its minions. This system deprived the population of all monetary accumulations and actually transferred the country to international monopolies for use.
  The entire infrastructure with almost complete destruction of the industry was destroyed. All that remained was the extractive industry to supply the world's leading countries with energy resources in exchange for industrial and food products, as well as - to supply the same intellectuals and crooks from the people masses who have got into the oligarchs and officials with millions and billions of dollars, which have immediately being transferred to foreign financial institutions, and not investing in the development of the country, that is, putting it in the position of the actual colony of the West.
  Naturally, such open lawlessness has led to the establishment of an authoritarian system that brought some order to the country and raised the standard of living of the population, but this was mainly due to the high price of oil, not development. Along with that the corruption in all levels of power, inaction of laws, the lack of separation of powers and their feedback to the population, as well as the created imbalances in the national economy were not eliminated.
  The quality of education, due to the lack of need for professionals of high level, fell sharply, which was aggravated to a large extent by the reforms, carried out by the equally advanced representatives of the intelligentsia, consciously or not, but who actually overlap the access to higher education for main part of the population in connection with the transfer of it for the most part to the paid basis, by giving to the population along with that, television programs promoting the most base products of mass culture, designed to stupefy the masses to the level of cattle.
  The health care reform has significantly worsened the population's access to medicine, increasing the trend of its decline.
  It should say about the management structures represented by intellectuals, not by anyone still, since the current system is not designed for the development of the country, but for its use in the international monopolistic division of labor. Exactly for this the managing layer of the "advanced" intelligentsia receives its bonuses in the form of permission to make deposits in Western banks and live families in developed countries of the world.
  All management deficiencies are compensated by developed corruption at all levels, which intellectuals of all sorts try not to notice it, but which also makes a significant contribution to reducing the country's budget, which has already become smaller than the budget of California (US state).
  Thus, the intelligentsia of Russia in the modern world was unable to break beyond selfishness and helplessness with respect to upholding the interests of the masses of the population, yielding to the corporate interests of managers from their own environment, receiving some bonuses or promises, not contributing to the development of the country and people, but destroying both.
  The explanation of this phenomenon lies in the historical development of the country, where everyone who broke out of the dark, clogged mass did not want to return there, and, as a rule, inclined oneself to compromise and subordinate to unprincipled and corrupt managers, or, if it was possible, has been trying to become a manager, breaking away from the masses in their interests, guided by self-serving-imperious or, at best, utopian intentions.
  High values, banal patience, alas, turned out to be inaccessible to the recently somehow formed immigrants from the people masses, who broke away from them, and at the same time retained his low-lying natural properties of survival with a primitive understanding of the world values. That is, the self-consciousness of the Russian intelligentsia in its mass has not risen to a level that begins to significantly prevail over the lowest consciousness.
  It should also be noted that the low level of self-consciousness of the Russian intelligentsia, which comparatively short time was developing largely under the outer influence, is manifested in the fact that its most active layers tend into power structures, despite the fact that they perfectly represent the rottenness and meanness of power in Russia, only for in order to take advantage of the benefits provided there and actually legalized bribes in exchange for loyalty, at this, they constant humble themselves before higher ones, that is characteristic of any government structures of the authoritarian regimes.
  The rest of the active part of the intelligentsia, which could not fit in far from dimensionless sphere of power structures, places oneself in power structures, which under the authoritarian regime become for the most part punitive organs with all the ensuing consequences, that is, deep down they must despise themselves, if, of course, not completely numb.
  Other representatives of the intelligentsia are either distributed among other well-known niches, without resentment especially at the corruption orders prevailing there, or, if there is a sufficient level of education, specialization and abilities, emigrate from the country, further weakening its intellectual, creative and general development potential.
  Thus, the presented invoice clearly shows how the slowdown in the development of the country for a long time, compared to neighbors developing at a faster pace significantly slowed down the development of self-consciousness the people masses and the educated part, standing out from them, and this educated part, paradoxically, is mostly negative influenced the development of the country, having reduced the population as a result, along with a decline in its quality, at this, significant part of the intelligentsia of Russia turned either into compradors, or into humiliated servants of unfit power, or into a dumb herd without any future.
  The rest of the population, not related to mental work, is only fighting for survival and waiting for better times, without undertaking anything.
  Nevertheless, the upcoming world cataclysms will probably awaken in the Russian people the collectivist consciousness that has not yet disappeared in them, which will save not only Russia but the rest of the world from complete decay and death [8].
  
  Bibliography
  
  1. Nizovtsev Y. M. The United States against Russia. Whether everything is so obvious here? Amazon. 2015. (C) Nizovtsev Yury.
  2. А.С. Пушкин. Полное собрание сочинений в 20 томах. Том 7. Борис Годунов. СПб, "Наука". 1999. История Пугачевского бунта. Издательство II отделения Собственной Е.И.В. канцелярии.1834.
  3. Л.Н. Толстой. Полное собрание сочинений. Том 5. Анна Каренина. М. 1958.
  4. Ф.М. Достоевский. Собрание сочинений в 15 томах. Том 10. Братья Карамазовы. Л., Издательство "Наука", 1988.
  5. Гоббс Т. Избранные произведения. Т. 2. М., 1964.
  6. Кафка Ф. Замок. Превращение. СПб. Издательство "Азбука-классика". 2005. ISBN 5-352-01446-0
  7. Мережковский Д.С. Полное собрание сочинений. Том XIV. Грядущий хам. Товарищество Сытина И.Д. Москва. 1914 г.
  8. Nizovtsev Y. M. Communes as a result of crash of all civilization. Amazon. 2014. (C) Nizovtsev Yury.
  
  Chapter 12.
  What is the mystery of genius, still unsolved?
  
  Could a genius of thoughts and feelings emerge from primates? The answer is obvious. This means that there are certain potencies in a person, allowing to solve the problem of genius. On the other hand, geniuses among individuals is impossible to project and grow up at all diligence in any way, and they themselves somehow manifest, but is extremely rare. What peculiar properties promote manifestation of genius and in what it is expressed?
  I
  Recognized, that geniuses best of all manage to get new and non-obvious knowledge. To same, the mass of various signs of genius is listed.
  However, all this, in essence, is about nothing, because it doesn"t say what specifically ensures the acquisition of new knowledge and how can geniuses get it so effectively? What signs have knowledge obtained ин the genius, unlike, for example, from knowledge, received by the talent.
  In other words, a lot of correct words and in general much interesting are told about genius and properties of the genius, but to this day remain not clear: the source of genius, the driving force of genius, the main incentives of genius, the main method of achievement by the genius of the adequate result, the main signs of expression of genius.
  Nothing intelligible about these peculiar properties, which necessarily accompany genius, is not said, except for the presence of obligatory natural endowments, extraordinary intelligence, favorable conditions for the manifestation of genius and the results that are recognized out of the ordinary.
  Moreover, from all that has been written about geniuses, a picture emerges of a certain fallout of geniuses from the ranks of humanity, their perfect singularity, which is far from being so, since many geniuses were called to action by current events - means, they were already ready to manifest their properties to a certain extent.
  Again, there is still no explanation of the boundary separating genius from talent.
  All this vagueness, as well as the banality of definitions of geniuses and talents, forced us to comment on this matter.
  Indeed, how many can reason, that talent is set of outstanding abilities, a high degree of endowments in certain sphere of activity, and genius is the highest degree of talent development associated with the creation of qualitatively new, unique creations, the discovery of previously unknown ways of creativity?!
  These words indicate only one thing: the mediocrity of their writers.
  Let's see what else they talk about genius, and it's easy to check, looking at the Internet.
  Some claim that genius is determined under the results of a person"s work on creating something that is absent in nature and society, and that are out of a range of known achievements.
  It is absolutely fair, but is unclear at the expense of what nevertheless similar results are achieved.
  Some researchers of this phenomenon (a number of the directions of the structurally-functional theory of genius) believe, the genius is a result of huge diligence, persistence, patience, determination and will power (the theory of efficiency).
  The fact that this statement is not serious, is evident from the fact that it does not mention such mandatory properties of creativity, which are characteristic not only of geniuses, but simply for people of creative activity, for example, some endowment, sufficient level of intelligence, education, experience, aspiration to inspiration, etc.
  There is also the consideration that at the heart of genius lies exorbitant passions, love for the world, for people, for own work, and an irresistible desire to learn the truth (the passionary theory).
  All these properties, rather, can be attributed to the great opera singers, and not to geniuses of various kinds.
  Other structuralists believe that a genius is a person with extraordinary intellectual power, exceptional and extraordinary mental abilities (the intellectualist theory).
  All these remarkable signs are peculiar, for example, to outstanding chess players, who have nothing to do with obtaining extraordinary (non-obvious) knowledge, dealing only with a combinatorial mind game.
  There is also a rather strange consideration regarding genius: it is based on a passionate desire to improve everything that exists and constantly follow the highest standards of excellence (the perfectionist theory).
  Properties of this sort belong to all idealists, but idealists great multitude, though, of course, and geniuses are in some way idealists, since they largely neglect pragmatics.
  Who only doesn"t show own rather limited ideas about genius?!
  Here, there are also theorists relying on attribution, that is, being lumped together of all more or less clear signs of great persons, pointing herewith the extraordinary development of one of them.
  Their definition of genius: phenomenality, limit and extreme level of development of abilities, domination and extraordinary development of one of the qualities or mental processes of a person.
  To gain these remarkable properties can only, in their opinion, by increased attention, lively perception and impressionability, intuition (they do not define it in any way), unusual imagination and fantasy ideas, the ability to think well, great experience and perfect memory (apparently, poor geniuses should be regretted only as they are forced by that memory to remember all bad for them all rest of life).
  Theorists of suprematism are relied on this remarkable list, believing certainly to achieve thanks to optimum "binding" of the specified advantages of the ingenious manifestations.
  Following these considerations, you can easily identify individuals, who can compete under the mathematical account with the computer; can have the incredible imagination, on what big swindlers are capable, the impressionability of schoolgirls, and at the same time are capable to argue of any subject very competently, but geniuses among them were not found yet.
  Some enthusiasts-researchers of the process of creativity also believe that genius, rather, - the highest level of intelligence, depending on the enormous memory, comprehensive education, critical abilities and self-development of a person. Under these conditions and gifts, a genius will certainly have to come.
  If everything was so simple, then geniuses would be "grown" like chickens in an incubator by artificial selection according to these characteristics.
  There are pundits who consider extraordinary endowments from birth to be the main thing for a genius, that is, a rare combination of fields and subfields of the brain's subcortex, giving or extraordinary sagacity, characteristic of sages, as well as recognized writers and critics, or giving the special sensitivity to sounds and their overtones, so important for composers. or the extraordinary ability to feel the slightest shades of colors, without which it is impossible to become an artist, and the rest will follow with diligence, education and experience.
  Indeed, such, gifted by nature people, are recruited a lot of always. They are even specially selected at competitions and olympiads, special schools are arranged for them, but the recognized geniuses out of this large number of child prodigies was not getting, behind the rarest exception (Mozart).
  There are those who claim that a genius appears as a result of an accidental combination of circumstances, in which any intelligent and gifted person can rise and produce something extraordinary - in the manner of Napoleon.
  The reliance on accidental set of circumstances does not take into account the mass of human features, without which, in any case, genius could not be manifested in any way. The same Napoleon had a number of extraordinary abilities, including a unique memory, high speed of decision-making based on the ability to adequately summarize the data, enormous ability to work, etc.
  It is also believed that if life requires a genius, then he will certainly appear from the masses of the population and will think up demanded by this life - it is only necessary to strain and be allocated to someone. Whoever is able to do it in favorable circumstances will be recognized as a genius. And no matter as far as he is silly or clever. The main thing is perseverance, the ability to find and unite like-minded people around you on the basis of, perhaps, the wrong idea, keep on the wave of success, not allowing to remove yourself, skillfully to use the known practices and ideas of the colleagues, receiving the desired result. Lenin and Stalin managed all this, for example.
  Here already the matter is being resolved by history. In particular, it is impossible to recognize Lenin and Stalin as ingenious after years, since the social structure, respectively, laid and built by them, historically quickly enough failed.
  Also curious are statements about geniuses of such expert on life as the famous German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer famous for the aphorisms and strange interest in will, assigning the role of representations for the rest.
  The viewpoint of Schopenhauer about genius come down to the following.
  "Genius ... consists in excessive intellectual surplus which can find for itself the application only in that to head to the general beginnings of being" (A. Schopenhauer. The World as Will and Representation. Volume 2. Chapter XXXI. On Genius).
  "In the private constantly to see the general - exactly in it and consists the main line of the genius" (ibid.).
  All great theoretical creations, whatever they may be, are realized in such a way that the one who begins them, all forces of the spirit direct to one point in which he connects them and concentrates to such extent strongly, firmly and exclusively that all other world for him disappears" (ibid.).
  "The talent can create that above creative abilities of others, but not above their receptivity. That is why he immediately finds connoisseurs. On the contrary, creations of the genius go beyond not only creative abilities of other people, but also their susceptibility therefore they also do not recognize him" (ibid.).
  Thus, Schopenhauer sees signs of genius in an extraordinary giftedness, alienating genius from the rest of the public; in a decisive tendency towards generalization, the high concentration. In addition, he notes the discrepancy between the products of the activity of a genius and the current epoch, which is not perceiving his works.
  It should be noted that the specified signs of genius are absolutely not enough, especially as Schopenhauer does not open the nature of genius, that is, a source of genius , the driving force of a genius, the main incentives of genius, the main way of achievement of adequate result by the genius, but shows only the well-known need for the genius to have these or those natural endowments, which for some reason is associated by him with a high level of intelligence, that far not so; the detachment of the genius from public and the current time; his synthetic abilities and ability to concentrate on a problem.
  These signs are rather commonplace, since, for example, among composers and scholars is a lot of clever people with the ability to concentrate excellently on solving the problem posed, and quite good to generalize the obtained data in the form of a symphony or dissertation. There are millions of these persons, and no more than a few hundred the geniuses have been manifested for all the time of existence of civilization.
  However, Schopenhauer quite right noted the lack of a coincidence of creations of the genius with his era, but explained this phenomenon purely psychologically. However, behind the lack of a possibility of susceptibility of "works of the genius" has to be something?
  II
  Nevertheless, the properties of genius are one thing - and they are well described with many examples, and another is the source of genius, the driving force of a genius, the main incentives of genius, the main way the genius achieves an adequate result and the main signs of the expression of genius. They are not revealed in full yet and not formulated especially as the genius has to appear on certain "soil", that is have the signs and genesis coinciding generally with group of certain individuals, having, nevertheless, from them some essential differences.
  Therefore, at first it is necessary to clear origin of geniuses and their general properties, for example, with creative persons, and then to turn to the differences of geniuses from them.
  As things stand, on the subject of nature as well as the expression of genius arise such questions.
  There are millions of outstanding, intelligent, energetic, highly educated, hardworking figures in engineering, science, and art, who sometimes achieve outstanding results, but few out of them are automatically recognized as geniuses in the public consciousness.
  The entire educated public reads exactly them the novels and stories, even though they were sometimes written hundreds of years ago; on their pictures at exhibitions line up huge queues; practically, only their concerts, symphonies and operas are performed in all the halls of the world continuously, causing tears to listeners, although other musical works are innumerable; their scientific and technical approaches have made and make decisive changes in our lives, etc.
  It means, that between endowments, talent even at unusual diligence of their owners, and the genius lies a certain abyss, which very few manage to overcome.
  If manage to find out at the expense of what some persons are overcoming this abyss, having ensured themselves the recognition in centuries, then the principle of genius will clear up.
  However, the principle is a principle, but it is still far not clear, what is that basis from which the genius grows and that stimulates it and supports such phenomenal results that are impossible not to recognize.
  Let's try to answer these questions.
  Everything that has being concocted in engineering and art can be divided into two parts: combinatory and inventive.
  The combinatory activity, characteristic, for example, for the operation of computers and actions of chess players, is capable not on discovery of essentially new knowledge, that is unobvious, hidden, absent in the nature and the database of public consciousness, but its possibilities are limited to creation of only another combination of the known things and processes (phenomena).
  It is on the principle of combinatorics that the overwhelming majority of representatives, science, technology, art acts. And there is nothing shameful here, since exactly a harvester has revolutionized the agrarian sector of the economy. Moreover, any rationalization makes an undoubted and significant contribution to the development of civilization, and, most importantly, to the development of self-awareness of each person who joins this activity. And it does not require special talents, outstanding intelligence. All that is needed - savvy and the desire to change something, that is, a manifestation of the interest in what the soul seeks, rather than lying on the sofa by the TV.
  All this, of course, not bad, but the geniuses in this field, alas, in the afternoon with fire you will not find, inasmuch abrupt coups the combinatory activity does not give, and provides only rather slow development of both the person, and all civilization, including culture, owing to quite insignificant increase of new information to the available database of mankind.
  Quite another matter - inventiveness, which, having generalized it on culture and art, it is possible to call creativity.
  But from where creativity undertakes?
  In order that to understand it, it is necessary to make small digression to the concept of consciousness of a person, inasmuch the consciousness of any person has two the main components.
  One of them fully corresponds to the primate's consciousness, from which a person occurred, - the lowest, or animal consciousness (often referred to as the subconscious), another - the highest consciousness - it can be qualified as awareness of the self, or self-consciousness, that is, everything accumulated in the subcortex for two million years in the role of hominids, and then - Homo sapiens, - distinguishes the person from all other on the planet by his separation from the fauna, completely merged to the environment, by hiss alienness to this environment, thanks to what the person becomes capable to change surrounding and himself quickly enough according to the purposeful (conscious) understanding, which appeared at him, in comparison with sluggish development of the nature, based on random changes (mutations) of the body's genome. According to their aspirations, these types of consciousness are opposite: the animal strives for survival and reproduction, and self-consciousness, or the highest consciousness, tries to strive for perfection both individual and social.
  So, there are two irreconcilable creatures in each person.
  One of these beings is determined by the lowest consciousness, which is the only inherent in all flora and fauna, except the person; This type of consciousness manifests itself in inseparability with the environment on the basis of sensations.
  Beings with this type of consciousness are in the general stream of life, but are not capable "to rise" over it, they do not understand that they live. In this regard they remind in advance programmed mechanisms capable to sense, forming own environment and adapting themselves to it, but deprived of spontaneous or conscious memories, fantasies, notions of time, they have only a genetic memory in the absence of oral or written memory of generations, and are not able to consciously influence the habitat.
  These beings do not even know that they will die, but can feel approach of death only instinctively. Similar restriction of consciousness for these beings means impossibility of any purposeful change of the environment even for the most developed their representatives - these beings are completely subordinated to it, though, at the same time, quite reasonably and effectively interact with surrounding from the position coming from their sense organs to the processing information centers of an organism, which for them is not distorted by reflections, the reminiscences and experiences peculiar to human consciousness as a whole.
  In this respect, these natural organisms are more perfect than humans, and ignorance of their own essence makes them completely "happy" in existence, despite the fact that in the common natural circulation they only do that they devour each other.
  And such "being" necessarily "sits" in every person, and it cannot fail to determine its existence in one way or another, no matter how tried the person to distance himself from it.
  Another "being" in the person is represented by the highest consciousness, which separates it from the environment and from fellow tribesmen; it manifests itself in the realization of its own existence, for example, in the form of abstract ideas about the world and about oneself, a return to the past in the form of memories, designing subsequent actions based on consciously selected data from memory, combining them with newly received information, responsibility for the committed, the ability to make any decisions, even the most unprofitable and useless, which in fact is the most vivid manifestation of liberty of consciousness.
  On this basis the person tries to set to himself the purposes, to solve various problems and to change thereby by means of the developed representations the surroundings. For example, this being is capable to build to itself the dwelling not according to the standard, but as it is pleasant to it more, thinking out new ways of supply of materials on the course of the construction, changing a palette of walls and a roof, bringing into the extent of his intelligence, these or other innovations, in contrast, for example, from the invariable standards of the anthill.
  New projects and ideas develop the mind of a person, his insight, contribute to the most effective manifestation of various abilities during life, lead to the thought of beautifying life, that is, the culture of one's own beingness and beingness of the public.
  In the person both these antagonistic in relation to himself and to the surrounding are merged together. Therefore, they do not manifest themselves separately, but operate in a hidden way, and the degree of their domination depends on the degree of development of the highest consciousness in a person.
  And the person himself often cannot predict what in the next moment will become predominant: love or hatred, anger or sympathy, sincerity or hypocrisy, timidity or courage, discretion or recklessness.
  The lowest consciousness "feeds" solely by sensations that give it everything, including the harmony of existence, i.e. something acceptable and even pleasant in our understanding in a certain combination of feelings if, of course, to be distracted from fight of each being for survival. Therefore, it does not wish to lose the sensations at all.
  Similar the type of consciousness has natural egocentrism, automatically seeking to survive, no matter what.
  In the process of development of the living beings, this type of consciousness undergoes relatively minor changes, since it is not able to remove own basic property - an unconscious desire for survival, based on the primordial activity of any living thing.
  The highest consciousness which is contained in the person at any level of its development is radical contrast to the lowest consciousness.
  In the presence of the highest consciousness in the living being, it begins as though to see the light, becoming not so much "poured" in the environment, how many separated from it, and, so it acquires the opportunity to look at it and on oneself from the outside, to appreciate this ratio in attempts to consciously set to itself goals in mind certain shortcomings in one's own existence, which, in the opinion of this being, could be overcome, and to try to obtain implementation of goals in actions.
  All this obviously drops out of an instinctive and reflex sphere of action of the lowest consciousness, and even begins to contradict it as the highest consciousness often neglects utilitarian reasons, chasing something to unattainable, but nice to heart and mind.
  Being separated in self-consciousness from the environment, this being, in the course of time, in its development in relationship with the beings, which are like him, begins to feel the need for new forms, different from the primitive communal relations of still wild people, completely absorbed in the struggle for survival. In mutual communication this creature reaches such a limit that its various conscious aspirations begin to outgrow into significant changes in the environment, and not just in its use.
  From gathering, a person passes to cattle breeding, growing cereals, other forms of economic activity and the corresponding exchange of the labor products. Inequality, ownership, the struggle for the preservation and augmentation of property, for power and et cetera are arising, that in turn requires establishment of some institutions of order in order to avoid chaos - the local states in the bosom of a growing and improving civilization were being formed.
  New forms and institutions, on the one hand, ensure the accelerated development of communities already in a structured form, that is, as the states with the bodies of governance, security, courts, etc., and on the other hand, do not allow to the states to fall apart because of the contradictions, invariably tearing-apart non-equilibrium society.
  Despite a certain progress in development of human communities according to development of self-consciousness, the essence of human consciousness which is expressed in dualism, more precisely, in divergent life-aspirations of the lowest and highest form of consciousness does not disappear anywhere, and cannot be substantially modified.
  Both these parties of consciousness continuously conflict both in the person, and in the interpersonal relations: discontent with, visible inability to change quickly, the felt limitation of intelligence, abilities, etc.; the envy and hatred to competitors instantly would rip to shreds any human community if not the state with its institutes.
  Nevertheless, each person manifests also qualities of the highest consciousness which are expressed not only in the intellectual and production sphere, but also in inquisitiveness, various religious and cultural forms as well as in the affectional relations, somehow: friendship, love, experiences for relatives, for the fatherland, etc.
  If the relationship between people on the basis of self-awareness slowly but steadily develops, then the lowest consciousness in the person remains unchanged.
  Therefore, the ideal persons do not appear, and the lowest consciousness, despite any form of its disguise, acts at any stage of the development of human consciousness, being expressed in deep-rooted egoism (egocentrism) - personal and corporate, hypocrisy (masking), suspiciousness (caution), contempt for people of other circle (mistrust to other communities), animal instincts concerning an opposite sex, etc.
  Thus, the highest consciousness in the course of its growth begins to oppose itself to the lowest consciousness more and more effectively - the struggle between them just distinguishes the person from animals, being manifested at early stages of development is hardly noticeable, and then - all stronger and stronger.
  In other words, the growth of self-awareness, or raising the level of the highest consciousness in the struggle with the lowest consciousness, gradually, but with an acceleration, expands the human sphere of activity, ensuring the permanent development both certain persons in their generations, and the development of their communities.
  With the growth of self-awareness and, thus, the increase in the self-sufficiency of civilization, the action of the majority of the above-mentioned natural factors are increasingly leveled, which means that they really manifest themselves as necessary external, but not as the fundamental factors for the human consciousness.
  Consequently, the intensive development of communities of the living beings - previously barely noticeable, and the main contribution to which was made by mutations (random changes in the genome) - begins only with the appearance in them of self-consciousness, and accordingly - with its interaction with the lowest (animal) consciousness, which does not disappear anywhere from these living beings. This interaction is expressed practically in incessant fight of these consciousness forms, merged together, as they mostly have opposite aspirations, what it was in detail told above about, i.e. their interaction mainly is expressed in hostility (antagonism).
  In other words, not evolution with its natural selection and not the artificial selection practicing already in human communities becomes the most effective driving force of communities of living beings, but confrontation in both in every person and in his communities of the animal and self-conscious forms of consciousness.
  As an example, can result in the manifestation of the antagonism of the lowest and highest of the types of consciousness is not at all not in the class struggle of the oppressed masses and bloodsuckers-oppressors, - in those and other dominate the lowest consciousness, thereby stimulating mainly the struggle for survival, but not for the development of the community. The antagonism of the lowest and highest of the types of consciousness manifests in the struggle of the informal intellectual opposition and the ruling elite, inasmuch exactly they mostly represent respectively the highest and lowest of the types of consciousness making the driving force of every human community development
  Naturally, creative persons have to differ in some special combination of the highest and lowest types of consciousness too.
  III
  Indeed, there are individuals in society, always crowded with deep feeling of dissatisfaction in relation to their environment, which comes to them from the lowest consciousness in its aspiration to creation of big conveniences to existence. However, this individualist feeling is combined with their highest consciousness, the dissatisfaction of which by insufficient public comfort, development of science and art, reaching high degree, altruistically demands to extend achievements of a civilization and culture to all.
  But, at this, the lowest consciousness dominates, because the activity of these individuals is manifested mostly instinctively, without much reflections, with a minimum of reasonableness, while giving, nevertheless, the most creative persons from all living.
  This category of any community prefers non-standard life situations owing to rejection of only formal-logical approaches to life - such a life for them is boring and meaningless, like working on a conveyor for tightening nuts.
  They do not love reasoning, logical constructions, try to avoid analytical and synthetic work, hate the actions according to pragmatic calculations; at the same time, they, as a rule, - at all not workaholics.
  Therefore, the target programs of self-consciousness in combination with programs of the lowest consciousness can be applied by these beings with great success, if, of course, they are capable to combine so contradictory forms of consciousness, for fast and resolute change of a situation in favor of the conceived.
  In other words, they prefer not the long-term reflections, not systematization of the facts and phenomena, i.e. not rational actions, but actions spontaneous, or actions at which the goal can be achieved for one-stage as if instinctively though, of course, they should work beforehand in acquisition of craft skills and gain experience.
  Exactly such people make discoveries, create masterpieces of poetry, painting, inventions, they become by the outstanding commanders. That is their activity is manifested generally in the creative scope, which attracts them at all not with a position of consumption of some benefits and goods - they are interested in the process.
  Alas, en masse the results of their activity are very mediocre both concerning the quality made by them and owing to a lack of experience and laziness, and often - narrowness and ignorance; but defeats especially do not disturb them. It is pleasant to them to use own abilities, often - very mediocre (graphomaniacs) for receiving result without special effort of the intellect.
  And they fall back into the old ways, like the card player who cannot move away from the card-table.
  Nevertheless, creators of the unobvious new is situated always among them as in the field of technologies, and culture.
  Thus, for creative person, and therefore, for geniuses, too, which can only occur from them, one of the main developmental incentives emerges - the aspiration to get out of a routine due to search the interesting, meeting the available expectations of this creative person.
  In other words, any creator person is sickened by what is, and the cause of this state is permanent dissatisfaction with himself and those around him in the current circumstances.
  Naturally, in this case, he seeks to begin to search for what lack yet, what has not yet been passed, that is, to get into those changes, which will bring, perhaps, something pleasant or maybe not, but - by all means the new: will reveal some secret, will distract him from the abominations of life, that is, will attract him with the differences from an everyday routine, and, perhaps, will bring to the essence of things and phenomena.
  It turns out that behind the interest there is always dissatisfaction with the present, and the interesting is the product of the interest.
  A satisfaction is sought in any interesting, but it is never definitively because, having stopped on one, you can lose the rest, which cannot be allowed, otherwise it is not possible to get new satisfaction in another interesting, and even itself discovered interesting is not capable of bringing full satisfaction due to its incompatibility with an initial image attracting to itself. More about the interest and interesting is stated in the collection in Russian "It's the other way around. Answers to tricky questions about interesting things" (website www.litres.ru).
  Emerged, finally, the harmonicity of the interest and abilities of the person in favorable conditions, may produce the genius, if, of course, this person can and is able to set before himself the grandiose targets (Plato, Mozart, Raphael, Shakespeare, Pascal, Newton, Gogol, Tesla).
  Therefore, in an attempt to approach the basis, the driving force, incentives of genius and the way the genius achieved such impressive results for the development of society, we were able to find that the genius, at a minimum, should have creativity, which manifests itself only with a certain ratio of the lowest (animal) consciousness and self-consciousness; the interest accompanying his abilities (giftedness), which is an enduring stimulus of creativity; a non-stop driving force of development, manifested in the struggle of opposing aspirations of the highest and lowest types of consciousness; and the basis, more precisely, the source of all this is the dissatisfaction of both types of consciousness - the animal and self-consciousness.
  The most curious in manifestations of genius is the fact that all these features of a genius are inherent in any creative person, but to a lesser extent, as will be discussed below, and the most poorly they are expressed in the philistines.
  Anyway, the main recognized criterion of genius consisting in the ability to create essentially new hidden from other except geniuses, is absolutely insufficient, inasmuch any creative person, irrespective of degree of his endowments, only also does that tries to create new and even unobvious, and most effectively it turns out at the people endowed with outstanding abilities in this connection they are called talents. However, talents are far up to geniuses who fundamentally change life of all civilization, or. at least, change the approaches and basic provisions in their field of activity.
  Therefore, the main and defining feature of a genius, as opposed to just talent, is the pronounced scale (enormity, immensity) of the projects of a genius in his chosen field of activity, manifested mostly in the unification of what seems to be incompatible for the rest persons. Thereby the geniuses with own projects as if displace themselves into the future, and their followers can already design in more detail this future, which is turning into the present by users-consumers of presented finds. It is in this sequence that the true technical and cultural development of civilization takes place.
  This process can provide by no means only a logical-formalized approach, which is also used by artificial intelligence that not have consciousness, but only insight (intuition) is able to provide it. Logic, intellect, that is, analytical and synthetic properties of the brain, only help to prepare for insight and systematize the results of the insight with their respective framing.
  In this respect, a genius is a consequence of the intuitive aspiration of human consciousness to get as close as possible to the beautiful.
  The beautiful, as and the interesting, is a source of information, but, unlike the interesting, which, when addressed to it, becomes ordinary, the beautiful, attracting attention, always excites the enduring interest not only by harmoniously merging the elements of his image in consciousness, not only its stability in this harmony, but also by its eternal mystery for a person: it is possible to admire every day sunset, autumn leaves of trees, Raphael"s Madonna, though pragmatically it is absolutely senseless.
  Countless forms of the beautiful exist only for the person, and they are completely objective, since they are perceived as being constructions that find a certain refraction in consciousness, and not arbitrarily produced by his consciousness, but the fusion of the elements of beingness into harmonious images in the human mind occurs only on the basis of his awareness of himself at the moments of concentration, that is, when he consciously merges his "I" with certain fragments of the environment, which is not always possible for everyone.
  The beautiful has that difference from the interesting, that the beautiful always remains unchanged. It does not depend on current events, and therefore has no direct relation to process of knowledge like inquisitiveness or interest.
  The beautiful can be contemplated or heard, but it is impossible to copy it - it is immediately deadened - whether it be Raphael"s paintings or the performance of Tchaikovsky"s symphony on the balalaika.
  It is impossible to model the sunset into the sea or the colors of the autumn forest.
  The ancient forms of the Parthenon still fascinate us with their perfection, and making changes to the ancient architectural ensembles or paintings by great artists immediately destroys their harmony.
  To learn to create art masterpieces in the conveyor way still nobody managed, despite, for example, knowledge of all the rules of versification.
  This fact undoubtedly indicates that the basis of the beautiful is under the other side of the current beingness, and the reflection of this "otherworldly" can only be contemplated or extracted in the form of art masterpieces at the successful contact with it, inasmuch self the existence of the beautiful in the nature suggests an idea of creation of similar, and attempts to make this really gave, however, in rather few number, unusual objects of art, emergence of which is not explain by compliance of certain rules as, for example, in crafts.
  Without being crowned in most cases with success, the attempts to create the beautiful, nevertheless, get to framework of an interest, i. e. the attraction to the extraordinary, the most outstanding products of which are the emergence of such interesting as the photo, engineering, chemical technologies, bioengineering, etc. for the benefit of the population.
  That is, in essence, the emergence of entire industries that accelerated the development of civilization turned out to be a by-product of the beautiful at the appropriate level of development of human self-consciousness, which, having expanded the possibilities of the population in touching to the beautiful, not only in natural phenomena, but in music, painting, verbal expression and architecture, has drew attention of the person to technical creativity in an attempt to get closer to the beautiful.
  Permanent and quite regular failures to find the rules for creating of the beautiful by the industrial (conveyer) way as it is paradoxical, allowed the person to take, as you can see, from them a certain benefit.
  More about the interest and interesting is stated in the collection in Russian "It's the other way around. Answers to tricky questions about interesting things", website www.litres.ru, (the article "Why and due to what are manifested the interest and interesting?," section VII).
  So, purely logical constructions, characteristic, in particular, for artificial intelligence, nothing new, that is, not manifested openly in nature and the person self, or rather, unobvious, are not able to reveal.
  Naturally, only intuition (insight, or inspiration) can help in the discovery of this, still hidden.
  4
  It is clear what the principal component of intuition (for this state more precise is the term "insight") are, first, experience, i.e. a set of the developed models, ready to immediate application: knowledge and skills without experience will not help instantly or is even stretched in time to solve the arisen problem in the particular sphere; secondly, a tantamount component of intuition is the insertion by the person of itself in state of insight that often occurs automatically in a stressful situation of danger or, on the contrary, at the relaxation moments, and even in a dream, but more often in the moments of awakening (by the way, emergence of insight in minutes of awakening in no small measure is defined by connection to work of a brain of some other centers processing information, such as: motor centers; centers that control the visual functions); third, insight comes only at a particular goal-setting to which have to correspond certain "technological" practices.
  Along with that, insight can be caused artificially when keeping of the specified three positions, exemplified by the actions of shamans and sorcerers.
  The ordinary person also, happens, enters in similar state unexpected for himself, receiving sometimes answers to questions, which are not resolved by the known methods. This as if automatic entrance to state of insight means also automatic exit from it that in itself retains identity of the person.
  Similar state, which is not controlled by human reason, is called as inspiration. It has various forms and is reached, as a rule, irrespective of the person at the moments of a stress, relaxation, half-asleep state and other unusual states.
  An ordinary person, as a rule, does not remember what happened to him in this state. He remembers only the answer to the question, stated mentally. However often success in this state is not achieved, in particular, because the person fuzzy formulated a question or lacked the necessary training - there are no necessary representations, knowledge, abilities and experience; in this case the sense of the answer is distorted or the complete comprehension of the answer is not reached.
  Nevertheless, the arrival of inspiration, in effect, is explained by local coincidence of the interest, which is expressed in certain purpose, and experience of the person.
  Intensive interest, for example, can bring the person to state of excitation, and experience helps to formulate the questions correctly that often leads to "emergence from nowhere" of the comprehension of an event or the answer which is required.
  In any case, the mechanism of intuition consists in such combination of the highest and lowest forms of consciousness, at which consciousness begins to work automatically (without reflections and logic), as it occurs at animals for their survival, and along with that into this automatic scheme relatively short-term are being involved all practices of the person in the form of the gained experience in this sphere, the available knowledge and abilities with certain target orientation.
  Similar rather short-term harmonious merge of target programs of a self-consciousness and the ideal programs of the lowest consciousness for a survival which do not counteract each other, as usual, and work in unison, for example, helping the person to escape from a misfortune, reflects their reciprocal interest with the offensive of an extreme situation whereas in routine circumstances their interests and aspirations, as a rule, vary that clearly is looked through in contradictory actions of each person.
  If voluntary or involuntary address of the person with a definite purpose to own lowest consciousness does not contradict aspirations of the last, related mainly to the survival of the organism, then the person receives necessary to him if, of course, he will understand the answer.
  To do this, and the relevant experience is required.
  The person in the self-consciousness pushed back the lowest consciousness on the background and by that considerably came off from the environment, having become the subject into temporary process. In other words, he understood that he is in temporary process with all advantages of this comprehension, but along with that he lost former unity with the environment.
  However, the lowest consciousness did not disappear in him. It means, in principle, he is capable to shift of it into the forefront temporarily, that is to enter into it, but without loss of the highest consciousness, without forgetting who is he actually, and, thanks to this, at some point to get out of the lowest consciousness, more precisely, to shift it again to the background.
  Shamans are able to do it without loss: to enter into the lowest consciousness, to find out required, and to get out of it. In other words, shaman here, as if having returned to natural state of the lowest consciousness, but, without losing itself in it, that is, not forgetting the purpose, can coincide with own surroundings as well as, after receiving the required, timely stop this coincidence.
  He in own consciousness is capable to become thereby not only as a wolf or a snake, but also - as snow-storm, ice drift, the near volcano, and inasmuch he does not lose at these moments the highest consciousness in the form of a goal or the wording of a particular task, he can ask in a new appearance the prepared question and see or feel the answer, but he will be able to understand the answer only with corresponding preparation, i.e. at adequate experience, knowledge and skills.
  Otherwise he will not understand these answers.
  Therefore, shaman, knowing the matter, adjoins in own insight with "otherworldly" only in the spheres, determined by him, with which he is well familiar, for example, treatment of some diseases, weather forecasting, searching of places for hunting for concrete species of prey, but does not even try to identify himself with a cloud to learn its physical substance, mechanism of formation of lightning, etc.
  However apart from shamans, quite often occur among people the persons, similar to them on qualities: they, not knowing that, are capable in one way or another to insight without special training, naming the arrival of insight by inspiration, or by creative rise because then at them everything turns out, all problems are solved mysteriously.
  And other, one may say, creative people possess similar properties, being able to extract from "air" at the particular moments something ingenious or, at least, standing apart.
  These include, above all, numerous inventors of anything, great artists, writers, in general, the creators of something original.
  All ingenious works are being written and drawn not just like that - under this or that cliche, the standard storyline.
  They too are fruits of insight, the only one of its kind. The person has to think, to prepare self all life, perhaps, to something, yet precisely unknown to him, and the majority does not get acceptable results, so as it is almost impossible to represent a cloud so that it was alive, joyful and airy or - heavy and terrible, impregnated with moisture and thunder-storm.
  In this world of subconscious or "things in themselves", on terminology of Kant, who, however, did not go further, having refused thereby in productive contact with transcendent, is everything, and it is possible to receive answers to all questions, but only can understand these answers not everyone, and not everyone, having got there, will be able to leave this state.
  However, the ingenious insights, especially in art, in which the main lurch is done not on long-term analytical-synthetic research, but mainly on inspiration, happens, are fraught with a sad outcome, so how, for any person though not easy, but is possible practically - to enter into state of insight, but it is necessary still to be able to leave this state in order to not remain in the "otherworldly" world of own lowest consciousness, where, probably, very good because it is thoughtless and not terrible. Addicts who artificially enter themselves into the close to it state well know this, but they drop out of this consciousness automatically as soon as effect of drug comes to end.
  Therefore, people, intensively the creative in the work, balance on the brink of the highest and lowest consciousness with a possibility of offset into the lowest consciousness, more precisely, replacement of the highest consciousness by it. Hence the high percentage of fallen into the madness of artists, poets and writers, suicide and drug addiction among them.
  5
  Be that as it may, one of the main differences between a genius from a gifted (talented) person or even just a creative person is that, a genius, using inspiration, as a rule, spontaneously, nevertheless, consistently carries out an enormous preliminary analytical and synthetic work on research of existing knowledge in this field and related disciplines, puts real and thought experiments, thereby achieving the most accurate and at the same time capacious goal-setting, automatically moving himself into the sphere of insight (inspiration), when this process arrives, thereby increasing the chances of receiving an adequate response, emerging in his own head during the insight, as well as the chances of retaining and decoding the information received. At the same time, a genius, setting ambitious goals, must possess the ability to transform this information into a digestible form, otherwise even descendants will not understand it.
  Similar process, owing to scale (enormity, immensity) of the purposes and, therefore, its labor input, complexity and unusual as well as a necessary combination of structure of a brain (the congenital endowment arising thanks to an accidental overlap of certain fields and subfields of a brain, the existence of subfields and the sizes of fields and subfields), knowledge, abilities, experience, this or that technique of an entrance to insight, in science happens extremely seldom, if, of course, to cut off those numerous discoveries and inventions that occur in a similar pattern, but on a different scale.
  In addition, extremely rare is created the proportionality (harmony) of the interest and abilities of the person, expressed in striving for the ideal, that is, for the beautiful, without which genius is not manifested.
  Thus, the main difference between a genius and talent is determined by the scale (enormity, immensity) of actions in the ability to consider not an isolated fact or problem, but in the ability to put together a "workable" structure from known discoveries and experiments, which formally may not be related to each other, but an adequate connection arises by adding to the initial assembly of one"s own "stroke" obtained during the insight, that is, a new element connecting the entire "construction". And this creation, especially in science, does not develop smoothly preceding compositions, showing their other sides, and it contrasts with them abruptly or even contradicts them. Thus, a completely different direction in science, art, technology is created. For example, in science it was quantum mechanics, in art - impressionism, in technology - Internet.
  The base of this process is self-consciousness which is manifested in separation of the person in own consciousness from the environment, creating his subjectness which in turn gives the chance consciously to accumulate and systematize information, combining it with the current information, that broadens horizon and accelerates process of knowledge both for the subject, and for all community of human individuals, developing thereby the most intensively each individual consciousness.
  And the top of the creative process manifests itself in genius, since the genius manages to absorb, master and transform the maximum possible information flows that fall on the era of his existence, the final content of which is fundamentally new (non-obvious) knowledge, which provides with its quality an access to the next level of finding the truth in its expression as close as possible to the beautiful.
  If talents in their multitude as compared with the few geniuses, as a rule, solve purely practical (applied) problems, which are often put not by them, using their abilities and practices, then the few geniuses, forgetting about routine, about the particulars of everyday life, try to establish still unknown to the world connection without any pragmatics and, as a rule, with damage to themselves in private life because immersion to the world of the ideas and high aspirations distracts them from commercialism and household comfort, but urges them to high aspirations, despite all difficulties and burdens of similar work.
  The basis of such acts of a genius, as indeed all creative people, lies an intense dissatisfaction of their lowest consciousness, demanding to dominate in surrounding of similar themselves, if are such abilities and opportunities, and the highest consciousness in this case assents with the lowest consciousness, supporting it for a time of insight.
  At this, the difference between genius from all other individuals consists that the dissatisfaction of his highest consciousness with the imbalance in concrete sphere of creativity is expressed as much as possible in his demand for the most harmonious structure of the elements of this sphere and, therefore, - to the most adequate explanation of their functioning at this stage.
  To illustrate, we compare the specifics of the work and, accordingly, the achievements of Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison in the technical field.
  Tesla, independently discovering the phenomenon of a rotating magnetic field, immediately offered to use it to produce alternating current, having laid the foundations of all electrical engineering, he was the first to achieve the transmission of radio signals over a considerable distance, initiating all developments in the field of wireless communication technologies.
  Edison, unlike Tesla, was limited in the activity only to local inventions and improvements. In particular, he improved the typewriter, telegraph, phone, thought up a phonograph, offered one of versions of the glow lamp (with coal thread).
  As you can see, this example clearly shows the difference between a genius and a talent, at least, in the scale (enormity, immensity) of the tasks to be solved.
  Quite impressive and original was the approach to the work of many famous artists of Renaissance, when they, having charged the work on the subject and composition, specified by them to own pupils, were approaching on the final stage to the picture and were making a few brush strokes, turning this picture into an unthinkable masterpiece.
  In general, any masterpiece is the most complete understanding of the object in which the author temporarily merges with necessary to him surrounding. And how he technically frames this process - is another question. In particular, the Impressionist writing technique was not so good compared to the artists who painted ordinary landscapes, but they caught something new and alive - in the flickering of shadows, turning heads, an unusual combination of colors and shapes, which allowed them to enter eternity.
  So copying masterpieces in any field of activity resembles an attempt to make a living person from a log.
  The same principle of the scale magnitude in the association of supposedly the incompatible, or at least not quite close, with the addition of the still unknown, but practically the eternal, differed William Shakespeare in art, and in science - Albert Einstein
  It is known that Shakespeare for the most part took plots and schemes from already published literary works and transformed them in his own way, differing mainly by the fact that he had been transferring ordinary life conflicts into the exteriors of the interaction of the greats of this world and had been giving them a philosophical meaning of the eternal riddle, tearing thereby from the routine.
  Therefore, his contemporaries were more interested in the plays of Francis Beaumont, Christopher Marlowe and other talented playwrights of the time, who beautifully reflected the burning events of that time in their works.
  But now they are forgotten, but Shakespeare is fresh and new, and still mysterious even in the authorship of his plays. This is what the scale (immensity) and the demonstration of the true unrevealed and mystery of human existence and eternal collisions in it means.
  In particular, Shakespeare, having uttered by Hamlet's mouths the words "To be or not to be, that is the question", could not help becoming famous for centuries, if only because so far no one really answered this question, although Shakespeare hinted at some unknown "Not to be" and the injustice of life ("to be"), showing that the routine of ordinary life does not at all mean the revelation of the secret of both "not to be" and "to be," i.e. for what need that and another, and also - for whom !? In other words, Shakespeare put all of us on the threshold of the unsolvable, so as we not to be arrogant, and at the same time showed the eternal fearfulness of the overwhelming majority before that and another.
  Let's also compare the Nobel laureate Albert Einstein with the Nobel laureates Willard Boyle and Charles Wilson, in order to show and in science the difference in the choice of problems and their scale between geniuses and talents.
  A. Einstein - developed throughout his life a number of fundamental theories.
  In particular, these were: the special theory of relativity, the general theory of relativity, which, with its unusual representation of time, was shockinghe entire scientific community for many years, the quantum theory of the photoelectric effect, the quantum theory of heat capacity, the theory of induced radiation.
  At this, for the special theory of relativity, the main "stroke" that Einstein introduced into this concept was the following: the invariance of the speed of light, that is, its independence of the speed of an observer. By this, Einstein spurned the traditional concept of the ether as a whole, that is, the medium in which light waves should propagate at a speed varying depending on the speed of the observer relative to the ether.
  Besides, Einstein managed to connect the concepts separated earlier in physics - mass and energy, having united them in formula E = mc², having proved thereby that conservation law of mass and the law to conservation of energy are parts of more general law of communication of mass and energy according to which it is possible to turn mass into energy and energy in mass.
  W. S. Boyle, received the Nobel Prize for his participation in the development of optical semiconductor sensors (CCD sensor).
  C. T. Wilson received the Nobel Prize for the invention of the camera, which allows to detect the trajectories of electrically charged particles using vapor condensation.
  From the above we can also see that the genius manages o create such a new in theory or in practice that it comes closest to the harmony of Creation at its gradual disclosure, that is, to what in our reality is called beautiful.
  Similar rapprochement with the beautiful, that is, equilibrium-harmonious (sustainable) for the person succeeds not with the use of combinatorics (logical constructions), which does not give a fundamentally new at all, inasmuch it is dominated by flipping through variants of a known (chess, artificial intelligence), at this, a sample of combination concerning novelty is a harvester.
  To discover the hidden, more precisely, to find unknown connections and patterns the most effectively a person is capable only with the use of insight, which is available to all creative people, distinguishing a genius, except, of course, some abilities, which, however, can be quite modest (A. Einstein), exactly thanks to the choice of a large-scale goal and maximum immersion in the problem, including the past experience and current experimental results, which allows intensively concentrating, i.e. attracting all resources of own organism (the significant part of all existing neurons, and not just the brain neurons during insight, or, in the other words, uniting resources of both the lowest, and highest of types of consciousness) that is expressed in use not only the available practices, but also all content of subconscious memory, to find sooner or later the required solution as it was made, for example, by D. I. Mendeleyev.
  He discovered the periodic law of chemical elements, having formulated it quite unusual way and very general: the properties of elements, and therefore and the properties of the simple and complex objects, formed by them, are in periodic dependence on their atomic weight. That is, despite of all distinction of the known elements, he distributed them only on atomic weight, tabulating, which gave the chance to predict and existence of still unknown elements.
  The product of a genius can be not only a theory that explains in a new way those or phenomena, but also a breathtaking symphony, a colonnade of an ancient temple, etc.
  For all its large scale, the works of a genius, as a rule, contrast with the previous ones, either explaining the phenomena in another way, either offering a different music harmony, or changing the architectural style.
  As it does not seem paradoxical, but, as a rule, geniuses in the field of thinking do not always possess some extraordinary abilities of nature (giftedness), for example, exceptional memory, ultrafast intelligence, the strongest susceptibility, the ability to carry out in the mind super-difficult calculations, etc. In particular, Einstein did not particularly welcome mathematics.
  At this, abilities of geniuses of certain field of activity to unite and generalize the seemingly disparate phenomena have more than, and own results, quite contradictory in the opinion of scientific community, geniuses acquire thanks to the concentration on a problem and the appeal to intuition which prompts to them how to eliminate the seeming contradictions between the phenomena and objects by introducing the new elements, which "fasten" their new construction.
  One of the most characteristic examples of this action is the same Mendeleev who, by comparing different substances according to atomic weight, has distributed elements depending on their atomic weight among rows, groups and periods, and his table made it possible to predict the existence of still unknown elements.
  Figuratively speaking, a genius covers the future with his scope, and a talent, despite all his endowments, sagacity, experience, training, concentrates on the point solution of current problems, and he has not been given a glimpse into the future.
  On the other hand, geniuses in art are simply obliged, besides told, to have pronounced endowments in perception of the concrete phenomena, in particular, the composers and conductors - sounds (acoustics), the painters - color spectrum (lighting and shades of light), unusual composite decisions at the translation of volume images on the plane
  In addition to the above the genius of the physics of A. Einstein, the technical genius - N. Tesla, the genius in the field of chemistry I. Mendeleev, the genius of the literature of V. Shakespeare, it makes sense to name some, the most prominent representatives of creativity in other its fields.
  Undoubtedly, genius-thinkers for all times and peoples are Plato and Aristotle, from whom both science and art have come.
  Undoubtedly, the geniuses-innovators in the field of music were Joseph Haydn, who laid the foundations of the symphony and string quartet; Johann Sebastian Bach - the greatest master of polyphony, who united unusually harmoniously the features of different musical styles his "Well-Tempered Clavier" became base of a cycle of the parts sounding in all tonalities; Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, the first organically linking the opera music with a lively and detailed development of the action; Richard Wagner - the creator of the new opera, programmatically combining both music and drama, where vocal and symphonic scenes flow into one another, and arias and duets turn into monologues and dialogues.
  The genius-innovator in art, science and engineering was Leonardo da Vinci, who developed a new pictorial technique with blurring lines, haze between the audience and the depicted object, thereby as if reviving image, not to mention the many inventions - epoch-making, but unclaimed (parachute, bike, tank, robot, spotlight) and the ideas of the airplane and helicopter.
  Rembrandt - the master of a chiaroscuro in the portrait painting, original on composition, portraying models as if unchained and in the movement, became a harbinger of an era of realism and impressionism.
  This enumeration could be continued, but in the Internet era it is not difficult to get acquainted with other geniuses-revolutionaries of creativity, especially since their number is relatively small.
  6
  In conclusion, we note the following.
  The source of development of each individual and his communities is the dissatisfaction of human consciousness.
  Accordingly, the driving force of this development is the confrontation between the lowest (subconscious) and highest (self-consciousness) types of consciousness. More about this is stated in my work "The Driving Force and Source of Development of the person and His Communities", posted on the website www.litres.ru
  The incentive of development of consciousness of the person is interest (see, e.g., on the same website work "Why and due to what are manifested the interest and interesting?" in the collection in Russian "It's the other way around. Answers to tricky questions about interesting things").
  The way to achieve any new result is a combination of logical and intuitive approaches to all activities.
  Geniuses throughout the history of civilization in different spheres of activity were and are at the top of the creative pyramid of mankind, thinking the most scale, obtaining constructively and productively the fundamentally new knowledge - basically opening new laws and trends in science, as well as new directions in engineering and art, thus ensuring the most effective development of both an individual representative of humanity and the entire civilization.
  At all this, the large scale, which by all means is expressed in creativity of the genius unlike talent, is provided how it was shown above, rather long coincidence of aspirations of the lowest (subconscious) and the highest (self-consciousness) of types of consciousness together with intelligence during insight, when on the solution of objectives, that is, for the gain and processing of information, geniuses are able to use the significant part of all 150 billion neurons of own body during this coincidence, not just 11-19 billion neurons of the brain (the process of insight), and the incentive to solve large-scale problems of increased difficulty is to strive to the most interesting in this sphere, that is, the most harmonious (the beautiful).
  Scanning all the departments of memory in combination with the information coming in through the adequately allocated channels is not always, but at least once in life can give the desired or unexpected result, which reverses modern ideas in this field.
  Nevertheless, genius, as well as all other people, experiences from time to time the dissatisfaction both himself, and the environment, differing at the same time by the highest degree of this main feature of any active in the form of the lowest and highest consciousness and ability to unite the force of both forms of the consciousness together in certain periods, achieving thereby the most effective use of process of inspiration (insight) some kind by resonance of both types of consciousness.
  This dissatisfaction of the genius is expressed also in the greatest possible freedom of his acts as he arranges full or almost final fracture former great and universally recognized, and in its place offers a new, unfamiliar, plunging society into doubts and regrets, and oneself - into a more or less significant loss of communication with its own surroundings, pulling away oneself in a certain measure of from conservatism and misunderstanding of the events by these surroundings.
  In the same way, the force that drives the genius, arising as a result of the struggle in him the lowest (subconscious) and the highest types of consciousness, distinguishes it from all other individuals by its intensity, since both of these types of consciousness reach at him the highest value.
  Below the cohort of talents of various kinds is located, already much more big on number in comparison with geniuses, by few for all history of mankind.
  Talents are capable, as well as geniuses to receive the essentially new knowledge, however, more specific, applied - for the needs of the day, though some of their achievements, like wheel, compass, fireworks, rockets, temples frescos are used still.
  They reflect mainly the cultural and technological demands of their epochs in books, sculptures, paintings, inventions, creating a unique flavor of each era, significantly improving life, technology, raising the level of culture of the entire population.
  Naturally, the fundamentally new (non-obvious) knowledge, talents are also obtained using the procedure of insight, but the tasks they solve are more specific, pragmatic and, as a rule, - less complex, and therefore the deep into insight takes them relatively less time without requiring enormous strain of the whole organism, and over the course of a lifetime, they can reach their goals repeatedly.
  Therefore, everything necessary to gain new knowledge, namely: dissatisfaction of both types of consciousness, the driving force of the development of individual, such incentive for development as an interest, duration of insight, the scale of own expression at talents, and even more so - at other individuals, respectively weaker or less than geniuses, whereas abilities (giftedness) among geniuses can be expressed less prominently than among talents.
  Under them settles down incomparably more considerable numerically a stratum of creative persons.
  Their main feature is the ability - same as well as geniuses and talents - to receive essentially new, that is, non-obvious knowledge, mainly due to intuition in the form of involuntary short-term inspiration, as well as a sufficient level of intelligence, experience, education, certain skills and abilities.
  But all these properties are expressed in them much weaker than those of geniuses and talents. They often don't have enough mind, that is, analytical-synthetic abilities (acumen), as well as experience. The professional skills, are also often not enough to get results adequate to their intentions, but they neglect logical constructions, combinatorics, clearly feeling their creative abilities.
  Eventually, products of their activity are the most part mediocre or at all worthless. In literature they come down to graphomania, in science - to unrealizable ideas and projects, in engineering - to inefficient though often original decisions.
  The lowest part of this their kind pyramid, more precisely, its foundation, is almost all the rest of adult humanity.
  Each of his representatives, possessing self-consciousness, is also able to receive new knowledge, but, as a rule, this part of the population is not enough education, culture, experience, qualifications, abilities, including and the ability to insight, or conditions for expression of the available properties just are absent.
  For this reason, they are limited to either combinatorics, which also provides an opportunity to get new knowledge, but of a more "lower grade", or by repeating methods already worked out by learning them, or by imitating the creative activity that is most flourishing in bureaucratic structures.
  Besides, rather thin ratio and intensity of manifestation of the lowest and highest forms of consciousness characteristic of creative persons, for the rest of the adult population is represented otherwise, being reflected the most negatively in lumpen and criminals, or are fraught with insufficiency for open expression of creativity (philistines).
  The main strata of society are described in more detail in Chapter 4.2 of my work "The Driving Force and Source of Development of The person and His Communities" (website www.litres.ru).
  All this does not mean a condemnation in particular, for the largest segment of the population - philistines, since even at the absence of giftedness (corresponding to the structure of the brain), one can initiatively, that is, working on oneself, to develop intelligence (ingenuity), to increase the manifestation of lower and higher forms of consciousness, removing lethargy and indifference, for example, by detecting the new interests. Along with that, similar initiatives are capable to break balance between the lowest and the highest consciousness forms, characteristic of a stratum of ordinary people (philistines), having attached thereby the individual or to creative persons, or, at achievement of appropriate level of education, to an intellectual-informal stratum of society. And to spur additionally similar changes are capable critical external events-wars, crises, natural disasters,
  Therefore, externally inert mass of people in the face of the philistines is actually a bottomless reservoir, from which is scooped and creative, and opposition, and managing strata of society.
  Let's remind, nevertheless, that the basis of all aspirations of the person - dissatisfaction of his consciousness in relation to itself and to the environment, surrounding him - comes to him from the lowest consciousness in its aspiration to creation of more conveniences to existence.
  However, this individualist feeling is combined with their highest consciousness, the dissatisfaction of which by insufficient public comfort, development of science and art, reaching high degree, altruistically demands to extend achievements of a civilization and culture to all.
  But, at this, the lowest consciousness dominates, because the activity of these individuals is manifested mostly instinctively, without much reflections, with a minimum of reasonableness, while giving, nevertheless, the most creative persons from all living.
  Thus, the top of the creative process manifests itself in genius, since the genius, in contrast to all the other individuals, manages to absorb, master and transform the maximum possible information flows that fall on the era of his existence, the final content of which is fundamentally new (non-obvious) knowledge, which provides with its quality an access to the next level of finding the truth in its expression as close as possible to the beautiful.
  The theme of the beautiful is covered in more detail in the work "Why and due to what are manifested the interest and interesting?" - the collection in Russian "It's the other way around. Answers to tricky questions about interesting things" (website www.litres.ru).
  
  Chapter 13.
  What kind of dough is a hero sculpted of?
  
  Introduction
  Can heroes appear in our time of the stagnating society in which only crooks and moneymakers set the tone? Perhaps the heroes should not save similar society, in the place of which a new one will come, where they can really manifest themselves? The answer to this question can be found in this article, since it shows the real origins of heroism and the forms of its manifestation in different circumstances.
  As a basis of heroism, almost all of its researchers put forward, oddly enough, quite superficial (external) characteristics of heroes, which, moreover, are clearly insufficient.
  Some proclaim its connection with the cosmos, others believe that the basis of heroism is intellectual, third think that the essence of heroism is charisma, fourth indicate powerful will as the true essence of heroism, fifth reveal the nature of heroism in the selfless devotion of heroes, etc.
  If you look closely at these statements, you can see that, practically, all of them are, at best, related to individual manifestations of heroism.
  Nevertheless, it makes sense, for greater clarity, to consider briefly the considerations of the most famous researchers of the nature of heroism, as well as some characteristics of the heroes mentioned by them, for subsequent analysis and criticism.
  But first, a few words about the genesis of heroism.
  The very concept of heroism has pretty much expanded and changed from antiquity to the present.
  In ancient times, between the tribes and ethnic groups there was a permanent war for resources and survival, sometimes ending in their complete destruction.
  Naturally, in order to avoid death and in order to preserve what was won, all available means were being used, including strength, courage, dedication, fearlessness, the ability to inspire and lead individual representatives of tribes and peoples.
  These were the main signs of the heroes of that time.
  With the development of culture and the advancement of civilization along the path of progress, the possibilities for the manifestation of the human spirit (self-awareness) have expanded.
  Science and technology in their development formed the concept of truth, the search for which was carried out by knowing the environment both through experimentation, and through contemplation, reflection, logical analysis and intuition.
  The emergence of morality and monotheism led to a softening of mores: ideas of mercy, beneficence, equality of all people before God, and then before the law, appeared.
  Therefore, the military mainly heroism of ancient times was naturally supplemented by the desire of individuals, in spite of everything, to the truth, as they understood it, as well as to the establishment of more just social relations, in which hostility between people, at least, should decrease, and the available goods will be distributed more or less evenly, but taking into account the merits of everyone.
  A new field of activity brought to life heroes of a different type. Despite all the obstacles in the face of the prevailing morals and rigid church institutions, they sought to prove their rightness, both in other ideas in comparison with traditional views, and in particular, on the structure of the universe - Giordano Bruno, burned at the fire - and in proposals for a new organization of society - Tommaso Campanella with his "City of the Sun", who was tortured and who were spending 27 years in prisons.
  The industrial revolution, which caused the emergence of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, led to the collapse of feudal society, the growth of national struggle, the formation of new States on their structure and, accordingly, also to the appearance of heroes of a different type compared to the previous ones.
  They were revolutionaries who wanted to radically reorganize society in different ways, but with the same result - it must be fair and without any oppression by one person of another person. The revolutionaries believed that in this consists their social value (Bakunin). Another part of the revolutionaries led the struggle for national liberation from the oppression of the colonialists (Simon Bolivar in South America) and the formation of independent states (Giuseppe Garibaldi in Italy).
  In particular, the heroism of the fighters for the destruction of the bourgeois system consisted in the fact that, believing the reformist means of changing society were not effective, they tried to resolve the accumulated contradictions by the most radical means, which demanded self-sacrifice, courage, perseverance, fearlessness, disinterestedness, devotion to the ideals of fairness and at the same time, responsibility, as well as the ability to drag ahead those who hesitate to fight the oppressors (Rosa Luxemburg, Nestor Makhno, Che Guevara).
  As a rule, truly selfless hero-fighters for the common good suffer personal defeat - they are killed or suspended from affairs in our pragmatic world, which is so far from their idealistic impulses. Nevertheless, with their reckless aspirations, they destroy the ossified ideas of life, by their example they arouse in people a passion for change, the search for truth and justice, and they do not allow society to plunge into the swamp of stagnation and consumption.
  In addition to national heroes - fighters for the happiness of working people, such as, for example, Mahatma Gandhi, Sun Yat-sen, Jose Maria Pino Suarez, there were also such ideological fighters-heroes for the happiness of peoples as Marat, Maximilian Robespierre, Peter Kropotkin, Vladimir Lenin and Adolf Hitler who understood this happiness very not ordinary.
  In particular, both of the latter ideological and quite sincere fighters for the common good had their own and very original understanding of the happiness of mankind: Lenin proposed to create a classless, just society for all, having forced everyone to follow this idea; in his turn, Hitler wanted to eliminate from society everybody, in his opinion, the defective (inferior), who should not interfere with the development of the best (Aryans), having forced the rest to serve to the full valuable persons.
  Both of them suffered defeat. The nations, which succumbed to these attractive slogans and the charm of both pretty selfless fighters for the happiness of people were also unlucky.
  Thus, there are several types of heroes fighting for the good, happiness, and salvation of all of humanity, as well as individual ethnic groups and people: fighters against the oppressors of ordinary working people and other guardians of the common good and happiness; situational heroes, rushing in a single rush and purely voluntary in a moment of danger with the risk of life to save people in a fire, entering into deadly battles in the war in defense of the Fatherland, challenging any injustice without a shadow of doubt and regardless of the danger; as well as ideological heroes who are captured by not quite adequate ideas or even false concepts, but sincerely convinced in rightness of these ideas.. All of them, of course, more or less, but refer to themselves as altruists.
  Nevertheless, there are heroes of a different plan. They can be called, rather, self-centered heroes, or antiheroes due to the presence of some features, as well as the absence of certain features of these personalities compared to heroes of the common good. These include contempt for people, pride in themselves, which altruistic heroes do not have, and the lack of responsibility to society that is inherent in heroes of the common good, although those and others are unselfish in their intentions, sacrificial, fearless, fully aware of own mission and committed to newfound ideas.
  It must be assumed that all these properties of the personalities of heroes do not arise on their own, otherwise the heroes would meet at every step, however, they met extremely rare over the entire history of mankind, but at the same time during critical periods of history (war for the salvation of the fatherland, revolution, uprising), except of individual flag-bearers-great heroes, mass heroism of people, who were not heroes at all in the usual life, was being manifested.
  This means that there is still some other basis for heroism, and not just the purely external features of the characters' personalities indicated by its researchers.
  If we return to the anti-heroes, then these persons, just as fearless, disinterested, strong-willed, charming, persistent, valiant, seeking to overcome any difficulties and dangers without a shadow of doubt, like the altruistic heroes, play by -life not for the public good, but pursue their own goals, which rarely coincide with the interests of society, but elevate them in their own eyes, and, as they believe, in the eyes of others, flaunting their intellect, charisma and charm, although they treat ordinary people with contempt, considering them only tools for the implementation of their grandiose designs.
  They use any means to achieve their goals, the main of which is not just power and not at all material benefit, but - the achievement of greatness, which will ensure their entry into history as figures who changed the world. They strive for this goal, not paying attention to human losses.
  In this, the egocentric heroes quite agree with the heroes of the idea, who also do not consider the number of victims, but only in the course of the struggle for the people's happiness, and not for own greatness.
  Nevertheless, the egocentric heroes manage to win significant popular support thanks to clearly and enticingly formulated slogans and promises of significant changes for the better.
  Each of these egocentric heroes despises the crowd and considers oneself superior to it, not only because of own outstanding intelligence, certain talents, but also due to own willingness to sacrifice own life to achieve the desired greatness and expand influence on peoples to limitless confines, on what they do not just trip upon, but come to complete failure (Cesare Borgia, Leo Trotsky).
  Having recognized themselves as unique, ready for great achievements, these antiheroes use the resources of society not to improve the well-being of the people, but only to achieve the set goals and confirm own exceptionality, but their dreams always end in failure, even if affairs are going well at first. The hopes of the hero-egotist collapse when his followers reveal the deception, and he is deprived not only of the sympathy of these or those layers of the population, but also of the support of his comrades who also realized the illusory nature of the goals, set by this hero.
  The heroes with a claim to the role of superman believe in their exclusivity, reject the prevailing morality and value system, and thereby constitute a serious danger to any community by virtue of its charisma, power, ruthlessness, fearlessness and irresponsibility. They create their own norms and rules, which are a typical fruit of voluntarism, and are able, in search of their own "Grail", to drag many fellow tribesmen into the abyss (Russian nihilist and revolutionary Sergei Nechayev and Russian socialist-revolutionary Boris Savinkov).
  If there are heroes, then in any case there are false likenesses to them.
  These deceptive heroes can be courageous, calling to fight injustice, have an extraordinary mind, many talents, excellent organizational skills, sociability, energy, valor. But in the basis of all this is by no means sacrifice and selflessness, but the desire for a pleasant and comfortable life, the aspiration for fame, wealth and power, including in order to treat those who did not achieve these "benefits" with contempt, singling themselves into a elite of celebrities.
  As a rule, such false heroes are the fruit of the power elites of all States, who propagandize them, put monuments to them and cite them as an example in historical Chronicles (Caesar, Napoleon, Churchill and many other generals, emperors, presidents, Ministers).
  The power elite of the society of any state is not dominated by the highest consciousness, characterized by a high level of awareness of oneself as a self-valuable person with a sense of dignity.
  The low level of self-consciousness of this elite, suggesting the negative features mentioned above, leads to the dominance of natural (animal) consciousness in it, for which the main properties are dissatisfaction with the place occupied in the community and a sense of self-preservation, ensuring the desire of members of the power elite in any case not to lose the consumption of sensations, preferably the most pleasant ones, at the expense of all the others - they are absolutely not interesting for representatives of the power elite, - but nevertheless those in power understand that having lost or destroyed these pathetic in their opinion, people, they will lose the foundation of their own existence, and they are forced, with a creaking heart, to somehow interact with these people.
  Such, judging by the noted goals and features of the manifestation of consciousness, the distribution of heroes into two main groups, not forgetting, of course, and situational heroes, who are massively manifesting themselves in various kinds of disasters and incidents, saving someone or something with the risk of life.
  However, for the most part, those in power are not interested by the true heroes. They always glorified the defenders of their caste of oppressors, predators and parasites, who besides arranged the genocide of conquered or subjugated peoples, and sometimes their own citizens (Caesar, Tamerlane, Napoleon, Churchill).
  1. Attempts to determine the nature of heroism by thinkers of different eras.
  The problem of the nature of heroism due to the importance, is supposed, of this phenomenon for the development of society, attracted a number of well-known thinkers to its solution.
  The Italian enlightener, poet, scientist and philosopher Giordano Bruno was the first to try to analyze in detail the problem of heroism in the separate fundamental work "On Heroic Enthusiasm" back in the Renaissance.
  He quite adequately revealed the main features of the hero compared to other individuals.
  Bruno noted the hero"s immolation in the course overcoming obstacles and transferring suffering, the absence of fear of death and pain: "... heroically act so that you no longer perceive the fear of death and do not experience the pain of the body ... ... extinguish all suffering that could have come from any doubt, grief and sorrow" [1. Part two. Dialog first].
  Moreover, the hero is able to turn enemies into friends with his high impulse, courage, desire to act for the good of the people and with his disinterestedness, as well as turn disasters into victories: "... for people of heroic spirit everything turns into good, and they can use captivity as the fruit of great freedom. And turn defeat sometimes into a high victory" [1. Part two. Dialog first].
  The hero, according to Bruno, cannot spend time on all kinds of nonsense because of his mission, which he perfectly understands: "It is very important, of course, that time, which we can have not enough for the necessary work, no matter how carefully we saved this time, most of it is spent on things superficial, that is, cheap and shameful" [1. Part two. Dialogue second].
  The hero also does not subordinate himself to the will of fate, or only to passions, but strives for beauty, relying on the power of reason: "... not soaring under the control of unworthy fate in the snares of animal passions, but a reasonable impulse that follows the mental perception of the good and beautiful and knows what should be adapted to in pleasure..." [1. Part two. Dialogue third].
  He does not seek to fraternize with the crowd, because he understands its vices and ignorance: "Since thought aspires to the divine radiance, it avoids communication with the crowd, departs from conventional opinions; it, I say, not only and not so much moves away from the mass of people, as from the community of their efforts, opinions and utterances. After all, the danger of adopting vices and ignorance is greater, the more people you come into contact with..." [1. Part two. Dialogue first].
  The hero is always in search of the truth, not departing from the acquired ideals, neglecting the fatigue and the seemingly, by unattainability of goals: "... a thought that strives for a high one, first of all leaves care, about the crowd, taking into account that the torch neglects fatigue and is found only there, where there is a true understanding, and not where there is any understanding, the true understanding is that which is among the few, - the main and the first, and it itself is the first, main and only" [1. Part two. Dialog first]. "... if anyone seeks the true, he must rise above thoughts about bodily things" [1. Part two. Dialogue second].
  The accuracy and quite adequate coverage of the characteristics of the hero, which really give an almost complete characterization of the hero, can hardly be questioned, except that this characteristic is related to heroes of the common good (altruistic type), and not to egocentric heroes who manifest a little interest to the public good. Self-centered heroes are more attracted the underline of one's own credibility and own importance in comparison with the crowd, and only in the second - power and glory. A high assessment of oneself should be confirmed by appropriate actions that the gray mass is not capable of, as the egocentric hero believes. These actions may not be entirely adequate, but the main thing is not this, but confirmation by them of own exceptionalism, for which this hero can sacrifice both himself and other people's lives, which he does not appreciate at all.
  Bruno also tried to find out the nature of heroism, which, in his opinion, consists in the manifestation in the heroes of the divine plan of saving people through their intellect and will: "The rise occurs in the soul from the ability and push of the wings, that is, from the intellect and intellectual will through which it, of course, tunes in and strives for God as the highest good and the first truth, absolute kindness and beauty" [1. Part two. Dialog first].
  Here Bruno makes two mistakes.
  The first is that the intellect and providentiality, which he believes to be nature, or the essence of heroism, can hardly be by it, since heroes are not always smart and do not always act in accordance with God's providence.
  His second mistake consists in that he presents the effects as the essence of heroism. The hero, indeed, can rely on his intellect and follow, for example, the precepts of Christ, but many other people, not heroes at all, follow to the same. In other words, Bruno takes some manifestations of heroism for the essence of heroism.
  The British writer, historian and philosopher Thomas Carlyle, like Bruno, makes a similar mistake, believing intellectuality as the nature of heroism. Moreover, he preaches the cult of heroes: "... world history, the history of what a person has done in this world, is, in my understanding, essentially a story of great people who worked here on earth. They, these great people, were the leaders of mankind, educators, models and, in a broad sense, the creators of all that the whole mass of people generally sought to carry out what she wanted to achieve. Everything that has been done in this world represents, in essence, an external material result, the practical realization and embodiment of thoughts that belonged to great people, sent to our world" [2, p. 7].
  Based on his false conception of the essence of heroism as intellectualism, Carlyle makes the following mistake, arguing that by raising the intellectual level, that is, thanks to educating and educating - by examples of great people - any person can be made a hero: "A full world of heroes instead of a whole world of fools... - that's what we want! We, for our part, will put aside all that is base and false; then we may hope to be governed by nobility and truth, but not before... You and I, my friend, can in this perfectly stupid light be, each of us, not a fool, but a hero, if we shall want to" [3, p. 38-39].
  These fragments also indicate that Carlyle, generalizing excessively, confuses heroes with great people (leaders, prophets).
  Below we show by examples that heroes can be different - not only noble and highly intellectual - depending on the differences in the content of their consciousness.
  In addition, not a single person managed to completely destroy the "low and deceitful" in oneself, as well as stupidity, but, despite this, the heroes always appear from generally imperfect people, but not thanks to upbringing and intellect, but at certain periods of history, having the appropriate basis for the manifestation of their heroic qualities, and the small number of heroes during the entire history of civilization indicates that to make all heroes has not yet worked, and will not work, judging by the content of the consciousness of each person, as will be discussed below.
  David Hume and Friedrich Nietzsche, like Bruno and Carlyle, in their attempt to determine the essence of the phenomenon of heroism, alas, drew attention to its purely external signs.
  Hume stated that pride and self-esteem lie at the heart of heroism: "Everything that we call heroic valor and which we admire as greatness and exaltation of the spirit, is nothing but calm and firmly grounded pride and self-respect ..." [4, p. 416].
  Nietzsche added will to this characterization of heroes, the absence of the fear of death and the inevitable following towards a goal set, which is consistent with their obligatory pursuit of greatness: "Heroism is such a mood of a person striving for a goal beyond which he no longer counts. Heroism is a good will for absolute self-destruction ... As for the hero, I don"t have a very good opinion of him - and yet: he is the most acceptable nature of existence, especially when there is no other choice ... ... People striving for greatness are usually evil people: this is their only way to endure ourselves" [5, p. 725-726].
  Naturally, the desire for greatness, which Nietzsche's supposed hero does not measure with the own forces of just mortal person, leads him so far that he begins to think himself superhuman, and invariably crash, although Nietzsche himself was of a different opinion: he saw in this transformation the meaning of humanity's existence: "The superman - the meaning of the earth [ibid., p. 8] ... ...he (a person) is transition and perdition... How to surpass the person?" ... To the superman is predisposed my heart, he for me the first and only" [ibid., p. 207] ... The freer and stronger the individual, the more demanding his love becomes; finally, he longs to become a superman, for everything else does not satisfy his love" [ibid., p. 728].
  What makes the superman by such - this is mainly the will for power, without which development is impossible: "But wherever I find the alive, I have heard everywhere about obedience. All living things are something obeying ... In order to the weaker served to the strongest - the will of the strongest induce him for it, which wants to be master over the weaker: he cannot do without this joy ... Only where there is life, there is also will, but it is not the will to live, but - as I teach - the will to power!" [ibid., p. 82-83].
  But the superman cannot do, as F. Nietzsche believes, without the will to live, instincts, inner will, or "desire", as well as the will of passions and attractions: "... your body with its great mind: it does not say I, but it does I ... The tool and toy are feeling and mind: behind them lies yet Oneself. It also seeks through the eyes of the senses; it also listens by the ears of the spirit ... it compares, subjugates, occupies, destroys ... There is more reason in your body than in your highest wisdom ... Oneself speaks to I: Here you feel joy! ... You once had passions, and you called them evil. And now you have only the virtues: they have grown out of your passions" [ibid., p. 24-26].
  The will to life and instincts are inherent in any living organism.
  However, the inner will, or "desire," belongs in the most concentrated form to the predator.
  The will of passions and attractions cannot but be attributed for each person, but, of course, to a different extent.
  The will to force, or rather, to authority, expressed, according to Nietzsche, in the desire to subjugate another, is in fact a dominance characteristic of any living organism that always seeks to create more convenient living conditions for itself.
  This property is most pronounced among pack leaders, for example, the alpha-male monkeys. Actually, first of all, thanks to him, and not the strength, intelligence or cunning that can be found in assistants, the creature becomes a leader.
  Thus, Nietzsche"s superman is, contrary to desire of Nietzsche, not "half-saint", not "half-genius", not "creator", directing historical development in the direction he needs, not extreme individual, "absorbing" life in its extreme manifestations, surpassing a person so much how far a person surpassed the monkey, but this is just a copy of the monkey alpha-male in human form, that is, somewhat cultured.
  Nietzsche, may, have wished for a more noble higher person to appear in the future, but, alas, our desires do not always coincide with reality, and Nietzsche"s superman, judging by the above analysis, is not a noble, super-smart and hypersensitive being of the future, for whom an ordinary person is only a transitional stage from the animal, but he is only an egocentric with exacerbated desire to dominate.
  Thus, Nietzsche could not adequately determine the nature of heroism, noting only a few features of the hero, but he showed that in addition to altruistic heroes, who are responsible for their own actions for the good of society, there are heroes, albeit unselfish and sacrificial, like heroes altruists, but irresponsible, and striving to designate by their actions own genius, unpredictability, mighty will, the ability to resist any forces and, thereby, own greatness and the gigantic separation from the population which obediently to fate.
  Such egocentric heroes can also be called anti-heroes, since they don't care about the public good, although they cannot be attributed simply to strong personalities or leaders who are simply trying to rise higher in the hierarchy of society.
  Even the most valiant of strong personalities are by no means heroic. La Rochefoucauld characterized them like this: "The desire for glory, the fear of shame, the pursuit of wealth, the thirst to arrange life as conveniently and pleasantly as possible, the desire to humiliate others - this is what often lies at the basis of valor, so praised by people" [6, p. 306].
  Anti-heroes, due to the fact that they put themselves above society as demigods, despise its members for widespread utilitarianism, pettiness, fear of death, religious and domestic prejudices, possessing, however, in contrast to ordinary and even outstanding personalities, not only fearlessness, perseverance, courage, but also disinterestedness, although, unlike altruistic heroes, self-centered heroes have no incentive to sacrifice by themselves for the interests of society, but can do this to demonstrate their superiority over the crowd, they have no responsibility to society, because they do not care about the welfare of all, considering it a true good to strive for the unattainable, which is available to the chosen, and not to the crowd, which only wants to be near a good feeder.
  Nietzsche himself so marked the difference between the superman-hero and the altruist-idealist: "The opposite of the heroic ideal is the ideal of harmonious all-development - a beautiful opposite and very desirable! But this ideal is valid only for good-quality people" [5, p. 725].
  But all historical Chronicles do focus not on altruistic or egocentric heroes and not on the rather numerous situational heroes who appear in various border situations - wars, floods. fires, conflicts, etc., but these Chronicles describe the exploits and life of ostensibly heroic emperors, kings, generals, reformers, religious leaders, etc., who in the best case turn out to be to some extent useful to society, and, for the most part, by no means heroes, but their false semblance, who was so vividly and fairly characterized by La Rochefoucauld (see above).
  The German historian, philosopher and sociologist Max Weber saw the essence of heroism in charisma: "Charisma in most cases arises in extreme historical conditions, when the corresponding socio-psychological need arises. The qualities of a charismatic leader acting on a religious or socio-political field are in some cases mystified. He is considered a prophet, the chosen one, the greatest historical person, deliverer, demigod, carrying out a great mission, which ascribe with all the successes of his supporters and followers. Even obvious failures turn into his glorification (flight is regarded as salvation, any loss - as obligatory sacrifices or intrigues of enemies, ridiculous statements - as incomprehensible wisdom" [7, p. 308].
  Weber believed that charismatic domination, including heroism in general, resists to other types of domination, because it stands out for its dedication, by the contraposition to routine [8, p. 263].
  If we mean by charisma (in Greek, "mercy") authority, sociability, the ability to convince the crowd of the need to achieve own goals, then Weber believes that this property underlies both domination and heroism.
  Weber's similar view of this problem follows from his General approach to solving problems in sociology.
  He interprets any human action in society as a subjective relationship between individuals, based on the understanding of the meanings and goals that determine their actions, that is, understanding a certain event [8, chapter 1].
  This approach to the multi-sided problem of heroism quite naturally leads Weber to single out as the essence of heroism one of its purely external manifestations, although one of the most impressive in its effect on the crowd.
  The fallacy of this approach can be seen from the fact that charisma is inherent in many personalities who cannot be attributed to heroes (Timur, Mao Zedong, Emperor Peter I of Russia), although outwardly they may resemble them, since they have many properties of heroes, including charisma, but, unlike true heroes, they lack signs such as disinterestedness and immolation, but there is passion for power and vanitу.
  Therefore, Weber by the adequacy of determining the nature of heroism is as far away as his predecessors.
  In turn, the Russian philosopher Sergey Bulgakov represented the essence of heroism in a completely different way from the thinkers mentioned above: "Heroism seeks to save humanity by its own forces and, moreover, by external means; hence the exceptional assessment of heroic deeds, to the maximum extent embodying the program of maximalism. It is necessary to move something, to accomplish something beyond strength, and at the same time give up the most precious thing, your life - such is the commandment of heroism. To become a hero, and together with it, a savior of mankind can thanks to a heroic deed, far beyond the bounds of ordinary duty. This dream, living in soul of the exponent of intelligentsia, although only feasible for units, serves as a general scale in judgments, a criterion for life's assessments. To commit such act is also unusually difficult, because it requires overcoming the strongest instincts of attachment to life and fear, and it is unusually simple, because it requires volitional effort for a relatively short period of time, and the implied or expected results are incredibly considerable" [9].
  Bulgakov believed that the role of the hero, which he saw in the salvation of mankind, should be played by representatives of the intelligentsia, as the most educated and cultural members of society, noting that few can be a hero, since heroism, in particular, "requires overcoming the strongest instincts of attachment to life and fear". Therefore, Bulgakov appeals to all representatives of the intelligentsia, making rather transparent hint that only mass involvement in the commission of extraordinary acts (maximalism) can select the true heroes from this cultural layer, and these extraordinary acts he designated in the title of his article as selfless devotion (asceticism).
  Of course, Bulgakov is right in that the role of the few altruistic heroes - he means only them - is suitable for people who understand what needs to be done to save humanity, that is, they are sufficiently educated and not stupid, possessing along with that by the qualities of sacrifice, responsibility and fearlessness.
  However, it is possible and necessary to save not only humanity, and, therefore, not only representatives of the intelligentsia can provide, for example, mass heroism during times of various cataclysms.
  Bulgakov also did not identify other types of heroes except for altruists, and therefore, the essence of heroism has remained secret for him, just like for the thinkers already mentioned above, since they all limited their efforts to find the nature of heroism only by the external manifestations of consciousness, such like strong will, sacrifice, disinterestedness, self-esteem, charisma, intellect, pride, etc.
  Modern psychology represented by Vladimir Shadrikov, highlighting such manifestations of human consciousness as sacrifice and egoism, defines the nature of heroism as the victory of sacrifice over egoism, which few are capable of: "Conscious sacrifice in the name of others, as a rule, of the members of a kind, and stands at the origins of spirituality. Heroism is at the forefront of spirituality. And fundamentally important here is not that a person sacrifices himself in the name of the clan, but that he does it consciously. And sacrifice is now becoming available to everyone. Everyone can be elevated to a spiritual act, but not everyone is being elevated. Consciousness, exalting a person, at the same time aggravates his egoism, uniting with the instinct of preserving individuals (preserving life). A situation of the struggle of motives is formed: to sacrifice oneself in the name of others or to save oneself. The poetization of heroic acts, their consolidation in myths and traditions contributes to the formation of spirituality (heroism and sacrifice) as a conscious form of behavior" [10].
  It is difficult to argue with the fact that sacrifice in heroes prevails over egoism, but sacrifice is mostly associated with altruistic human aspirations, and heroes are not always altruists. Sacrifice is also by no means the only characteristic of the hero's personality.
  In addition, the struggle of sacrifice with egoism does not determine the nature of heroism even of altruistic heroes, since sacrifice itself is only an external manifestation of heroism, and not its essence.
  N. K. Roerich., E. I. Roerich and L. V. Shaposhnikova suggested that the essence of true heroism lies in the togetherness of the hero with Cosmos.
  In her diaries, Elena Roerich makes it clear that the hero"s thought contains cosmic creativity, while the hero"s desires promote evolution [11. Part 2. ј 797].
  Helena Roerich believes that a person is connected with beingness of Cosmos and the processes occurring in it, through one of the aspects of the Universal Energy - own internal fire. Psychic energy, spirit, human thought is a manifestation of man"s fiery nature, and the accumulation of psychic energy develops his moral qualities: "Mental energy is love and aspiration ... ... The development of a constant, indestructible striving for perfection, towards light in all manifestations will be by the development of this vital energy" [12, p. 148].
  Heroic deeds, therefore, suggest a kind of peak of the psychic energy of a person.
  Lyudmila Shaposhnikova brings a certain concretization to these ideas about the role of the hero in cosmic evolution: "The spirit personified in a certain hero is the driving force that breaks through the energy corridors of further spiritualization of earth matter. Through the hero and his feat cosmic lightning strikes a substance, which promotes human thinking and consciousness and creates an opportunity for humanity to take a certain evolutionary height" [13, p 378].
  Shaposhnikova believes that heroism is a manifestation of the meta-historical action of some Great Teachers of humanity, who are in a certain Cosmos. This creativity of the subjects of cosmic evolution, manifested primarily in the field of culture as a self-organizing system of the spirit, is the directed energy impact of a higher system on humanity, giving birth to heroes [14, p. 54].
  Thus, the authors of the proposed concept consider the appearance of heroes as the result of cosmic evolution, and heroes help at a certain stage of development of society by their example to rise even higher in the course of evolutionary development: "Cosmic energy, as an ongoing creative impulse, will give an exceptional life there, where aspiration is manifested. If a person realized the great mutual involvement, then he would more often direct his energy towards cosmic creativity. After all, the call is established as a great magnet" [11. Part 1. ј 55].
  I must say that the concept of unity of heroes with Cosmos has a clearly religious connotation, proposing to take on faith certain postulates that reflect something external and completely unknown to the authors of this concept. They put this absolutely fantastic at the base of heroism, artificially ensoul some Cosmos, whereas only the living beings are ensoul.
  The authors of this concept represent outer space as an energy source of heroism in the form of the Great Teachers of mankind (subjects of cosmic evolution), who direct mankind over and over again to higher stages of evolution under the influence of the example of heroes, in who they create a peak of psychic energy that determines the heroic deeds.
  Such external Cosmos of the Great Teachers of mankind, existing only in the imagination of the authors of this concept, of course, can have no relation to the essence of heroism, which can only be related to the internal content of human consciousness.
  In fact, a person is a self-active being who is aware of both himself and his activity, gradually developing in generations. That is, a person is controlled by his own consciousness, which does not have any outsider - cosmic or similar of it influence. Not only that, the activity of both a person and his communities, as well as all living creatures that are finite entities, in contrast to their consciousness, not only develops a general (single) infinite consciousness discretely through mortal beings, but also makes consciousness by eternal and keeps whole Creation in a stable state of eternal development.
  In our opinion, in addition to individual forms of consciousness in living beings, a single consciousness also functions, which accumulates in the databases of a holographic projection of an infinity out of time, representing a single consciousness, the results of the activities of all living beings.
  Along with that, a single consciousness is able to control the functioning of each organism, ensuring its viability for a certain period of time thanks to its own holographic basis, in which, like in any hologram, each section of it repeats the whole (everything in each part), due to which, in particular, the single consciousness of the hologram does not lose unity with each of individual forms of consciousness in their infinite totality.
  Therefore, a single-plural consciousness can, in its single quality, provide with the help of this unity a connection with each individual consciousness in a living being, organizing its functioning through the genome.
  The hologram itself is a high-frequency formation as a product of the overlay of several coherent waves, giving a stationary interference picture, since the phase difference of the waves does not change.
  The holographic basis of beingness is described in more detail in my work on the role of consciousness in beingness and the structure of Creation as a whole [see, for example, 15. Chapter 2].
  Nevertheless, the authors of the concept of the unity of the hero with the cosmos rightly noted that, besides man and his communities, there is a certain structure, which they designated as Cosmos. This structure, but in a completely different form, is really involved in the development, but not so much of a person and humanity, which is finite is in its civilizations, like human life, but in the form of a hologram, which is a projection of an infinity out of time. The interaction of beingness (current reality) and an infinity out of time through its holographic projection creates, as a result, the infinite development of consciousness, which is eternal, but manifests itself sequentially and discretely only through mortal beings.
  The authors of the hero"s unity with the cosmos also quite adequately noted a certain property of a person, which, however, they mistakenly called psychic energy.
  In fact, the main thing in a person is not some vague psychic energy or the equally far-fetched energy of passionarity, which L. N. Gumilyov points to, which not clearly where came from, but the human consciousness, thanks to which he possesses inescapable activity and is capable of developing both his own organism and his own consciousness, that is ensured by the main and all understandable state of consciousness - his enduring dissatisfaction, without which a person loses aspiration towards something, and turns oneself into a living corpse, which is incompatible with development.
  More details about the main feature of consciousness - its perpetual dissatisfaction, as well as the passionarity of L. N. Gumilyov are described in my work "The driving force and source of development of the person and his communities" [16. Part 3, sections 2, 4].
  In a hero, dissatisfaction of his consciousness in both its forms - animal (natural) consciousness and self-consciousness - manifests itself very specifically, giving birth to heroes of different types, while the authors of the concept of the unity of the hero and Cosmos point to only one type of hero-altruistic.
  The problem of the connection between the dissatisfaction of both forms of consciousness with heroism through certain external manifestations of this property of consciousness and understanding by the hero of his mission, which indicate a certain interaction of dissatisfaction of the natural consciousness and dissatisfaction of self-consciousness, is disclosed in the next chapter.
  2. The real origins of heroism.
  First, we note that the signs of heroism which are accepted by its researchers for the true nature (essence) of heroism fall into two categories.
  One includes, in fact, the purely external characteristics of the personality of the heroes, such as charisma, courage, enthusiasm, self-esteem, pride, strong will and intellectuality.
  These features, as we show below, are not related to the essence of heroism, but are only certain manifestations of consciousness. Their external character can be seen from a comparison of true heroes and false heroes, since these signs are usually inherent in both heroes and false heroes (see below).
  The fact that these features of a heroic personality are properties of each altruist hero is not in doubt, but they can be, with some exceptions, features of not heroic personalities, that is, individuals interested primarily in the pursuit of fame, power, honors and wealth, but sometimes those who conceive and achieve these goals really do something extraordinary: they conquer other peoples, establish empires, make coups and revolutions, etc. due to own talents, good intelligence, ability to lead people along, determination, fearlessness and ruthlessness.
  The actions of the altruistic heroes are disinterested, sacrificial and responsible precisely because they set themselves higher goals: the good of the people, the independence of the country, the fight against the oppressors, the protection of the disadvantaged; the desire for harmonization of society, justice for all, etc. at the same time, another part of the heroes - egocentric type, who therefore can be called antiheroes, - strives primarily not to the good of society, but to give oneself a status of extraordinary significance and greatness by rebellion against fate.
  Another sign of heroism, which is accepted by its researchers (see above) for the true nature of heroism, is the unity of the hero with the cosmos.
  In fact, man has only that relation to cosmos, if, of course, we consider it as an self-active living creature, that cosmos, indeed, is the infrastructure for the existence of living beings, being just the outer shell, necessary for the functioning of inhabited planets.
  From the historical excursion on the nature of heroism, it can be seen that reducing the essence of heroism to any of these signs or even to their totality is clearly insufficient and superficial, that is, it does not directly relate to its origins.
  Obviously, the essence of heroism is different, but to determine it, we must first find the main thing that makes a primate by a creature that is able to realize own existence in time and thereby begin to change everything around quite consciously, consistently setting goals oneself goals as well as solving related with them tasks.
  The activity of living creatures, including humans, in contrast to other objects of beingness, which are subjected only to natural laws: conservation laws, the law of non-decreasing entropy Newton"s laws, etc., must be conscious, and the presence of consciousness in them, in fact, is the only difference between living things from other objects of being. Otherwise, the activity of living beings would have no difference with the rotation of the remaining objects of being, but we do not observe this.
  Consciousness makes a person and, in general, all living beings not stand still - to develop, while it sensitively reacts to the circumstances of life and the environment, manifesting itself in a person's feelings, thoughts and actions in two ways: on the one hand, forcing him not to lose in any case activity, on the other hand, sharply increasing or decreasing activity under a certain set of circumstances, both natural and man-made, as well as keeping activity at a certain level in case of invariable circumstances of life.
  If we manage to determine the underlying property of consciousness that affects a person"s activity, then his fluctuations should somehow reflect on the degree of initiative, enterprise, responsibility, expression of will and other external manifestations of human life and the activity of human communities, as well as, in general - on the life of other living creatures, making them either dynamically functioning, or hibernate like a bear in winter, that is, passive.
  All human life, all beingness, the whole Creation is an eternal manifestation of the active or alive among the passive, that is, inanimate objects [17. Ch. 1.2].
  Thus. the rudimentary (instinctive) state of consciousness of a living being is due to its enduring own activity, without which it simply could not be considered alive, and this subconscious activity manifests in indefatigable dissatisfaction oneself among things and other living creatures in dynamics, without which any living creature would lose aspiration to change its existence for the better, that is, more profitable - pleasant, safe and comfortable - side, having lapsed into stagnation, which always leads to degeneration and death.
  The space of such dissatisfaction is expanding in a person by the awareness of this feeling (the main property of consciousness), manifesting itself already in his conscious activity, which comes down to the processes of destruction and creation in everything that surrounds him.
  This dissatisfaction, which is now inherent only in the human consciousness in its self-consciousness, but which does not go anywhere from its lowest (natural) consciousness, but by no means will and passionarity, gives impetus to activity for any living creature, appearing in conscious and subconscious actions to overcome the constant resistance of the environment.
  By the lowest (animal or natural) consciousness of a person, liberty or the action of dissatisfaction manifests itself instinctively, that is, without an explicit goal - by trial and error, in his desire for survival, reproduction, convenience, dominance and safety.
  Nevertheless, the basis of any aspirations and decisions of natural consciousness in a living being is the dissatisfaction of his consciousness, since alive or an active being strives away from what it has, to where, as it suggests by sensations, where is better for it than in this moment, that is, more pleasant and profitable: heartier, warmer, safer, etc. But, how it is known - relying on sensations cannot always be done, which, for example, is proved by regular locust flights to the desert or migration of fish schools directly into the mouth of predators for their own dying.
  By the highest consciousness (self-consciousness) liberty, or the action of dissatisfaction of consciousness is manifested in aspiration for the intended goal. This part of consciousness is already able to qualify, that is, to understand at least the visible restrictions on a person"s aspirations for the set goals as bondage, and the liberation from these restrictions as freedom "from", calling it, therefore, independence, which can be achieved by perseverance in a certain direction.
  In addition, a person acquires the ability to choose from a certain set of things that are more appropriate to his interests both at the moment and for the future. In other words, thanks to the dissatisfaction of a person"s self-awareness, he gains the ability to regulate and plan his life the way he wants, but taking into account the environment, and evaluating in advance the consequences of the planned actions, that is, understanding that he will have to answer in front of oneself as well as in front of own surrounding for these actions.
  However, this significant addition in the consciousness of a living being in the form of self-awareness, which allows him to comprehend himself in relations with the community and, as it seems, to act reasonably and responsibly, does not in the least reduce the actions of the lower (animal) consciousness, which at any moment can begin to block which whatever the aspirations of a highest consciousness, if it only seems to him that they contradict the survival of a given person, or even if they can worsen the quality of his life, or, conversely, when the lower consciousness of a person accumulates his own dissatisfaction with current circumstances up to such extent (not enough food, tired of cold and harmful neighbors), at which a person or the whole community will tend to go where the horizon of the best in the opinion of the lowest consciousness flickers, which is not able to predict on a long term, but is able, with its sufficient dissatisfaction, to push aside the highest consciousness, and to force the community to migrate to an unsuitable place or to lead the whole people to a hopeless war with neighbors for a better share, in which it will die completely.
  Nevertheless, a person who is a natural consciousness and self-consciousness, combined in the form of a body is a real manifestation of the action of liberty in both instinctive and conscious aspirations. The intrinsic contradictoriness of these aspirations and, at the same time, their fusion in the basis does not make it possible to unequivocally distribute the human actions into purely conscious and purely instinctive ones. Therefore, it is impossible to clearly predict the actions of any person or predestine them, and in this he is also free.
  Thereby, the free manifestations of a person, that is, his advancement, occur through both instinctive and conscious actions, which are based on the inescapable dissatisfaction with oneself and own surrounding. Another thing is the extent to which this fundamental property of activity is manifested both in the sphere of the lowest (animal) consciousness and within the boundaries of higher consciousness (self-consciousness).
  Overfilling a person with dissatisfaction, in particular, with his place in society, for example, in the form of an unsatisfied desire for power, which is in the sphere of animal consciousness, leads him to forget all moral standards and to crush by any means his opponents, who also seek into power.
  Overfilling a person with dissatisfaction with a place in life from the position of the most effective defense of his own dignity, dignity of his fatherland from unrighteous encroachment of enemies, remained in vain in the ordinary life, and this is the sphere of self-consciousness, makes the humble accountant to show miracles of heroism in war, where this property of consciousness allows him, unlike everyday life, turn around like a professional military did not dream about.
  This dissatisfaction of consciousness, which causes the desire for the new, is being fed the incessant and changing information flows that permeate the entire human being, which he can interpret, having self-consciousness, in different ways, to the extent of his understanding. Thereby, each person inevitably executes all time the hesitations from a habit, or an established way of life, to the destruction of order created by considerable labor, to liberation from it. Having established one and having joined it, sooner or later he begins weary of this order and decides to change it no matter how his external conservative nature resists this.
  Each person, realizing his own mortality, is forced to determine for oneself the attitude to death - first of all, how afraid he is of it, and what could be worse for him than death.
  Practice has shown that the vast majority of people clings in every way to life, even understanding the inevitability of the near end.
  This fact indicates the affinity of their consciousness to the consciousness of animals, which, although do not recognize themselves as personalities and do not know anything about death, but, possessing the ability to feel, are not able voluntarily to abandon sensations ever.
  This means that most people are not able voluntarily to take place as fearless individuals in a usual environment, that is, without cataclysms, during which the value of life is lost. In other words, the animal component (limbic in the brain or natural in consciousness) predominates in their consciousness, and the personal component of consciousness - self-awareness - is at a relatively low level, at which the dissatisfaction of human self-consciousness is focused on changes in its environment with the purpose of consumption for the most part material goods and entertainment, that is, his goals coincide with aspirations of the animal consciousness, wishing to bring sensations to the most pleasant, as well as to survive by any means, in particular, denying sacrifice, with the exception of special cases that were inherited still from animals.
  This, their sort, instinctive heroism of animals is manifested in critical situations of threat of attack on their cubs, in which, for example, female birds lead predators away from the nest away with a high probability of falling into jaws of predators.
  Similar threat, which should be eliminated for the sake of saving offspring, and therefore of the whole kind, arises during wars, earthquakes, etc., causing both genuine mass heroism and awakening to life individual great heroes who perform amazing feats that they themselves and could not have previously assumed, since they were engaged in the most ordinary work of mechanics, doctors, teachers, etc.
  These heroes can be called the situational, since they appear only in critical situations, returning to normal life with their elimination, while other heroes always seek and often find a field for the application of their exploits, only these exploits can be not only in defense of the fatherland or in the good of the people (the heroes-altruists), but also for the sake of their own exaltation (the unselfish heroes with claims to the role of superman).
  Nevertheless, the degree of dissatisfaction as well as the external manifestations of both self-consciousness and animal consciousness are not the same, distributing people into certain groups according to their behavior [16. Part 3, section 4], and the main of these groups is the group of so-called inhabitants, more accurately, philistines, comprising from 80 to 90% of the population.
  The weak development of self-consciousness and equally the weak manifestation of the lowest consciousness (low level of dissatisfaction of consciousness in both cases), which are in a balanced state, characterize the basic group of any communities. All members of this group are guided generally by own mind and experience: they are occupied by themselves as well as own wellbeing, and do not aspire to either "high" or "low" goals, being limited to the desire to a problemless and well-fed life, in which trouble is desirable to see only on the monitor screen. The philistines do not experience the aspiration to new due to own efforts, trying to obtain more comfortable state in life from a position of simple acquisition and consumption of benefits.
  Therefore, a relatively rare exception is individuals who despise well-being and are not afraid of death, but not because of stupidity and not because of circumstances, but with the understanding that there is something higher or worse than death, that each of them represents in its own way, depending on the development of own personality, that is, the development of self-consciousness.
  For them, covetousness is laughable and absurd. The various goods, honors and glory are also of little concern to them. By the way, they differ exactly these properties from most generally recognized heroes, who in fact are simply fake, even celebrities such as Caesar or Napoleon, whom, in particular, Nietzsche considered the closest persons to superhuman, but, nevertheless. did not classify them as such, realizing, however, that the impudence, ruthlessness, avarice, and self-interest of these characters of the story are incompatible with heroism.
  True heroes, the main features of which are the awareness of their great mission, selflessness, sacrifice and devotion to the found ideals, are interested in other values.
  Some - the heroes-altruists - are worried about global injustice, and they want to restore fairness so that everyone lives well and are as brave and noble fighters for justice as they themselves (Giuseppe Garibaldi); others want to free their people from oppression by foreigners (Jeanne d"Arc); still others dream of eliminating the state, which divides persons into estates or classes, preventing, as they believe, people from living in friendship and developing harmoniously ( ideologist of anarchism Peter Kropotkin).
  But there are those who, on the contrary, want to establish such order in States, in order to there are only the best, or full-fledged citizens, which, as productive units of society, are capable of ensuring the development and real prosperity of the whole society. But various kinds of the inferior individuals, more accurately, the defective (underdeveloped, sick, beggars, criminals, lumpen-proletariat and racially unsuitable for development) to remove out of society, having made part of them by servants, and the rest, as unproductive or harmful elements, simply to decimate, ensuring those who remained the permanent happiness and satisfaction with life (Adolf Hitler).
  Heroes- egocentrics are interested by society only as an arena for achieving own farfetched goals, which, since these goals contradict the real interests of society, turn out to be illusory.
  Some of these egocentric heroes want to rise above the crowd to an unattainable height for all others by achieving goals that will veer the world on new rails, but these rails, as it turns out later, lead to a dead end, since the choice of clearly utopian goals was dictated not in the interests of society,
  but for one"s own elevation above it due to short-sighted, which is characteristic of this type of heroes, who are mainly self-oriented (Leo Trotsky), despite the fact that these egocentric heroes have many talents, strong will and the ability to resist any forces and circumstances to the end, emphasizing their own greatness and gigantic margin from the population, resigned to fate.
  Other heroes-egocentrics who want to prove to themselves and others their exceptionalism by attaining on their own the sole domination of the entire civilized ecumenical community, get disappointed when achieving this goal, since they have nowhere to go farther and the rest of own life they are in despondency (Alexander the Great), not finding due to the narrowness own consciousness other ways to embody the dissatisfaction of one"s self-consciousness.
  Thus, from the understanding of own role as a kind of unselfish saviors of the fatherland, people or all humanity in critical periods, the heroism of the common good (altruistic type) arises, the reasons for which may be different, but its nature, or essence is always the same: the highest level of self-consciousness in its dissatisfaction with the situation in own surrounding or the whole society, from which comes compassion for people, selflessness, responsibility and nobility, reflecting, in particular, the understanding of the impossibility to let the elimination of certain cultural values belonging to the common commons or, conversely, not to enable to impede to the emergence of new values, which, in the opinion of this personalities will lead all or chosen ones to good, how this heroic personality understands this good.
  Along with that, the degree of dissatisfaction of the natural consciousness with the situation surrounded by the altruistic hero is such that it allows one to sacrifice a sense of self-preservation due to an aggravated sensation, for example, the loss of stability of the surrounding, which should be restored for posterity even at the cost of own lives.
  Such heroes of the common good, in self-consciousness who the private in a certain period coincides with the common, become popular, although among them there are heroes limited by the idea that captured them (charismatic Vladimir Lenin), which looked attractive in the eyes of the majority, but ultimately turned out to be utopian, and just situational heroes (Russian soldier Alexander Matrosov, who covered dot's embrasure with his chest, saving from death of a chain of comrades, who were going on the attack at the fascist invaders).
  The main soil for such altruistic heroes is a stratum of reasonably well-educated and opposition-minded the informal intellectuals, in whom dissatisfaction of self-consciousness with the state of society and the actions of the authorities reaches a value close to maximum, combined with a rather low degree of dissatisfaction of animal consciousness with material goods, the consumption of which is inferior to consumption of values which cognition and culture give.
  The difference between the self-consciousness of altruistic heroes and the self-awareness of ordinary informal intellectuals consists in the amplification up to the maximum possible values their dissatisfaction with the state of social relations, coinciding with a significant decrease in the dissatisfaction of their natural consciousness, which affects the weakening desire for survival and consumption of material goods, that allows these individuals fearlessly often fight hopelessly against ruthless enemies, try to overcome the insurmountable, fiercely defend the old, but good traditions, or, on the contrary, with irresistible impulse to introduce new values that they consider necessary at the moment for society.
  Outwardly, this difference between ordinary informal intellectuals and altruistic heroes is expressed in their sincere permanent unselfishness, contempt for death, and understanding of own noble mission, determination, perseverance, devotion to the ideals of justice, as they understand them, a sense of high responsibility for the success of any deed, uncompromising communication with enemies and obligatory charisma, that is, the ability to come to the fore and lead the masses in any circumstances; besides, in their self-consciousness there is no place for ambition and power-hungry.
  The heroes of the idea, aimed, as it seems to them, for the benefit of society, are not much different from the altruistic heroes, but their self-consciousness in its dissatisfaction by own surrounding is limited by the framework of the idea that mastered by them, and therefore, they lose to a large extent compassion for specific persons, since the heroes of the idea operate with large human flows for achievement of the set goal-good.
  In addition, the globality of goals leads the heroes of the idea to personify themselves in the form of aspiration to be highlighted, in which they are supported by an animal consciousness, striving, whenever possible, to dominate, partially destroying the nobility in behavior and responsibility for the fate of those, who trusted themselves to them, and the heroes of the idea abandon them into the "furnace" of their intentions, which consist in providing society with all possible benefits in a short time.
  In the case of a certain decrease in the level of self-consciousness from the maximum possible with a turn of its dissatisfaction with the position of people in society towards the side of dissatisfaction with the attitude of society towards oneself, for which a hero with a claim to the role of a superman could do a lot thanks to of his exclusivity, indeed, often justified, because just like the heroes of the common good, these heroes with inescapable love for themselves yet are independent, have a strong will, are fearless, brave, smart, decisive, unselfish, believe in themselves, go to the end, are afraid of nothing and nobody, as well as they are able to captivate masses (charismatic), their judgments are timely and accurate, they have certain experience, professional skills, and at least basic education, but these egocentric heroes are not interested in society, which they see as a collection of small-minded people with primitive interests. Moreover, they despise these pathetic characters of everyday life with their lowest consumer demands and do not consider themselves responsible to such an insignificant breed, although they are not averse to using it for their own purposes.
  However, they themselves are by no means visionaries, and they lack the understanding that manipulating society for their own goals, which are quite divorced from real life, is at least unreasonable, albeit spectacular, which ultimately leads them and the peoples, which have believed to these heroes, to the collapse.
  But similar antihero has long been disappointed in these mentally and emotionally underdeveloped and weak-willed day laborers, who can only complain about life, moan, desire low-level shows, eat in three throats and collect, if possible, all kinds of badges and medals. Therefore, he wants, using the resources of society, to accomplish the incredible and climb to the height of a demigod, to force everyone to look at himself with never-ending gratitude and sincere love, condescendingly accepting this admiration, confirming own faith in himself as a superman or, at least, a person not from this primitive world.
  In this opinion the egocentric hero is supported by a sufficiently high level of animal consciousness, whose dissatisfaction is reflected in the desire to dominate in his own surrounding at the expense of the actual loss of a sense of self-preservation, a significant decrease in which is the cause of contempt for the death of this hero.
  That is, the egoism of the animal consciousness in the form of the increased dominance supports its opinion of its own merits in comparison with the crowd, putting above plebs, and the heroism of such egocentric comes down mainly to demonstrating by any means, including fearlessness, one's own significance to the public - not for the sake of a real solution of urgent problems in the interests of the people, but for using these problems so that everyone convinced of his greatness, genius and uniqueness.
  In other words, sufficiently high level of self-consciousness and not bad intellect allow them to comprehend both their own significance and the essence of urgent social problems, but under the pressure of high degree of dominance of own animal consciousness, these egocentric heroes begin under the pretext of solving pressing problems to satisfy the consciousness of their own exclusivity by striving for various kinds of fantasies, such as recognizing themselves as standing above everybody as a pointing guidance for them.
  Thus, all the superhuman aspirations of such heroes despising death, but trying to jump above their own growth not only at their own expense, but also using the resources of their own surrounding to achieve chimerical goals, are always focused only on themselves by the content of the goals, they set, presupposing separation from the crowd not so much by seizing power, but by raising oneself in one"s own eyes, and therefore having in mind not a public or purely personal good, but opposing oneself to all those around with their risky and often illogical actions, but with bravado and narcissism in any danger, even if it threatens inevitable death.
  The main soil for such egocentric heroes is a stratum of creative people in whom dissatisfaction of self-consciousness by the state of society reaches a high level, combined with an even higher degree of dissatisfaction of animal consciousness with the material benefits available.
  In other words, there are individuals, always crowded with deep feeling of dissatisfaction in relation to their environment, which comes to them from the lowest consciousness in its aspiration to creation of big conveniences to existence. However, this feeling is combined with their highest consciousness, and its dissatisfaction with insufficient public comfort, development of science and art, reaching high degree, demands to extend achievements of a civilization and culture to all.
  But, at this, the lowest consciousness dominates, because the activity of these individuals is manifested mostly instinctively, without much reflections, with a minimum of reasonableness, while giving, nevertheless, the most creative persons from all living.
  This category of any community - a kind of "reckless persons" - prefers non-standard life situations owing to rejection of some formal-logical approaches to life - such a life for them is boring and meaningless, like working on a conveyor for tightening nuts.
  They do not love reasoning, logical constructions, try to avoid analytical and synthetic work, hate the actions according to pragmatic calculations; at the same time, they, as a rule, - at all not workaholics.
  Therefore, the target programs of self-consciousness in combination with programs of the lowest consciousness can be applied by the reckless beings with great success, if, of course, these beings are capable to combine so contradictory forms of consciousness, for fast and resolute change of a situation in favor of the conceived.
  In other words, they prefer not the long-term reflections, not systematization of the facts and phenomena, i.e. not rational actions, but actions spontaneous, or actions at which the goal can be achieved for one-stage as if instinctively though, of course, they should work beforehand in acquisition of craft skills and gain experience.
  Exactly such people make discoveries, create masterpieces of poetry, painting, inventions, they become by the outstanding commanders. That is their activity is manifested generally in the creative scope, which attracts them at all not with a position of consumption of some benefits and goods - they are interested in the process.
  The difference between the self-consciousness of antiheroes and the self-consciousness of creative people (creators) consists in the turn of dissatisfaction of self-consciousness of antiheroes towards identifying the shortcomings of this social environment not to really eliminate them, but for exalting own person, coinciding in this respect with the increased dissatisfaction of the animal consciousness with the position of its carrier in own surrounding, hat is, a high degree of dominance compared to other individuals, due to a weakening desire for survival and consumption of material goods, while creative persons are not satisfied with the state of social comfort and seek to improve this comfort by development of science, technology and art.
  Outwardly, this difference between self-centered heroes with a claim to the role of the superman and the creative people is expressed in the sincere unselfishness of these anti-heroes, their contempt for death, pride by themselves, determination, perseverance, strong will, charisma, thanks to which they come to the fore and lead the masses upon themselves to any circumstances, lack of ambition, and along with that - in contempt for people, lack of nobility and responsibility towards society, as well as setting goals before themselves, which can show their greatness and originality, despite the very likely unattainability of these goals, but about it they are not able to think or try not to think.
  Egocentric heroes, breaking away from society, and, in fact, parasitize it, consider by the true value the good only for the chosen, believing all others to be a stupid and needy crowd, a gray mass that cannot rise above itself, and which can only be used to achieve goals of anti-heroes, exalting of own persons without special basis for it.
  History has clearly shown the utopianism of their goals, that is, the obligatory collapse of all their undertakings precisely because of the dropout of these goals from the framework of the general civilizational trend, aimed at the development of both individual and mass consciousness.
  These altruistic and egocentric heroes are pulled together by their limitation by certain prejudices, self-confidence, and hope for a favorable outcome of their own actions, as well as unselfishness, sacrifice, awareness of their great mission in the pursuit of good, how the hero understands this good, or towards great goals, loyalty to newfound ideals and contempt for those in power.
  This limitation contributes to their heroism, since they do not think about the long-term consequences of their actions, considering them to be correct and timely, although they, saving, surprising or outraging, as a rule, have little effect on the growth of public welfare and never bring peoples to harmony, and the heroes themselves do not seek to own prosperity of any kind, which causes them just boredom.
  On the other hand, the limited character of the heroes does not allow them to think about the fact that they, for example, as disinterested altruists, only and do, that correct the mistakes of the rather stupid those in power that led to disaster, or they, as egocentrics, put themselves in the position of outcasts in moral attitude leading to the collapse of the individual.
  However, heroes of any type never act under the pressure of anyone else - they, as volunteers, are always independent in their actions, and their heroism is reflected in the fact that they do not deny themselves an attempt to resolve the insoluble and to fulfill the unrealizable not by unreasonableness, but quite consciously, coming, for example, in military art - to new forms of conducting battles as Hannibal, who almost destroyed Great Rome.
  Unselfishness of heroes and often open disrespect for those in power deprives them of a prosperous life, which ends mostly with poverty or fatality, but that's why they're heroes in order not to complain about fate and they accept hunger and death with a smile, and not with a grimace of disappointment.
  The difference between altruistic and egocentric heroes manifests itself also in their attitude to liberty.
  In principle, a person who is a combined inferior (limbic in the brain) and higher consciousness (self-consciousness) in the form of a body is a real manifestation of the action of liberty in both instinctive and conscious aspirations.
  Internal contradictoriness of these aspirations and at the same time their unity in a common base doesn't allow to determine actions of the person as purely conscious or purely unconscious. Therefore, accurately to predict actions of any person or to predetermine them is impossible, and in this also is manifested liberty.
  Thereby the free manifestations of the person, i.e. his advance forward happen by means of as instinctive and conscious actions.
  The explicit impossibility for the person to escape from public and natural fetters led, as it seems at first sight, to the fruitful idea: liberty is the cognized necessity.
  However, this restriction of liberty in favor of some order doesn't explain ways of this cognition - necessity in a form of order and organization is manifested everywhere, but everything can't be cognized - neither in one human life, nor in life of many generations, especially as everything continuously changes, and on the cognition is required time.
  Besides, this purely external interpretation of liberty can cause bewilderment due to the fact that even if to admit of knowing or understanding of all restrictions, with which are encountered the person, it is possible to qualify such cognition only as humility before external thingness factors, which thereby are admitted as primary.
  Similar approach, in effect, denies development and can result not to liberty, but to the thought of release from similar oppression only after death, or to the paranoid idea that the course of soulless things must determine (to dictate) all motions of the person.
  Last, automatically assumes the totalitarianism in the public relations, which is trying to deprive of the person and liberty, and independence that leads it as a result to crash. A notable illustration of this result is the drop during not so long time almost all Marxist regimes that have adopted this "remarkable" formula of liberty.
  The result of such type again shows the inadequacy of the domination of things over consciousness, which arranges the world for oneself, starting since the formation of things on own understanding, that is, in accordance with the existing form-building abilities at it.
  The egocentric hero-individualist with a claim to a demigod spits on the circumstances, being a typical voluntarist, that is, trying to achieve, without taking into account the circumstances and possible consequences, his really illusory goals, which consist only in his own elevation above the crowd by any means and self-obsession at this by his outstanding volitional attempts.
  In other words, this individualist hero considers it possible to use randomness supposedly directed by free will in view of the unpredictability of the outcome of the event, that is, something opposite to necessity.
  Trying to seize by will the arbitrariness, the individualist hero also becomes a toy of circumstances, that is, a figure, subordinate to them, losing freedom in his actions and gaining instead of fame only the ridicule of contemporaries and future historians over his superhuman aspirations, which are ordinary stupidity, invariably leading to collapse.
  Heroes of the common good argue in a very different way.
  They, as true folk heroes, without especially going into the genesis of catastrophic events, lead, possibly, into the last battle of all volunteers who succumbed to their confidence and charm, making them heroes too. It is they who, without an order, remain in the rearguard to die, covering the retreat of their unit during military operations.
  In science, these heroes, despite on any personalities, overthrow authorities, receiving in return not medals and honorary titles, but exile and curses during life, and not always a mark in history, since their merits are often stolen by ordinary scoundrels from science.
  Altruistic heroes always throw themselves without regret on the altar of the Fatherland, science, art, or just camaraderie, feeling free in the most complete degree, which not available to any reasonable citizens, or even sages.
  Ordinary, but very real heroes from the common people not only do not wait for a reward, but try to quickly and imperceptibly move away from the place of their heroic deeds, if, of course, they survive, to the former, usually modest occupations until the Motherland again calls them to the feat.
  Therefore, true altruistic heroes, in addition to the above-mentioned qualities common to all heroic individuals, are able to feel compassion, enjoy life, and fight for the rights of ordinary workers.
  Along with that, history has long shown that heroic deeds do not occur spontaneously at all times.
  Take Switzerland, for example, where a smooth, well-fed, well-established life has been flowing for centuries without any cataclysms, revolutions, and other upheavals. Naturally, it doesn"t smell of any heroes there.
  But this does not mean that there are no heroes at all in a trouble-free and "well-fed" time, when insoluble contradictions are absent. Everywhere and always there is a struggle between progressive persons and conservatives, not transferring for the most part in the revolutions, although the ruling elites unwittingly have to carry out reforms in order not to become dependent on more developed states. Potential heroes do not disappear anywhere, nor does a high level of self-awareness in many people, requiring the elimination of any injustice, and it is everywhere and always with respect to the working masses in excess. Therefore, potential heroes simply become the most active members of society, manifesting themselves mainly in organizations and enterprises, which are in opposition to authorities, trying to improve the structure of society and helping disadvantaged.
  There are quite a few such people, and it is they who go ahead in a moment of danger of any kind, be it a defensive war or a flood, dragging along the rest of the voluntary helpers, and thereby ensuring mass heroism that often saved entire nations, or all these heroes were perishing with honor, but never asked for mercy.
  The most famous of them are Joan d"Arc, Chang Hyung Dao, Giordano Bruno, Tomaso Campanella, Jan ижižka, Simon Bolivar, Giuseppe Garibaldi, Nikolai Chernyshevsky, Jose Maria Pino Suarez, Sun Yat-sen, Nestor Makhno, Mahatma Gandhi, Ernesto Che Guevara, Martin Luther King.
  If there are heroes, then in any case there are its deceptive similitudes.
  These false heroes can be bold, calling to fight injustice, they can have an extraordinary mind, excellent organizational skills, sociability, energy, valor and even be charismatic, at least for a while. But the basis of all their deeds is the desire for a pleasant and comfortable life, the desire for fame, wealth and power, including in order to treat those who have not achieved these "benefits" with contempt, singling themselves in some exceptional group among the rest, but not separating themselves from the power elite, and being therefore the highest expression of corporate solidarity of those in power.
  Official historians, being, as a rule, propagandists of the power elite, to which these false heroes belong, and these are emperors and kings, presidents and ministers, known for their military victories and reforms, expose them as heroes, while they have nothing to do with heroes of the common good and even to antiheroes, whose goals are always high, due to the meagerness and banality of the goals of these false heroes - power, wealth and honors, although outwardly they may look like heroes, showing, sometimes, courage, steadfastness, fearlessness, and even responsibility, and sometimes showing certain talents, but they always serve the ruling class and not the people, and their ideas, judging by the results the actions of these "heroes", are reduced only to expanding their own power, increasing wealth, privileges, ranks and ranks, as well as strengthening the power of the ruling elite.
  Why these personalities are false can be understood from what reservoir they mostly appear - and these are the power elite, force structures and bureaucracy.
  Let's first see what the consciousness of the representatives of these strata is.
  The power elite of the society of any state is not dominated by the higher consciousness (self-consciousness) of its members, the basis of which is dissatisfaction by public relations and the desire to improve them, bearing in mind all fellow tribesmen, manifesting itself, however, in different ways.
  A high level of self-awareness as individuals with a sense of self-esteem, compassion for the suffering, nobility, high culture, selflessness and responsibility to society for their actions is not available for the members of this elite and its associated security forces and officials.
  Selecting from the highest consciousness (self-consciousness) the appropriate share of self-image, own merits and shortcomings, and, therefore, determining on this basis its own prospects in society, and from the lowest consciousness - rapidity of reaction, quite strong-willed qualities and energy, skill to communicate, sufficient dexterity, cunning, and, as a consequence, - insidiousness and unprincipledness, these subjects gain an advantage over the rest - the more inert members of the community in the form of ordinary people, highly moral intellectuals of any kind, and other members of the population who are sluggish or preoccupied with other matters, and who are not able to deftly push aside or slander their opponents, as well as really enjoy the humiliation of the lower ones, and at the same time endure mock from the side of own bosses.
  The low level of self-consciousness of these strata of society, in which the emphasis is not on the struggle to improve the state of society as a whole, but on protecting the interests of the ruling class, permitting for the features mentioned above, brings to the dominance of animal consciousness in them, for which the main feature is a sense of self-preservation, striving in any case not to lose the consumption of sensations, preferably the most pleasant ones, at the expense of all other members of society, on who they do not give a damn, but nevertheless they understand that having lost this miserable, in their opinion, people, they will lose the basis of their own existence, and they are forced, with a creaking heart, somehow interact with this people.
  Thus. for representatives of power, the dominant is inevitably animal consciousness, that is, in their consciousness there is a clear lack of awareness of themselves as self-valuable, creative individuals, and not as consumers.
  The difference between the self-consciousness of false heroes and the self-consciousness of representatives of the power elite lies in the extreme degree of dissatisfaction of the attitude of society towards them, and, accordingly, own place in the hierarchy of those in power, who, it seems to them, underestimates their talents and energy, thanks to which they are able to achieve a lot, not only for themselves, but also for other colleagues in power. This dissatisfaction of self-consciousness coincides with a high degree of dissatisfaction of animal consciousness (the increased dominance), which at all costs requires more power, reverence and comfort.
  Outwardly, this difference in the consciousness of false heroes from ordinary power-hungry and ambitious persons is expressed in their strong will, charisma, high degree of intelligence, various types of natural giftedness, determination, perseverance, fearlessness, but at the same time they are proud, complacent, sophisticatedly insidious, cruel, merciless, despise ordinary people, considering them cattle. They are magnificent intriguers, easily sacrifice people to achieve their goals, which consist in the concentrate in their hands more and more power, wealth and various privileges, without renouncing the honors, awards and titles that, they believe, have deserved, protecting the interests of the power elite, and they never take the side of those who are offended and oppressed, except smile at the people and throw to it generally insignificant charity things.
  3. Examples of the main types of heroes.
  3.1. Heroes of the common good.
  3.1.1. People heroes (altruists).
  Italian revolutionary and commander Giuseppe Garibaldi (1807-1882)
  From his youth, Garibaldi dreamed of freeing Italy from the Austrian invaders. In 1834, he tried to raise the uprising in Genoa. The plot failed, but he managed to escape. Garibaldi was sentenced to death in absentia.
  Then he voluntarily worked in the cholera barrack in Marseille, participated in the war for the independence of the Republic of Rio Grande against the Brazilian empire, was wounded in a battle with an Argentine ship, was arrested, tortured, and participated in the war against Uruguayan conservatives.
  In 1848, Garibaldi received news of the beginning of the uprising throughout Italy against the Austrians. He quickly joined the rebels and soon joined the battle with superior enemy forces at the town of Luino, having won. Large Austrian military formations were sent against his small detachment, and he was forced to retreat and cross the Swiss border.
  At the end of 1848, Garibaldi with a small detachment joined the rebellious people in Rome, who were besieged by opponents. Garibaldi successfully repelled the assault, and then defeated the troops of the Neapolitan king.
  In mid-1849, large forces of the French occupiers approached Rome. The rebels were forced to leave it. The revolution was defeated. Garibaldi emigrated from the country.
  In 1858, the war for the unification of Italy began. Garibaldi took an active part in it. He defeated the Austrians several times with a detachment of volunteers of 3,000 people, but unsuccessfully attacked the Austrians at Treponty, barely escaping complete destruction, which was the result of the betrayal of the joint Allied command (Sardinian kingdom and France). Garibaldi refused all ranks, ranks and returned to his home.
  In 1860, the uprising broke out in Sicily. Garibaldi immediately joined the rebels and, after several battles, cleared the entire island of Neapolitan troops. He began to distribute land to peasants, freed political prisoners.
  After the liberation of Sicily, the Garibaldi detachment landed in Calabria and after several battles freed the entire southern part of Italy, and transferred power to the king of Sardinia, who now he became the head of the Italian kingdom.
  During the Austro-Prussian-Italian war, Garibaldi again won a series of victories over the Prussians and Austrians, and Venice was annexed to the Italian kingdom.
  In 1867, Garibaldi decided to liberate Rome, but his small detachment was defeated by the combined papal and French forces, he was arrested and sent into exile.
  In 1870, Garibaldi helped France defend the south of France from the German invasion in the war with Prussia.
  In his memoirs, Garibaldi noted: "I am used to subordinating any of my principles to the goal of uniting Italy, no matter what way this happens" [18, p. 341].
  The hero formulated his general position as follows: "Being a supporter of peace and friendship between nations, I find myself forced again to take up arms, which contradicts my principles ... I do not like war, it"s the tears of the oppressed are forcing me to take up arms" [19, p. 4].
  Chinese revolutionary Sun Yat-sen (1866-1925)
  While studying at a medical institute, Sun Yat-sen, together with his friends, planned to overthrow the Chinese-hated Manchu Qing dynasty, which ruled in China. Over time, he came to the conclusion that only revolutionary measures can return the country to the ranks of leading powers in the world and bring its population out of poverty.
  He created the first revolutionary organization of China, but the authorities revealed it, and he was forced to flee to Japan.
  During the 1912 revolution, Sun Yat-sen was elected the interim president of China and founded the Kuomintang National Party of China.
  Sun Yat-sen set about developing the basic principles, the implementation of which will make China a powerful and prosperous power.
  In his opinion, it is necessary first of all to exclude egocentrism from political life and unite the various peoples of China in the struggle for independence.
  Sun Yat-sen also proposed to carry out the democratic reforms in China, giving all citizens the right to vote, the right to recall elected representatives, the right to take legislative initiative, and the right to a referendum.
  In his opinion, it is necessary first of all to exclude egocentrism from political life and unite the various nationalities of China in the struggle for independence.
  He considered, in accordance with Chinese traditions, to add the control and electoral power to the legislative, executive and judicial.
  The welfare of the people, for Sun Yat-sen's idea, could only be achieved by creating an industrial economy and ensuring the equality of peasant land ownership, and the Chinese government should ensure that the population has adequate housing, clothing and normal food.
  Thus. Sun Yat-sen believed that China could shy away from the flaws inherent in capitalism, and that socialism could be built by enlightened people with the help of the state outside classes.
  In 1919, he restored the Kuomintang, and in 1921 he again took the post of the interim president, but his power was limited to only one province of China.
  At the Kuomintang Congress in 1924, which he led, a revolutionary manifesto was adopted.
  Sun Yat-sen tried to unite all of China with the support of the Comintern, but died during one of his trips along China.
  Latin American revolutionary Ernesto Che Guevara (1928-1967)
  A very characteristic example of a hero - a fighter for the people good against any oppressors - it is an ordinary Argentine doctor and a native of the bourgeois family Ernesto Che Guevara, who joined the group of small number of fighters of another country against dictator Batista - a ruthless American puppet in Cuba.
  Che Guevara, despite chronic asthma, worked in leprosories and traveled to many countries of Latin America. He had seen enough of the terrible living conditions of ordinary workers, the mockery of planters and factory owners under workers, and his soul was being filled with disgust for such an order, and he devoted his life to improving the situation of the broad masses of working people.
  But, as soon as the possibility of a real fight against the oppressors appeared, he did not fail to join it, although only 82 people had practically no chance of defeating the numerous troops of the Cuban dictator Batista, which had tanks and aircraft.
  Really, after the first battle only a few dozen people survived.
  Nevertheless, they started a guerrilla war, which was gradually joined by the Cuban peasants, who were tired of the scoundrel Batista. The struggle for a just cause carried away the people of Cuba and in a few years the active fighters won. The dictator fled the island. A few years of life in leadership positions in socialist Cuba seemed boring for a hero who was used to a ruthless and bloody struggle.
  Therefore, he gave up all his titles, high positions, and even his Cuban citizenship, and went to raise the poor to revolt in other countries.
  However, Che Guevara did not take into account certain factors.
  In particular, in the Congo, peasants reacted hostile to the detachment of Cuban revolutionaries and they had to leave this country. Che Guevara also failed to raise the revolutionary movement in Bolivia. The population did not support Che Guevara, his partisan detachment of 50 people was defeated by a detachment of government troops of 650 soldiers, he was wounded and killed several days later.
  There is no doubt that contempt for the death of Che Guevara does not mean his stupidity or irrational, but the weakness of the sense of self-preservation, which is at the core of every natural consciousness, while his merciless struggle with the oppressors of the common people was essentially laid down in his self-consciousness, the level which was such high, that it did not allow him to live an ordinary life, but all the time pushed him into a completely conscious struggle for a worthy and happy life for all working people on Earth.
  3.1.2. Heroes of the idea.
  As for the heroes of idea, they are distinguished by their faith in the correctness of this or that idea, which they have adopted with their minds, and which as if leads to a common good and happiness, whether it be anarchism, communism or some other utopia.
  For the most part, they do not have time to become disappointed in this faith, since they are the first to die in the struggle for the triumph of utopias, leaving a field of activity for different crooks against the background of ordinary people (philistines).
  French revolutionary Maximilian Robespierre (1758-1794)
  Maximilian Robespierre was ideological fighter of freedom, equality and fraternity, which in fact, as later events showed, were incompatible slogans.
  Robespierre was engaged in the work of a provincial lawyer in France in the second half of the 18th century. He was famous for his integrity and straightforwardness. He was raised on the ideas of such enlighteners as Montesquieu and Rousseau. He stood for reform, was modest, advocated the expansion of citizens' rights.
  During the revolution, his oratory talent, enthusiasm, open hatred of rotten royal power, as well as the slogan: truth, freedom and society are more expensive than life brought him to the forefront. In his speeches, he expressed his readiness to die in the fight against tyrants. His extreme left-wing views led him to organize terror against all the enemies of the free Fatherland and the public good. These enemies he considered not only the royalists and the rich, but the entire middle class.
  After the destruction of his political rivals, Robespierre became the de facto head of government and began to pursue a policy of reducing great fortunes, helping those in need, and introducing uniform education. The cult of the Supreme Being was proclaimed, and the terror was recognized as a means to correct souls.
  Worshiping the Supreme Being meant hatred of unbelief and tyranny, the desire to punish traitors and tyrants, helping the unfortunate, respecting the weak, protecting the oppressed, rendering all kinds of good to one's neighbor and avoiding all evil.
  However, the unfitness of terror, as a means of correcting society, quickly restored almost all other leaders of the republic against Robespierre, wishing to end the terror. The convention recognized Robespierre as a tyrant. He was eventually announced outlawed and beheaded.
  The ideological Robespierre, the fighter for fairness, as he understood it, was replaced by ordinary crooks and corrupt officials, who protected defended the interests of the rich, led by the unprincipled careerist Barras.
  Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924)
  Lenin, limited by the short-sighted considerations of Karl Marx, threw the Russian people into the furnace of the struggle for a typical utopia - communism, but he believed Marx and promised all peoples, in fact, the establishment of paradise on the earth, which is rather primitive and strongly smacks of religion.
  The population of Russia was largely exterminated in this senseless struggle for world domination in order to bring all other peoples to the happiness of ostensibly true equality and fraternity, which in fact led to the loss of liberty by the peoples who were captured by this attractive, but thoroughly false idea, and Lenin himself died, having discovered in practice the failure of Marxism.
  Nevertheless, his activity, distinguished by selflessness, sacrifice, awareness of his great mission, devotion to the ideals found, and hatred of the oppressors of working people, encouraged the rest of the people to fight for the rights of workers and has involved the world into a new orbit of existence, where the estates in most countries were destroyed, and the workers received more rights and freedoms.
  Russian revolutionary and anarchist Nestor Makhno (1888-1934)
  At the age of 18, Makhno became a member of a group of anarcho-communists and participated in terrorist acts, was subjected to arrests, was sentenced to death, replaced by indefinite penal servitude.
  In 1917, he was released from prison and led the Peasant Union of his county, and then a local group of anarchists.
  Makhno advocated radical revolutionary transformations. He created the Committee for the Salvation of the Revolution in his county and began the confiscation of landowner land. By nationalizing the land, he distributed it to the peasants.
  The ideological anarchist Makhno has expressed his thoughts on the new social structure as follows:
  "We will organize it (the new system) on the basis of a free public, the content of which will allow the entire population not exploiting the labor of others to freely and independently of the state and its officials, even the Reds, build all social and social life completely independently at their own places, in their own surrounding ..." [20].
  In 1918, Makhno led the struggle of the peasants and anarchists with the German invaders and the troops of the hetman Skoropadsky.
  He was handing out property and food, taken from the rich, to the population.
  In battles, Makhno showed extraordinary courage, courage and ingenuity, constantly developing his military successes. He was personally leading the cavalry into the attack.
  The Makhno detachments fought with the Petliurites and the troops of General Denikin, either uniting with the Red Army, or acting separately from it.
  Makhno"s actions in the rear of the white units destroyed Denikin"s hopes of taking Moscow. At a time when the white units were retreating, Makhno created an anarcho-peasant republic in Ukraine on the basis of free councils without communists, where land was transferred for free use to those who cultivate it, subject to redistribution by number of eaters. Makhno denied the ownership of land as a natural asset for the whole people.
  Makhno"s army was used by the red units to fight against the white troops of General Wrangel, but after the defeat of the white troops was first partially, and then almost completely destroyed by the red troops.
  The wounded and shell-shocked Makhno was transferred by his last fighters across the border to Romania and interned.
  Makhno ended up abroad without any money, but American anarchists helped him not to starve. He, as an ideological anarchist, refused to cooperate with both Ukrainian nationalists and Polish communists. After arriving in Paris, he worked as a joiner and a carpenter.
  In the press, Makhno was publishing essays, as well as attracted witnesses to refute the insinuations of their enemies, and in the end, the public recognized that the alleged atrocities of the Makhnovists over the population and their participation in Jewish pogroms were malicious fiction.
  Spanish revolutionaries called Makhno to lead the revolution in their country, but the sick Makhno could only help them with advices and soon died of bone tuberculosis.
  3.2. Heroes with a claim to the role of superman (antiheroes).
  French Anarchist Revolutionary Anselm Belzharri (1813-1890)
  In 1844, Max Stirner's book published, "The only and his property" (Der Einzige und sein Eigentum), in which he outlined a new concept of so-called individualistic anarchism, according to which the human rights are limited only by his force, in turn, limited by the force of other people: "... that, what you are capable of becoming, on this you have the right to. All rights and all powers I draw from myself. I have the right to everything that I can overpower. I have the right to overthrow Zeus, Jehovah, God, and so on, if I can do it, if I can"t, then these gods will always remain right and strong in relation to me, I will have to bow before their right and force ... I only not have right on that, which I do not do quite freely and consciously, that is on that, on what I myself do not authorize" [21, p. 176-177].
  It was this ideology that penetrated the heart of Anselm Belzharri, apparently during his travels and meetings before the 1848 revolution in France, in which he actively participated. He, as a true anarchist, located on the edge of the anarchist front, disassociated himself from the positions of other revolutionaries, declaring that a true revolution is the final elimination of the need for government. Anselm Belzharri called for disobedience to the government, which he considered a form of slavery, and argued that anarchy is an order (norm).
  Anselm Belzharri was harassed for publishing anarchist pamphlets.
  The extreme form of his anarcho-egoism is confirmed by the following statement by Belzharri: "I reject all, I affirm only myself ... I am the only reliable fact. Everything else is an abstraction that falls into mathematical X, into the unknown ... There can be no interests on earth above my interests for which I have at least partially sacrificed my interests" [22, p. 276].
  It must be assumed that such voluntarist statements emphasize the nature of the heroism of this individualist, which consists in dissatisfaction with his self-consciousness with the state of society, the insufficiency of his democratic foundations, expressed in hatred of any power, except selfgovernment, at which the power of each person is equivalent to the power of each of the rest. This dissatisfaction of his self-consciousness was supported by the dissatisfaction of his natural consciousness, which was outwardly expressed in his desire to dominate in all activities, in particular, he called all the political parties of France of that time "the plague of the nation" and called for civil disobedience.
  Russian revolutionary Sergey Nechaev (1847-1882)
  Listening to lectures at St. Petersburg University, Nechaev was inspired by the ideas of Mikhail Bakunin and Nikolai Chernyshevsky.
  Having taken an extreme position in the revolutionary movement of that time, Nechaev became the leader of his radical wing, calling for subversive activities, ruthless terror and the use of any means to liquidate the existing system.
  In accordance with his extremely voluntarist position, Nechaev developed the "Catechism of the Revolutionary," in which he called for "to exterminate a whole horde of robbers of the treasury, vile tyrants of the people ... ... to get rid one way or another from the false teachers, scammers, traitors, dirtying the banner of truth" [23, from. 576].
  Nechaev decided to confirm his radical views and superiority over own associates by decisive actions, killing student Ivanov, a member of his circle, for refusing to obey him.
  Italian writer and politician Gabriele d´Annunzio (1863-1938)
  Gabriele d'Annunzio, in addition to writing poems and novels, by his restless nature, could not help taking part in the First world war, although he was already quite an elderly man, showing himself in it as a fearless hero, who also reached the lieutenant-colonel from lieutenant, but lost one eye.
  A group of officers proposed to the popular in the people poet and military officer d'Annunzio in 1919, to lead a liberation campaign in the city of Fiume, which was unjustly rejected, as many believed, from Italy.
  With a handful of associates, dannunzio captured the city, where his proud and irresponsible nature unfolded to its fullest.
  Taking advantage of the indecision of all interested states, d'Annunzio proclaimed the independent republic of Fiume and was recognized as its leader.
  The people in the city sang songs and robbed passing ships, marches and free political discussions were organized there with the leader, who condescending communicated with the masses. In general, the loose morals flourished.
  After a year, the conflict between Italy and the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was settled, but d'Annunzio refused to leave the city, and only after its shelling he resigned from office of Duce.
  D'Annunzio tried to influence Mussolini"s policies in order to bring it closer to Fiume"s model of governance, and he tried to discourage Mussolini from contacting Hitler, calling him the "ferocious clown", but failed.
  All literary works of d'Annunzio indicate his individualism, egocentricity and extraordinary ambitions. He glorified the enjoyment and will of own I, and in his decisions was a typical voluntarist.
  Lacking a definite political position, d'Annunzio was always inclined to change, believing that by his great example he was influencing social institutions.
  The fantastic and ambitious nature of his superhuman tasks and illusory goals was that he wanted to set up a state system in the manner of a musical symphony, where individual corporations form the brought together system, in which the main decisions are made by creative "aristocrats of the spirit", who set improvisation, that transforms the world.
  Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky (1879-1940)
  Trotsky did not have firm beliefs in the fidelity of certain doctrines to change the backward society of the Russian Empire, but he was convinced of own talents, firmness of spirit, and the possibility of becoming great only through the revolutionary struggle.
  Therefore, when Trotsky was still very young, he began to actively campaign among the workers, participated in the creation of workers' unions in southern Russia, and was subjected to harassment, arrest, imprisonment and exile.
  At the same time, he successfully engaged journalism, studied Marxism, and during his first emigration gained great fame. Even then, he astonished all by his education, oratory and aplomb.
  He quite rightly criticized Lenin for a split in the party, suspiciousness and doctrinairism, having suggested the theory of permanent revolution in underdeveloped countries, modified by him.
  This theory in itself, proposed by Marx and Engels, about the pass of the bourgeois revolution directly to the conquest of power by the proletariat, was absolutely fantastic, and the authors quickly abandoned it.
  Trotsky, on the contrary, as a true individualist and original, decided to surprise everyone by modifying this theory to a state in which it becomes outwardly acceptable and can capture enthusiasts.
  And at first he surprised everyone with a wonderful somersault, pointing out the possibility of a socialist revolution at once, in view of the inability of the bourgeoisie of the underdeveloped countries to fulfill the bourgeois-democratic demands: "It (bourgeoisie) could not lead the workers, who were hostile to it in everyday life and very early learned to generalize their tasks. But it turned out that bourgeoisie to be equally unable to lead the peasantry, because it was connected by a network of common interests with the landlords and dreaded of shock of the property in any form" [24, p. 41].
  Indeed, Trotsky, together with the Bolsheviks, managed to seize power in Russia, despite the enormous sacrifices among the population involved in the struggle for utopian goals.
  But this was not enough for Trotsky. He believed that with the help of the new Russia it would be possible to rekindle the fire of the world revolution and come to communism on a global scale.
  It was this idea that he laid down in the "development" of the ideas of the classics of Marxism, proving, that building socialism and communism on a global scale is possible only if the socialist revolution is transferred from petty-bourgeois Russia to the industrialized West, which, in turn, will contribute to Russia in the final overthrow of the classes of oppressors. If this is not done, then capitalism will be it will be restored in Russia.
  However, the idea of a permanent revolution with the help of Russia could not be realized due to the weakness of Russia itself, and the West so and remained capitalist, and Russia for several decades tried to become a communist paradise separately from other countries, but failed, and, as Trotsky predicted, there was a restoration of capitalism in it.
  The victory of communism did not happen either in a single country or throughout the world with the help of a permanent revolution.
  All Trotsky's undertakings ended in failure, as, indeed, the actions of his opponents - Stalinists, due to the illusory nature of their goals of passing the human society, antagonistic in its unchanging nature, which contributes to the development of consciousness, into a harmonious - swamp - existence, incompatible with development.
  Trotsky is still popular with volunteers-rebels', prisoners of meaningless but attractive ideas.
  Nevertheless, about such limited enthusiasts who aspire to become world-famous persons like Trotsky, Nietzsche said so: "As for the hero, I don"t have such a good opinion of him - and yet: he is the most acceptable form of existence, especially when there is no other choice ... People striving for greatness are usually evil people: this is their only way to bear themselves" [24, p. 725-726].
  
  4. False heroes.
  The commander and ruler of Rome Guy Julius Caesar (100 - 44 BC)
  Caesar became famous mainly for his military victories, personal courage, strategic talent and luck, as well as many other talents, in particular, and literary. He was an active politician, occupying successively the highest posts in the republic.
  However, it is little known that he was a banal schemer and a big fraudster.
  In particular, in order to obtain the highest position in the system of Roman religious magistrates, he bribed all groups of voters, spending huge sums on it. But his creditors did not stint, understanding the guaranteed return of money, because this position attracted universal attention and ensured success in his political career.
  By intrigue, bribery, family connections, military success, periodic generous gifts for the plebs, in no small measure intelligence, organizational talents and determination, as well as the successful elimination of competitors, the main of which was the famous commander Gnaeus Pompey, Caesar moved to the first place in the Roman Republic, becoming at first one of the consuls (59 BC), and after the victory over Pompey - the sovereign dictator.
  Earlier, he fluttered before the famous cruel dictator of Rome, Lucius Cornelius Sulla, but having advanced to the first roles in the republic, he became to disdain even senators, not taking into account the long-established republican traditions of the state.
  He considered his own intellectual abilities and accomplishments to be unique and therefore did not impede all kinds of honors into own honor right up to the lifelong dictatorship, the father of the nation, the statue next to the gods, he did what he wanted in the management of the state, for example, appointed officials for many years, contrary to domestic customs, for many years to come.
  Except the love of power dominating in him, he was also possessed by a passion for money grubbing: "Neither when in command of armies nor as a magistrate at Rome did he show a scrupulous integrity; for as certain men have declared in their memoirs, when he was proconsul in Spain, he not only begged money from the allies, to help pay his debts, but also attacked and sacked some towns of the Lusitanians although they did not refuse his terms and opened their gates to him on his arrival. In Gaul he pillaged shrines and temples of the gods filled with offerings, and oftener sacked towns for the sake of plunder than for any fault. In consequence he had more gold than he knew what to do with, and offered it for sale throughout Italy and the provinces at the rate of three thousand sesterces the pound. In his first consulship he stole three thousand pounds of gold from the Capitol, replacing it with the same weight of gilded bronze. He made alliances and thrones a matter of barter, for he extorted from Ptolemy alone in his own name and that of Pompey nearly six thousand talents ..." [25, ј54].
  In the interval between the first consulate and dictatorship, Caesar, as proconsul, began the wars of aggression in Gaul, eventually capturing by the year 50 BC territories of modern France and partially - Germany and Belgium. He arranged a real genocide of the population in this territories, reducing it by more than a million. The robbery of the new territories gave Caesar astronomical sums, which to a large extent contributed to successful conduct of the civil war by him.
  In addition to power and greed, Caesar was a passionate lover of women: "That he was unbridled and extravagant in his intrigues is the general opinion, and that he seduced many illustrious women, among them Postumia, wife of Servius Sulpicius, Lollia, wife of Aulus Gabinius, Tertulla, wife of Marcus Crassus, and even Gnaeus Pompey's wife Mucia ... But beyond all others Caesar loved Servilia, the mother of Marcus Brutus" [25, ј50].
  Thus, in Caesar, the main signs of the lower (natural-primitive) consciousness were clearly concentrated, the main of which was self-centeredness in the desire to stand out and take a leading place in the hierarchy of the community, for which one should not disdain by any means, without remembering morality. That is, Caesar was a high-level dominant, like an alpha male, seizing power and grabbing the best of everything in a row - from luxury to a lot of attractive females, since power allows to make it.
  The above facts also indicate that in addition to dominance, two more properties of the lowest consciousness were clearly manifested in him - the aspiration for a comfortable life with feasts, palaces and triumphs (the best food and living conditions for living creatures), as well as aspiration to fertilize as many females as possible for their own pleasure, and (unconsciously) to continue themselves in the offspring (transfer of their own genome to next generations).
  Emperor of France Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821)
  Napoleon is considered by unusually great - a true heir to ancient heroes, a brilliant commander, a talented organizer and lawyer who has put the world on a new - more adequate - foundation by his Civil Code.
  Indeed, he was not only a great commander, but also a talented administrator, a brave warrior, and many times wounded.
  Along with that, in an effort to strengthen his power, Napoleon put the press under control, created a powerful police and secret service, limited the opposition, returned Catholicism, secured the right to property and equality before the law, and then made himself by the lifelong consul, like Caesar.
  Napoleon's new order consisted primarily of supporting the French bourgeoisie in its expansion beyond France, which was most hampered by Great Britain, which had similar interests in the foreign market.
  Napoleon"s main aspiration is nothing less than lust for power, as evidenced by the elimination by him of his main rivals - General Pishegru (was strangled in prison) and Moreau (was expelled from the country).
  French historian Jacques Tulard confirms grotesquely exaggerated opinion of Napoleon about himself in his book about him in the following words of Napoleon: "Not for this I took upon myself the work of governing the Netherlands in order to listen to the opinion of the Amsterdam rabble or to act what others want ... Subordinate to me the peoples of Italy know me well and must remember that in one my little finger there is more intelligence than in all their heads combined" [26, p. 286].
  Napoleon's expansionist policy consisted of waging endless wars, which he, thanks to the outstanding talent of the commander, as a rule, won. In addition, he rightly believed that the main way to strengthen and maintain power was the conduct of predatory wars, during which you can not only gain popularity with your victories, but also get rich in military booty, and distribute part of it to strengthen your own positions in power.
  However, the flip side of wars is the losses of alive power. The number of these losses is indicated in one of the French encyclopedias: "At least 5 million people - military and civilians - became victims of the Napoleonic wars" [27. P. XVII-XVIII].
  Napoleon"s biographer J. Tulard writes: "In 1813, the French, at whom began to draft 16-year-old sons in the army, called Napoleon a cannibal" [26, p. 321].
  Thus, in sacrifice to his ambitions and lust for power Napoleon brought unprecedented earlier number of victims of the war, and France itself became the victim of his ambitions, having turned from the leading into the secondary power, which ceded Great Britain superiority both in Europe and in the world.
  Like Caesar, Napoleon, penniless at first, was not spared the passion for wealth, luxury and other attributes of the "sweet" life in full accordance with the instinctive desire of any living creature as best as possible to settle himself to get the most pleasant sensations.
  He lived in stylish palaces, surrounded by numerous servants and new nobility in galunas, epaulettes and gold.
  True, he had enough money for all this luxury, since in all campaigns Napoleon was engaged in undisguised robbery, exporting gold, jewelry, art objects in astronomical quantities from Italy, Egypt, occupied European countries.
  His other instinctive desire, like that of Caesar, despite Napoleon's intensive load with military and state affairs, was the transfer own genome by the help of attractive females to the future.
  According to E. Roberts [6], from December 1804 to August 1813, Napoleon presented to his mistresses, who were at least 21, over 480 thousand francs. This amounts to almost $ 10 million in modern equivalent.
  British Prime Minister Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
  The high-born aristocrat, the greatest politician, the witty weirdo, the gourmet, the workaholic and the Nobel laureate. So Churchill is seen by historians, and with their filing - by the rest of the public.
  The British themselves named Churchill in 2002 as the greatest man in the history of their state.
  Churchill, at the beginning of his political activity, has not yet closed in complete and final love for himself and his clan. Therefore, he was supporting the social reforms carried out by the liberal government at the beginning of the twentieth century. In particular, in 1908 he initiated the law on the minimum wage, which established the norms of working hours and wages.
  Martin Gilbert in the preface to his book on Churchill [29] describes him as follows: "A shrewd, reasonable and cautious politician, Churchill was always a supporter of bold actions. One of his greatest talents was his exceptional mastery of the word, his love of language, which allowed him to eloquently and easily expound the most important things, convince and inspire people. He had a great sense of humor".
  Churchill also had a creative imagination. In particular, he proposed scattering foil from aircraft to bring down German radars, expressed the idea of creating a pipeline under the Atlantic Ocean, proposed the construction of a navigation device for pilots, and was involved in journalism and literature with success, eventually receiving the Nobel Prize.
  It must also be said that to a large extent his energy and tough control of the country in the war with Hitler Germany, allowed to mobilize Great Britain, despite casualties and hardships, to the all-out struggle against the enemy, which was crowned with success.
  However, the primary goal of Churchill was to achieve the highest power in the country, and, if possible, in the world, since the sun does not set in the British Empire. He followed this goal invariably until the last premiership, refusing already in a completely weak state to retire.
  Churchill once admitted to his mother: "If I do not succeed, it will be a disaster for me! Failures will break my heart, because ambition is my only support" [30. P. 441].
  And one of the well-known prime ministers of Great Britain - Lloyd George, who worked with Churchill, described Churchill as a person who is ready to make a drum from her own mother"s skin to drum the march in own honor.
  An example for Churchill in his quest for Supreme power was Mussolini.
  Pierre Milza notes in his book "Mussolini" Churchill"s words about him: "Mussolini is the greatest living legislator" [31].
  And at a press conference in Rome in January 1927, Churchill said: "If I were Italian, I"m sure that I would be completely with you from the beginning to the end of your victorious struggle against the brutal appetites and passions of Leninism" [29, Chapter 22].
  For career advancement, Churchill actively used his connections in the highest circles of society.
  Churchill needed power not only for its sake, but it provided many other opportunities, in particular, to get good money through corruption, that he repeatedly used.
  Churchill, who did not have capital, but wished to live in luxury, rendered services to bankers, receiving a corresponding bribe for this.
  Sevastyanov A. N. in his book about Churchill writes the following: "The Jewish banker Kassel secured him participation in the loan issued by the Japanese government in the amount of 10.000 pounds (in current money - 500.000 pounds). Churchill wrote to his brother Jack about this financial transaction: "I hope to get a small profit from this." In 1905, Kassel paid for furniture in Churchill's bachelor"s apartment in the Mayfair district of London. Kassel"s financial support was ongoing. The income from the shares of the Etchison, Topeka and Santa Fe railway, which he bought for Churchill in 1907, enabled the politician to pay for the typist's services. When Churchill married Clementine in 1908, Kassel gave them £ 500 for their wedding, that is, about £ 25.000 in terms of current money" [32, p.20].
  "During the First World War, the production of explosives in the UK in large quantities (thirty thousand tons) required acetone, which was not on the market. The state was ready to pay for it in full without bargaining ... Weizmann, the head of the Jewish Agency, received from Churchill a monopoly on the production of acetone throughout the empire. You can imagine what fabulous profits such contracts bring!" [32, p. 21].
  Churchill as the true dominant-power-lover could not help but wage or at least accompany wars and local conflicts, that had not only to support his image as a great strategist, but also strengthen his position in power as a fighter for the interests of the British Empire.
  In particular, he made considerable efforts to create the permanent conflict situation in Palestine - the territory mandated by Britain, having confronted actually Jews with Arabs in order to "fish in troubled waters" in the future, paving the way not only for Britain but also for the USA actual to dispose without hindrance of the region"s richest oil resources.
  As for the Second World War, Churchill, being the head of his country, in agreement with Roosevelt, was dragging out this war in every possible way, reasonably considering it the result weakening his opponents - the USSR and Germany. Of course, he had in mind the interests of Britain and the USA, that is, the Anglo-Saxons and himself as their protector.
  Churchill does not spare his opponents and participates in a number of punitive operations and wars: he fights with the Boers in the Boer War, goes to Cuba, where José Marty 's rebellion is suppressed, participates in punitive operations in Sudan, repressions against the Irish, Somalis, Rhodesians, fiercely fights with the Bolsheviks.
  But his greatest "achievement" was the Bengal famine in India in 1943-44, actually organized by him, in which, according to the estimates of the Indians themselves, about 7 million people died.
  Personal and corporate egoism, corresponding to animal egocentrism, as well as suspiciousness and prejudice, corresponding to animal caution, were clearly expressed in obvious hatred and contempt for other communities: "I do not believe that a dog on the hay has any right to hay, even if she lay on it for a long time. I don 't recognize that right for her. I do not admit, for example, that great injustice was committed against the Red Indians of America or the black Aborigines of Australia. I don"t admit that injustice was committed against these people because a stronger race, a more advanced race, a wiser race, let"s say so, came and took their place" [33].
  Like all males among animals who have achieved power and are able to get what they want, Churchill, since the income allowed it, became a gourmet, consuming the best delicacies, the most expensive cognac and champagne, Cuban cigars. He also liked to play in the casino, used a luxurious state-owned yacht for himself and relaxed in the most expensive resorts in the world.
  From this it is clear that despite the external brilliance, in Churchill, as in all false heroes, all the basic properties of the lower consciousness have gathered: dominance is expressed in their fierce desire for power; the creation of the most favorable conditions for themselves, being reflected in aspiration for a comfortable life, where was possible to receive all best.
  Churchill used all his talents and skills, as well as not bad intellect, as can be seen from his actions, despite the distracting maneuvers in the form of literary creativity, to enter power and entrench himself in it, making decisions primarily not to improve the lives of at least citizens of own state, but to maintain the dominance of the large owners of own country and international capital, serving them, sparing no strength, and receiving considerable bonuses and privileges from them.
  Conclusion
  Inasmuch the dissatisfaction of human consciousness, being its main state, which supports its activity, able to change quite significantly under the influence of sudden metamorphoses, insofar almost every person is able to become a hero, that is, at least, the savior of someone or something, for example, in a disaster situation with a risk to life, although this, in part, reminds the behavior of a rat cornered, and vice versa, a heroic personality in an atmosphere of quiet and calm life is lost and can turn into an ordinary resident (philistine).
  Similar changes in the dissatisfaction of human consciousness cause mass heroism in earthquakes, floods, during wars, revolutions and other shocks, but disappear under favorable and comfortable living conditions when almost nothing outstanding happens.
  The total absence of heroes in the community can serve as a measure of stagnation in its life, despite external well-being, and, therefore, an indicator of the subsequent collapse or absorption of this stagnant community by more active communities.
  Along with that, for separate individuals, the degree of dissatisfaction with both natural (animal) consciousness and self-consciousness can be due to various reasons, which are to some extent noted above, quite stable throughout life - stably low or high.
  The consequence of this factor is that the outward manifestation of both forms of consciousness can be very specific and significantly differ in personality traits such as courage, fortitude, fearlessness, selflessness, responsibility, will, charm, sociability, energy, a sense of self-preservation, pride in oneself, charisma, love of power, ambition, etc.
  This difference was shown by us above on the example of different types of heroes, whose features of the external manifestation of their consciousness had certain differences, which allowed them to be divided into two main groups - altruists and egocentrists, as well as to decouple the false heroes from them.
  Nevertheless, throughout life, under the influence of circumstances and age-related changes, the dissatisfaction of consciousness can change significantly, causing in turn a change in the character of a person, his mental abilities, emotional state and various external properties - from fearlessness up to fear of death, from nobility up to contempt for people, etc.
  In addition, it is impossible to establish a rigid framework between the indicated types of heroes, whose consciousness not only changes over time, but also his state at one moment may not coincide with the state at another moment. Therefore, it is difficult to characterize definitely a person who is quite responsible today, but evades responsibility the next day in other circumstances.
  This factor, of course, cannot but affect the division of heroes throughout the marked groups, often making the line between them quite unsteady.
  For the most part, the heroes cause time. Over time, they disappear, mainly. returning to previous occupations.
  However, such return may not occur if, in the process of heroic deeds, circumstances cause a decrease in the degree of dissatisfaction with self-awareness, and at the same time, an increase in the degree of dissatisfaction with natural consciousness with its typically animal manifestations, for example, in the form of increased dominance over neighbors.
  Similar temporary heroes-transformers, turning sooner or later into their opposite, can be called half-heroes-half-villains.
  In these characters, consciousness undergoes significant changes during life, which is reflected in its external manifestations in the form of specific actions, sometimes heroic, then treacherous or selfish. These figures may at one time be actual heroes, and at other times they may be villains or pathetic and cowardly losers.
  Quite typical representatives of temporary semi-heroes are the ruler of the USSR in the first half of the twentieth century I.V. Stalin and the ruler of Italy in the first half of the twentieth century B. Mussolini.
  Joseph Stalin at first quite sincerely tried to make the country an instigator of the world revolution, at least in Europe, for building communism in it according to the covenants of Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin, imagining himself an ideological hero, but he quickly realized by his pragmatic mind the unpromising of the world revolution, and, unlike Leon Trotsky, who always strove for it no matter what, Stalin simply made himself a dictator in the country of "victorious" socialism, and after the war - by Generalissimo, and it was not quite deserved and not at all heroic.
  His egocentric nature, however, was kept for a long time within the framework of selflessness characteristic of any real hero. but this disinterestedness over time turned into ostentatious modesty with the availability in the reality of numerous residences, and the desire for greatness, at least in own eyes, turned into a banal dictatorship and the destruction of all opponents.
  This transformation was facilitated by his initially hidden love of power, ambition, resourcefulness, lack of nobility, lack of courage and sacrifice, contempt for people, and fear of death. Of course, the basis for manifestation over time, these negative features of the personality of this half-hero-half-villain is the change in the degree of non-satisfaction of the consciousness downward to the actual replacement of its by dissatisfaction of the animal consciousness, which made Stalin a kind of alpha male of an entire country.
  That is, dissatisfaction with the state of public relations of this figure over time has fallen to the point at which social needs ceased to interest him, giving way to the desire for sole power and its retention. This love of power was supported by a high degree of dissatisfaction of his animal consciousness, or, in other words, increased dominance. That is, in fact, he changed the image of an ideological hero not even to the image of a false hero, but to the image of a banal, uncontrolled ruler-villain who keeps his subjects in fear.
  Italian dictator of the first half of the twentieth century Benito Mussolini at the beginning of his career joined the socialist movement. He became the editor of the socialist weekly, and then the daily newspaper, and subsequently the weekly class struggle magazine, in which he criticized the government, which, in his opinion, defended the interests of the capitalists. He organized strikes, was arrested.
  In 1911, Mussolini opposed the war in Libya. He tried to prevent the sending of troops to the front, organizing strikes and was repeatedly arrested.
  Mussolini in these pre-war years became one of the leaders of the socialists of Italy.
  However, after the outbreak of World War I, Mussolini unexpectedly declared that a German victory would put an end to freedom in Europe, and began to fight with the socialists.
  At the front, Mussolini showed extraordinary courage, throwing himself by the first into attack.
  After the war ended, Mussolini declared that socialism had collapsed and should be replaced with a new doctrine. Thus arose fascism, which was actually supported by the bourgeoisie, which chose it as a counterweight to the communist movement.
  Mussolini became a dictator of Italy, launched political repression, officially began to support racist theories, organized a police state in Italy, got involved in wars.
  In addition, he showed exorbitan love for power and ambitions, making himself not only a dictator (duce), but also he spearheaded the cabinet of Ministers, as well as he headed seven ministries at once and covered himself by various medals and orders.
  Mussolini dreamed of making Italy a great empire on the base of the Mediterranean, but he had failed utterly, turning from a fighter for the rights of workers and a brave warrior into the defender of the parasitic ruling class and the militarist who lost the war.
  In the same way as Stalin, the basis changes over time its self-consciousness from altruism to selfishness was the lowering of the degree of dissatisfaction of consciousness, largely replaced by dissatisfaction of animal consciousness, as evidenced by not only its all-encompassing lust for power, but and the number of lovers and sporadic relations with women that are difficult to count.
  For comparison with these half-heroes-transformers, it makes sense to give a brief characterization by no means to the hero, but still an outstanding figure in the field of management and politics - the Russian ruler and then Tsar Boris Godunov (late XVI and early XVII centuries).
  Boris Godunov was a practical and responsible intellectual- statesman, who wanted not only power, but also thought to increase the welfare of the population.
  At the same time, he did not prove himself in battles, but turned out to be a talented intriguer, breaking through from the very bottom to the heights of power, taking advantage of circumstances, and, moreover, when he was still his ruler of the country, he became the richest man in the state. And if such external characteristics of altruistic heroes as responsibility, highly developed intellect, as well as great organizational abilities and sociability cannot be denied for him, then he had such - by no means heroic qualities, as adaptability, treachery, love of power, greed, hypocrisy, as well as the lack of valor, courage, determination, pluck, sacrifice and contempt for death.
  So, despite his outstanding intellect, significant successes in rebuilding the state after the catastrophic reign of Ivan IV and certain merits in joining Western Siberia to his Power, he is simply an outstanding representative of the power elite who has not accomplished any feats.
  That is, the content of Godunov"s self-consciousness is not much different from self-consciousness of any representative of the power elite, who, because of its low level, sees itself mainly, evaluating its prospects in occupying a higher place in the dominant hierarchy, and the leading place in its consciousness is occupied by the animal of consciousness, which encourages him to push opponents away from power and acquire all kinds of privileges, coinciding in this regard with his truncated self-consciousness.
  In conclusion, it should be noted that the main external differences of any hero from a false hero or from a half-hero-transformer are the enduring sincere unselfishness, sacrifice, awareness of his great mission in the pursuit of good, how the hero understands it, or great goals, devotion to acquired ideals and contempt to those in power as typical parasites and unworthy representatives of the human race.
  
  Bibliography
  
  1. Bruno G. On Heroic Enthusiasm. Kiev. 1996.
  2. Carlyle T. (1841) On hero, Hero-worship, & the Heroic in History. New York. D. Appleton & Co.
  3. Карлейль Т. Этика жизни. Люди и герои. СПб.
  4. Юм Д. Трактат о человеческой природе. Книга 2. Москва, Издательство "Канон". 1995,
  5. Ницше Ф. Сочинения. Т. 1. Издательство "Мысль", Москва. 1990.
  6. Франсуа Ларошфуко "Мемуары. Максимы и моральные размышления". Минск. Издательство "Попурри". 1999.
  7. Weber M. The sociology of religion. L. Methuen. 1965. - LXVII.
  8. Weber M. Economy and society. University of California Press. 1978. Vol. 1.
  9. Булгаков С. Н. Героизм и подвижничество. Из сборника "Вехи". Сборник статей о русской интеллигенции. - Москва, 1909.
  10. Шадриков В. Д. От индивида к индивидуальности. Институт психологии РАН. 2019.
  11. Рерих Е. И. Записи учения Живой Этики. Учения Живой Этики. Беспредельность. Часть 2. ј 797. Издательство - Андрей Люфт. 2011.
  12. Рерих Е. И. Письма. В 9 т. Т. 5. С. 148. М. МЦР, Благотворительный фонд им. Е. И. Рерих, Мастер Банк, 2003.
  13. Шапошникова Л. В. Мудрость веков. М. МЦР, 1996.
  14. Шапошникова Л. В. Рерих как мыслитель и историк культуры. "Культура и время". 2008. No 3.
  15. Nizovtsev Y. M. Why does not science have the ability to identify the essence of consciousness? 2020. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon. (C) Yury Nizovtsev.
  16. Nizovtsev Y. M. The collection of the especial and outlandish - for the check with respect to creativity. 2019. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon. (C) Yury Nizovtsev.
  17. Nizovtsev Y. M. Everything and Nothingness. 2016. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Amazon. (C) Yury Nizovtsev.
  18. Garibaldi G. Memorie, v. 2.
  19. Garibaldi G. Scritti..., vol. V.
  20. Махно Н. И. Воспоминания. Париж. 1936. Глава "На распутье". Hoaxer.
  21. Штирнер М. Единственный и его собственность. Харьков. "Основа". 1994.
  22. Woodcock G. Anarchism. A History of Libertarian Idea and Movement. 2005. ISSN 0887-3763.
  23. Нечаев С. Г. Катехизис революционера. Революционный радикализм в России: век девятнадцатый. М., Археологический центр. 1997.
  24. Троцкий Л. История русской революции. 1 том из двух. Февральская революция. М., "Терра" "Республика", 1997.
  25. Гай Светоний Транквилл. Жизни двенадцати цезарей. Божественный Юлий. М., "Художественная литература", 1990г.
  26. Тюлар Ж. Наполеон, или Миф о спасителе". М. Молодая гвардия. 1-е изд. 1996. ISBN: 978-5-235-03157-9.
  27. The encyclopedia of the French revolution and Napoleonic Wars: a political, social, and military history. Gregory Fremont-Barnes. - ABX-CLIO, 2006. ISBN 978-18510-96466. Roberts A. Napoleon the Great. Penguin. 2014. ISBN 978-0-241-01919.5.
  28. Roberts A. Napoleon the Great. Penguin. 2014. ISBN 978-0-241-01919.
  29. Martin Gilbert. Churchill: A life. 1992. An Owl Book. Henry Holt and Company. New York.
  30. Churchill Randolph S. Op. Cit. V. I. 1899. 11.01.
  31. Milza, Pierr. Mussolini. Paris, Fayard. 1999.
  32. Севастьянов А. Н. Преступник номер один. Уинстон Черчилль перед судом Истории. 2017. ООО "Яуза-пресс".
  33. To the Peel Commission (1937) on Jewish Homeland in Palestine.
  
  Chapter 14.
  What were the true aspirations of the glorified rulers and the reasons that caused them?
  
  Introduction
  It is known, what deeds were glorious the famous rulers, about whom volumes of historical researches are written - from Caesar to the US President Kennedy. Much less publicized data about their sins and transgressions, since the power elites ordering historical research on their own ancestors or predecessors are not interested in revealing the unpleasant or unflattering facts of the primitiveness and immorality of these figures, and, moreover, still remains a mystery, why the scoundrels are usually in power - a kind of negative selection, - which was noted by Plato more than 2000 years ago.
  In recent works, "The person in the attractive field of power" [1, part 4] and "The driving force and source of development of the person and his communities" [1, part 3, chapter 3] we have shown the fundamental reasons, according to which in power are individuals who often cannot be denied intelligence, energy, sociability, organizational abilities, but their main properties are selfishness, love of power, covetousness, contempt for the lower ones, hypocrisy, adaptability, cunning, insidious, dishonesty, naked pragmatism (benefit).
  They are not afraid to take the burden of power, that is, the adoption of vital decisions for large groups of the population, because they are interested in the population only from the position of receiving from it one or another benefit for themselves or for their own clans, and they always deceive their subjects, obscuring their selfish goals, but, as a rule, supplement this deception with timely thrown small oblations.
  It is precisely these, by no means the most positive properties, that ensure surfacing" from the crowd and holding in power of these, in fact, crooks whose actions are aimed at creating their own well-being, and everything else is subordinate to this goal or it interests them as factors that contribute to holding power and the glorification of one's own person, who, as a rule, does not differ in any achievements in science or art.
  Therefore, it makes sense to use the most impressive examples to show the true "achievements" of these figures, who are often proud whole countries and admired by not stupid people, and who really were not deprived of some abilities and even talents.
  However, first, to understand the essence of the problem, we note the genesis of consciousness and the difference between human consciousness and the consciousness of other creatures, as well as a combination of properties that characterize people striving for power, and the similarity of these properties with the main signs of the most primitive living organisms.
  In one of the works, we noted the following.
  "Be that as it may, all living beings are different from other objects of being by the presence of consciousness in them, which, in fact, makes them alive. This means that, unlike inanimate objects, they acquire new properties that allow them to replicate themselves through reproduction thanks the genetic code available in them; to be merged with the environment through metabolism; thanks to mutations, to be distributed on different types of living organisms, and, at the same time, with greater or less success, to be modified in accordance with changes in the environment, in particular, to become more complex, etc.
  However, these beings in the form of flora and fauna have no subjectness. They manifest themselves in the environment only in the form of dynamic components of the environment that do not conscious themselves, although and act to give development to this environment, but act instinctively-reflexively, i.e. their consciousness is limited consumption of sensations, and it does not go beyond the environment, and the development itself is very slow in comparison with conscious actions. Therefore, such initial type of consciousness can be qualified as the lowest consciousness, the only inherent to all living beings, except for the person who has some kind of complement to it.
  This restriction in the only of the lowest consciousness in any representative of the flora or fauna is removed in the person whose consciousness acquires a significant complement in the form of awareness of oneself. Thus, one gets the opportunity to become the subject of action: he understands the meaning of his actions, composing projects, correcting them on the move, that is, remaining as part of the environment, he at the same time rises above it, becoming partly its master and even the creator as in various man-made structures, mechanisms, processes, and creations of the spirit, which is reflected in various areas of art and culture...
  Thus, in human beings there are two components of consciousness - the lowest, often called unconscious, or subconscious, and the highest consciousness, or self-consciousness. the level of which can differ significantly depending on the degree of development of the person or his communities - take, for example, the person of the Stone Age and the current Nobel laureate, - the level of consciousness and in that and other case significantly other, however self-consciousness is present both here and there, without disappearing anywhere, but the lowest consciousness, which is responsible generally for functioning of an organism (body) to hold it in a live state and to do it by adequate concerning stay of a body in the environment as well as to fix and spread an organism in the environment, remains almost invariable, i.e. does not depend on time.
  Both these components (hypostases) exist and act in the body and through the body in an indissoluble connection, but the highest consciousness is incapable to exist without the lowest, as the last is responsible for preservation of the living being in the environment - it is impossible to do without this, and the first - above all - for conscious and design activity of a being as individually, and in the human communities which are in a certain environment, and other natural beings always do without self-consciousness...
  The lowest consciousness "feeds" only on the sensations that give it everything, including the harmony of existence, i.e. something acceptable and even pleasant in our understanding in a certain combination of feelings if, of course, to distract from fight of each being for survival. Therefore, it does not wish to lose the sensations at all.
  Similar type of consciousness has natural egocentrism, automatically seeking to survive, no matter what.
  In the process of development of the living beings, this type of consciousness undergoes relatively minor changes, since it is not able to withdraw own basic property - an unconscious desire for survival, based on the primordial activity of any living thing...
  Both these parties of consciousness continuously conflict both in the person, and in the interpersonal relations: discontent with, visible inability to change quickly, the felt limitation of intelligence, abilities, etc.; the envy and hatred to competitors instantly would rip to shreds any human community if not the state with its institutes.
  Nevertheless, each person manifests also qualities of the highest consciousness which are expressed not only in the intellectual and production sphere, but also in inquisitiveness, various religious and cultural forms and also in the affectional relations, somehow: friendship, love, experiences for relatives, for the fatherland, etc."
  If the relationship between people on the basis of self-awareness slowly but steadily develops, then the lowest consciousness in the person remains unchanged.
  Therefore, the ideal persons do not appear, and the lowest consciousness, despite any form of its disguise, acts at any stage of the development of human consciousness, being expressed in deep-rooted egoism (egocentrism) - personal and corporate, hypocrisy (masking), suspiciousness (caution), contempt for people of other circle (mistrust to other communities), animal instincts concerning an opposite sex, etc." [1, part 3, chapter 3].
  The low level of self-consciousness of the power elite and structures adjacent to it, as a rule, limited by pragmatism leads to the dominance of the lowest, or animal consciousness in it, for which the main property is a sense of self-preservation, which seeks in any case not to lose the consumption of sensations, preferably the most pleasant ones, at the expense of the rest of the population, and exactly the location inside of the power organs give similar senses primarily.
  In fact, the pragmatism of the rulers is reduced to the most profitable way of survival, which consists in the aspiration to consume the best foodstuff (the aspiration of any living being for food), - to create for themselves and their offspring the greatest possible comfort (the aspiration of any living creature to provide for themselves the maximum amenities that contribute, in particular, its reproduction).
  But to satisfy such requirements, a victory in the competitive struggle is necessary, which can give all the best on one"s choice from the perspective of consumption, namely: it is necessary a seizure of power or, at least, the proximity to the power elite (the aspiration of any living creature to dominate their own niche of life, the implementation of which may provide the best conditions for survival and, accordingly, the consumption of not just sensations, but - the most pleasant sensations).
  Thus, mainly people with the most primitive system of consciousness, that is, with a predominance of lower consciousness, try to get into the structures of power.
  Therefore, for the representatives of power, the lowest consciousness is inevitably a dominant, that is, in their consciousness a clear lack of awareness of themselves as self-valuable personalities, and not as consumers is sensed. Power and practically unlimited access to privileges and property belittles them to such an extent that they see in the people masses only a source of well-being for themselves and a field for manifesting their own low-lying instincts.
  However, being afraid of anger of the people and counteraction of informal opposition, they are forced to resist to anarchy, holding, in particular, by means of reforms that order, which provides functioning and development of society, but, naturally, not from the noble motives, but only from a sense of self-preservation.
  Compared to the rest, similar individuals from the standpoint of falling into the power elite and retaining inside it have significant advantages, since the main content of their consciousness is not compassion, disinterested love for one"s neighbor, honesty, self-esteem, nobility and other positive human qualities that have distanced a person from the animal world with its ruthlessness and automatism, and have helped human communities to use their creative abilities to change the world with great success.
  These positive human qualities, manifested with increasing force during the development of civilization due to the presence of a higher consciousness (self-awareness) in a person, are concentrated more in those individuals who are not satisfied with simple consumption, but who want more - knowledge about the world, about themselves, and wish to demonstrate your drawing abilities, Music, composing, civil and legal building, meaning they want more freedom, and not just for themselves, but for everyone. Therefore, they are natural opponents of power structures, criticizing them and forcing them to pay attention both to themselves and to pay more attention to the lives of the working masses, improving the efficiency of the state apparatus, culture and science.
  With the growth of this natural opposition to the authorities, the course of civilization is accelerating, countries and regions, which to the greatest extent concentrate all the cultural and technical achievements of civilization are distinguished, in contrast to archaic or backward states in which this opposition either did not appear or it is weak. Similar States are at the moment in the majority.
  Power, like the people in it, is cold, ruthless, mechanistic, systematic, corporate, pragmatic, hierarchical, fixated on itself - it is like a soulless nature built on mutual devouring in the frameworks the chains of its dynamic units, therefore everything truly humane, especially altruism, characteristic for the highest consciousness of the person, is only an obstacle to the penetration into power and the retention in it.
  For this reason, the scoundrels, or the individuals, in whom the lowest consciousness, that is, natural instincts, predominate, seek to power and with great success are held in power. In this regard, these individuals are closest to ordinary natural organisms, who are not bothered by moral problems, and own intelligence, which is higher than that of monkeys, they are used to only succeed in their sovereign field, pushing aside competitors, and fearing the burden of power not because they are afraid to make a mistake in their care about people, but because aa boss may not appreciate their zeal for caring for him.
  Similar orientation of structures of power mainly on themselves, actually deprives them of the ability to independently develop the relevant community, provoking either complete stagnation or slow development, and even then this development is forced due to the pressure of neighboring communities that can subordinate or absorb this community, and to deprive the local top of power, which has been happening for the last several millennia in a row, without making any special changes in social beingness.
  But as soon as a more or less constructive opposition to the authorities arose, this community began to progress much faster. An example of this can be the Greek city-states, which appeared more than two thousand years ago, and which laid the whole cultural and legal foundation of the present civilization, as well as having produced a number of technical and military innovations. A great degree of freedom in the realities of that time was provided by numerous philosophical schools, which were not only the first scientific centers, but also influential opposition to the authorities, and the first initiator of mankind 's desire for harmonious peace was Plato with his ideal state [2, Chapter 2].
  After a long stagnation in Europe, following the fall of the Roman Empire, in the middle of the Middle Ages has occurred the turn to industrial, beginning with the Netherlands, which put an end to a estates society close to caste community, that is, the stagnant, and conceived a society in which real opposing forces appeared in a form of the capitalist power elite and humanitarian opposition to it, which has stood on the side of the working people and offered to improve society so, that there were no longer neither rich nor poor (Campanella, then Henri Saint-Simon and many other thinkers - potential reformers) [2, chapter 2; 1, parts 6, 7].
  Thus, without constructive opposition to the ruling elite, either the archaic remains, or this community is absorbed by more advanced tribes or peoples.
  In potential power lovers, the primitive desire for consumption at the expense of others, or parasitism, was initially laid to the maximum extent. And it is promoted by to invariably elevated level of dominance on the basis of selfishness prevailing over all actions, that is, an inescapable aspiration in any way to push potential competitors from power and, therefore, from the feeding trough.
  Therefore, similar individuals are not ashamed anything: all their actions are characterized by deception. hypocrisy, contempt for the subordinates, cunning, perfidy.
  Thus, they use their highest consciousness misused, that is, all creativity available in them is directed not to the best organization of society, not to the common good, but to intrigues with the aim to penetrate the power in order to acquire and consume personal goods, and by any means to preserve oneself in it.
  This implies the natural advantage of such individuals over ordinary decent people who are not able to betray with a charming smile, but it"s these, in fact, scoundrels who penetrate power and stay in it, create multiple obstacles to improve the content and effectiveness of management, since most often they either do not have the corresponding abilities, or lose them in the flow of consumer sensations provided to them from power and comfort, poisoned, however, by the intrigues of the inevitable competitors who must be resisted by spending time and mental resources.
  It is precisely because of the miserable content of power elites whose primary goals were and is their own well-being and maintaining power, and not the development of their own countries, that the move of civilization is slow, zigzag - with delays and kickbacks.
  Thus, from the foregoing, it follows that each representative of the power elite, and even more so, the ruler, in order to find the best food, the most pleasant comfort and the most beautiful representatives of the opposite sex, must, just as happens in nature, take a leading place in the community, that is, first eliminate competitors, and then retain the captured leadership, still eliminating potential competitors to his own place as lord.
  As a result, the ruler gets not only the opportunity kicking his subjects, if he wants, not only to withdraw the funds from the treasury for a "beautiful" life, but also the opportunity to provide his offspring with loot for many years to come, as well as to promote, as a rule, his incompetent offspring into power, and, if possible, make the power hereditary.
  An objection may follow to these theses: many rulers were cultured people, famous for their glorious deeds, and they are still set as an example for the current generation.
  Therefore, they simply cannot be commonplace killers, thieves, sybarites and lascivious individuals.
  Let us look at specific examples of the behavior of the most famous and illustrious rulers of what preferences they were choosing, that is, what primarily were attracting these persons and why.
  We have chosen as examples such historical figures as Caesar, Napoleon, Churchill, US President John F. Kennedy, well-known and highly respected by the majority of the population.
  2. Analysis of the characters.
  2.1. Gaius Julius Caesar (100-44 BC)
  I
  Caesar is the most revered, noble, endowed with many talents, brilliant commander, who have conquered the whole of Europe, bordering the Roman Republic, have carried out a number of progressive reforms in the country, de facto have formed the enormous Roman Empire. Napoleon took an example from him. His tactics and strategy were studied by all the great commanders. His name became an analogue of royal titles. Until now, the entire educated public is thrilled at its mention.
  But - what really motivated this person in his deeds?!
  Caesar was born into a noble but not wealthy family. Received a good education at that time. Father died early. Gaius Caesar was then only 16 years old. He became the head of the family, which encouraged him to independence and the ability to take important decisions.
  Perhaps his ambitions were born even then: the aspiration for power - once he is noble, and the desire for enrichment - should not be such person as he, to be poor, especially since money opens the way to power - someone can be bribed, and own independence can be demonstrated to the public. At the same time, the very achievement of power guarantees an almost unlimited disposal of state resources.
  However, Caesar began small: he went to military service first to Bithynia, where he showed himself well, and was awarded the civil crown - an honorary military award. Then he was moved to Cilicia to war with Mithridates, but after the death of his adversary - Sulla, he returned to Rome to participate in the political struggle, that is, in fact, to gain power in the state. It was 78 BC, and Caesar was only 22 years old.
  Already in about 72 BC he was elected by the military tribune (command position allowing to command the legion), in 69 BC he became a quaestor (assistant consul and treasurer). In 66 BC Caesar was elected Curule aedile, whose duties included the organization of urban construction, transport, trade, everyday life of Rome.
  Thus, he was gaining increasing popularity among the people. In particular, in 65 BC he organized gladiatorial battles with extraordinary luxury.
  In 64 BC Caesar headed the permanent criminal court in robbery cases, and in 63 BC he held the highest position in the system of Roman religious magistrates, becoming a great pontiff. For the sake of this prestigious life-long position, he had to bribe all groups of voters, spending huge amounts on it. But his creditors did not stint, understanding the guaranteed return of money, since this position attracted general attention to him and ensured success in his political career.
  Indeed, in 63 BC Caesar received the position of governor in Spain, where he was able to practice oneself in pacification of local tribes (Lusitans), and in robbery a number of cities and churches to raise significant amounts to repay debts to creditors.
  Thus, by intrigue, bribery, family ties, military successes, periodic generous handouts to the plebs, to a large extent, quick wit, organizational talent and determination, as well as the successful elimination of competitors, the main of which was the famous commander Gnaeus Pompey, Caesar advanced to the first place in the Roman Republic, becoming first among the consuls (59 BC), and after the victory over Pompey - the sovereign dictator.
  In the interval between the first consulate and dictatorship, Caesar, as proconsul, began the wars of aggression in Gaul, eventually capturing to 50 BC territories of modern France and partially - Germany and Belgium. The robbery of the new territories gave Caesar astronomical sums, which to a large extent contributed to successful conduct by him of the civil war.
  Caesar's love of power was, on the one hand, realistic - he did not want to accept the imperial title, apparently not having interested in the external attributes of power. Having all the powers of management and being proud of himself, he once answered a proposal to become king: "I am Caesar, not king!" [3, ј79].
  On the other hand, he considered his own intellectual abilities and accomplishments to be unique and therefore did not impede all kinds of honors in own honor, up to "... dictatorship for life, ... Father of his Country, ... statue among those of the kings ..." [3, ј76]; in the management of the state he did what he wanted, for example, "... he named magistrates for several years to come, ..." [3, ј76]; "... arrogant were his public utterances ..." [3, ј77]; he also openly scorned the senators, not taking into account the long-established republican traditions of the state.
  Therefore, as Suetonius writes: "Even the populace no longer were pleased with present conditions, but both secretly and openly rebelled at his tyranny and cried out for defenders of their liberty" [3, ј80].
  The conspiracy of nobles led by Brutus and Cassius developed, and Caesar was killed.
  II
  According to the testimony of Suetonius Caesar had many abilities: "In eloquence and military art he gained no less, if not more glory, than their best experts ... Cicero calls his syllable elegant, brilliant ... " [3, ј55]. About "Notes" by Caesar Cicero speaks like this: "He wrote memoirs which deserve the highest praise; they are naked in their simplicity, straightforward yet graceful, stripped of all rhetorical adornment ..." [3, ј56]. "He covered great distances with incredible speed, making a hundred miles a day in a hired carriage and with little baggage, swimming the rivers which barred his path or crossing them on inflated skins, and very often arriving before the messengers sent to announce his coming" [3, ј57]. " ... he never led his army where ambuscades were possible without carefully reconnoitring the country ..." He entered into battle ... sometimes in the most severe weather, when this was least expected of him" 3, ј58]. "No regard for religion ever turned him from any undertaking, or even delayed him ..." [3, ј59]. "He joined battle, not only after planning his movements in advance but on a sudden opportunity, often immediately at the end of a march, and sometimes in the foulest weather, when one would least expect him to make a move ... When the issue was doubtful, he used to send away the horses, and his own among the first, to impose upon the troops the greater necessity of standing their ground by taking away that aid to flight ..." [3, ј60].
  The same Suetonius testifies to his unpretentiousness: "... he drank very little wine ... in the matter of food Gaius Oppius tells us that he was so indifferent ..." [3, ј53].
  Further, Suetonius notes the lack of the ferocious temper of Caesar: "His friends he treated with invariable kindness and consideration. ... he never formed such bitter enmities that he was not glad to lay them aside when opportunity offered ..." [3, ј72-73,].
  However, actually, except the love of power dominating in him, he was also possessed by a passion for acquisitiveness: "Neither when in command of armies nor as a magistrate at Rome did he show a scrupulous integrity; for as certain men have declared in their memoirs, when he was proconsul in Spain, he not only begged money from the allies, to help pay his debts, but also attacked and sacked some towns of the Lusitanians although they did not refuse his terms and opened their gates to him on his arrival. In Gaul he pillaged shrines and temples of the gods filled with offerings, and oftener sacked towns for the sake of plunder than for any fault. In consequence he had more gold than he knew what to do with, and offered it for sale throughout Italy and the provinces at the rate of three thousand sesterces the pound. In his first consulship he stole three thousand pounds of gold from the Capitol, replacing it with the same weight of gilded bronze. He made alliances and thrones a matter of barter, for he extorted from Ptolemy alone in his own name and that of Pompey nearly six thousand talents ..." [3, ј54].
  As an explanation, we note that one sestertium of Caesar's time was a bronze (medium) coin, and according to modern estimates, based on known prices in the markets of Ancient Rome, in terms of euros corresponded to 2 euros. For example, it was possible to buy on 1 sesterce liter of table wine, for ½ sesterce -1 kilogram of bread, for 15 sesterces - tunic, for 1200-2500 sesterces - slave.
  One Attic talent equated approximately 26 kilograms of silver. Since 1 gram of silver corresponds to approximately 5.5 modern dollars, 1 silver talent can be estimated at 143 thousand dollars, although, of course, the prices of our time and the time of Ancient Rome can vary greatly, but the scale is still visible.
  Nevertheless, Caesar perfectly understood the value of money not only as the means for a comfortable life, the construction of palaces and the purchase of works of art, which, however, he did not neglect according to evidence of contemporaries, and he considered money as a necessity to achieve power and its strengthen in the quality of some means of bribery of the people (customers and plebs in general) for own support, for bribes to relevant officials and senators to solve problems, in particular, appointments to positions, going into astronomical debts to collect amounts for bribes, which however paid off pretty quickly, as well as to fight wars, the victories in which over the adversary - obviously weaker on the military organization (tribes of Gauls, Belgians, Germans), on the one hand, strengthened his position in power, and on the other hand, gave him huge sums as a result of the robbery of conquered peoples and tribes: "... he met the heavy expenses of the civil wars and of his triumphs and entertainments by the most bare-faced pillage and sacrilege" [3, ј54].
  In particular, in August 46 BC Caesar made a grand triumph, dedicated immediately to four victories. Not only the crowned captives and hostages from the conquered countries were shown in the procession, the slaves carried treasures, estimated at 64,000 talents, which is about 10 billion modern dollars.
  In addition to power and acquisitiveness, Caesar was a passionate lover of women: "That he was unbridled and extravagant in his intrigues is the general opinion, and that he seduced many illustrious women, among them Postumia, wife of Servius Sulpicius, Lollia, wife of Aulus Gabinius, Tertulla, wife of Marcus Crassus, and even Gnaeus Pompey's wife Mucia ... But beyond all others Caesar loved Servilia, the mother of Marcus Brutus" [3, ј50].
  Thus, in Caesar, the main signs of the lower (natural-primitive) consciousness were clearly concentrated, the main of which was self-centeredness in the desire to stand out and take a leading place in the hierarchy of the community, for which one should not disdain by any means, without remembering morality. That is, Caesar was a high-level dominant, like an alpha male, seizing power and grabbing the best of everything in a row - from luxury to a lot of attractive females, since power allows to make it.
  The above facts also indicate that in addition to dominance, two more properties of the lowest consciousness were clearly manifested in him - the aspiration for a comfortable life with feasts, palaces and triumphs (the best food and living conditions for living creatures), as well as the aspiration to fertilize as many females as possible for their own pleasure, and (unconsciously) to continue themselves in the offspring (transfer of their own genome to next generations).
  2.2. Napoleon Bonaparte. 1769-1821.
  I
  Napoleon is considered by practically all literate people to be unusually great - a true heir to ancient heroes, a brilliant commander, a talented organizer and lawyer who has put the world on a new - more adequate - foundation by his Civil Code.
  He forced all the monarchs of that time to acknowledge his own insignificance before his great deeds, and France, the best part of the population of which was destroyed him in his continuous wars for domination of his neighbors, nevertheless recognized this Corsican as his greatest citizen.
  What is this citizen, who has made himself Emperor, if we look at him through the prism of the possession of each person of one of the two forms of consciousness indicated by us - the lower (primitive-natural, practically invariable for all living beings) and the higher (self-consciousness, which arises only in a person, and only inside him is constantly evolving in the frameworks of society). Which of these forms of consciousness prevailed in him according to the facts and results of his actions?
  The ancestors of Napoleon have been known since the 9th century AD. - Florentine branch of the Italo-Langobard family, descended from Count William. In the XIII century, representatives of the genus moved to the Genoa region, and then - in the XVI century - to Corsica, which then belonged to Genoa. So Napoleon is Italian by birth. And until his death, he spoke French with a distinct accent.
  In 1785, he prematurely graduated from the Paris Military School and was enlisted as a junior lieutenant in the artillery regiment. Napoleon supported the revolution and in 1792 received the rank of captain. In 1793, he arrived in Toulon, besieged by the revolutionary army, and received the rank of major there. With the help of artillery commanded by Napoleon, Toulon was taken and he awarded the rank of brigadier general for his services. In 1795 Napoleon used artillery in the dispersal of the royalist rebellion in Paris and was promoted to divisional general and later appointed commander of the rear troops. In 1796, he took command of the Italian Army of the French Republic.
  Creating a numerical superiority in the right place and at the right time, Napoleon quickly dealt with the enemy, who used outdated military tactics, and cleared almost all of Northern Italy out of the Austrians, receiving a huge indemnity from the defeated. Then he drove the Austrians completely from Italy and captured a number of its regions, including Venice, Verona, Mantua, Genoa. The Italian campaign was successfully completed. He kept a large part of the military booty for himself, which is not indicative of his lack of commercialism.
  In 1798, Napoleon went to conquer Egypt, as a pre-field to the conquest of India. He successfully completed this task, but in Syria failed and, leaving the army, went to France. This momentous event, as well as the fact that he left the army after crossing the Berezina, when it was necessary to somehow correct the collapse of his plans in Russia, testifies to Napoleon's enduring egocentrism, when for the sake of career reasons, he easily sacrificed by entire armies. In addition, Napoleon took out from Egypt a lot of art and other treasures, some of which he kept for himself.
  The crisis in France in 1799, due to military defeats and the country's economic weakness, provoked a conspiracy against the ruling Directory, and the conspirators invited the popular General Bonaparte to take part in the conspiracy. The coup was completed and Napoleon became the first consul of the three - the head of the executive branch.
  So, taking advantage of his popularity and military force in his hands, Napoleon seized power in the country, which he could not even dream about at first, but, apparently, having felt own strength and weakness of the Directory after the Italian campaign, he was only waiting for the right moment.
  He had enough abilities to manage, formulate laws and conduct military operations, and Caesar served as an example, whose biography and books he carefully studied.
  Several victorious battles allowed Napoleon to seize northern Italy from the Austrians, which Suvorov had conquered for them, as well as to gain control of Italy and Germany. In 1802, the war with the coalition of Austria and Great Britain was over. Then Napoleon acquired Louisiana from Spain, thereby expanding the colonial possessions of France.
  Napoleon"s administrative reform allowed to solve the problems of tax collection and recruitment, and also outlined the structure of the state, close to modern.
  In an effort to strengthen his power, Napoleon put the press under control, created a powerful police and secret service, limited the opposition, returned Catholicism, secured the right to property and equality before the law, and then made himself by the lifelong consul, like Caesar.
  Napoleon's new order consisted primarily of supporting the French bourgeoisie in its expansion beyond France, which was most hampered by Great Britain, which had similar interests in the foreign market.
  The resulting conflict could not but be resolved by the war. Napoleon sold Louisiana to the USA and in 1803 captured Hanover, owned by the United Kingdom.
  In 1804, the Civil Code of Napoleon was ratified, the meaning of which for Napoleon personally was to strengthen his power as a guarantee of the preservation of civil rights, property rights to the land of peasants and those who bought the confiscated land of the church and emigrants during the revolution.
  Thus, it becomes clear that Napoleon"s main aspiration is nothing less than lust for power, as evidenced by the elimination by him of his main rivals - General Pishegru (was strangled in prison) and Moreau (was expelled from the country).
  In this regard, it was quite logical for him to proclaim himself the emperor of the French to enter the community of other monarchs, but he did not succeed, although Napoleon tried hard, believing that great deeds could replace hereditary patricianism.
  In 1805, seeing the growing power of France, almost all the countries of the rest of Europe, under the leadership of Great Britain, started a war with it, but were defeated, thanks to which Napoleon received not only new territories, but also about 65 million francs out of Austria. Prussia was also defeated, and Napoleon received 159 million francs of indemnity from her. As a result, by 1807, almost all of Europe was in the hands of Napoleon.
  Only Russia and Great Britain remained independent countries, with Spain and Russia being virtually allies of France in the role in which they were playing in the continental blockade of Great Britain. Portugal, which refused to submit to Napoleon, was subject to the contrition of 100 million francs.
  In Spain and Portugal, unrest began, which went into a war with France, which won the war, but not completely, as hostilities spilled over into a guerrilla war.
  In 1809, the war between France and Austria began, in which Austria was defeated.
  The instability of Napoleon's empire, which included almost all the countries of Europe, was shown by his unsuccessful war with Russia, after the defeat in which first Prussia broke away from Napoleon, and then Austria and Sweden. After the defeat in the "Battle of the Peoples" near Leipzig (late 1813), Napoleon abdicated in April 1814.
  At the beginning of 1815, Napoleon managed to escape from the island of Elba and recover to the throne for 100 days, after which he suffered a final defeat at Waterloo and was exiled to St. Helena, where he died in 1821.
  II
  Napoleon was extremely ambitious, as his entire biography shows. He not only always sought power and was not afraid to bear its considerable burden, but also sought to regain power even in hopeless circumstances, having launched the escape an escape from the island of Elba, since he had to understand that he was guaranteed to lose to the superior forces of the opposing powers.
  At the very beginning of his ascent, Napoleon without any hesitation took advantage of the weakness of the Directory and seized power, which he held for about 15 years, but, like Caesar, his neglect for the opposition in the form of legitimate sovereigns of Europe, quickly rolled down after the unsuccessful military campaign in Russia, and two years later he lost power and the crown.
  Napoleon"s ambitions found their initial foundation thanks to his military successes in Italy: "After Lodi, - Napoleon will say later, - I began to treat myself not as an ordinary general, but as a person who was called upon to influence the fate of the people ..." [4, p. 32].
  Over time, his stay in power and total uncontrolled actions were expressed in contempt for others and an exaggerated opinion about his own personality, that in the animal world leads inevitably an alpha male to defeat due to underestimation of the situation at constant competition. And the arrogant Napoleon, hoping for his own assessment of the situation, organized two failed campaigns - to Spain and Russia, which became the beginning of his fall.
  French historian Jacques Tulard confirms grotesquely exaggerated opinion of Napoleon about himself in his book about him in the following words of Napoleon: "Not for this I took upon myself the work of governing the Netherlands in order to listen to the opinion of the Amsterdam rabble or to act what others want ... Subordinate to me the peoples of Italy know me well and must remember that in one my little finger there is more intelligence than in all their heads combined" [4, p. 286].
  These tirades of Napoleon clearly show what the self-power of the arrogant dominant leads to, despite obvious talents and abilities - to exaggeration of his own significance, to loss of ability to adequately assess the situation and the essence of things, that is, to mistakes and subsequent decline and decomposition of everything he created for himself. This means for him, in the face of competition, with strong opposition both within and outside the country, an inevitable loss of power.
  Here is an analogy with Caesar regarding the behavior of the latter before the conspirators killed him.
  Indeed, the tendency of the lower consciousness to a purely material: dominion, honors, glorification, enrichment, pleasures, characteristic of these rulers, despite the high level of their intelligence, obscuring the altruism of self-consciousness with its compassion to the weak, the pursuit of spiritual values and high ideals, which really only interfere in the bank with spiders, which makes up the essence of power, can offer nothing more to a person, except, in fact, an animal - pleasant food, comfort, affectionate females and the ability to kick the subjects or citizens in the consciousness of its own importance and supposedly influence on world events , which partly happens, but purely locally, without affecting the general course of the accelerating time of technological civilization.
  Actually, the usurper and upstart Napoleon was able to hold on to power for more than ten years, not only and not so much thanks to his military successes, but by the internal situation in post-revolutionary France. Its national bourgeoisie needed new markets for the sale of products, the peasants and the petty bourgeoisie wanted to secure the rights to property that they had seized from the aristocrats after the revolution. In addition, it was necessary to fix the elimination of feudalism in the new laws, in particular, in the abolition of estates, equality of citizens before the law, religious tolerance, as well as it was necessary to normalize finances, to form a new administration, etc.
  This is exactly, what Napoleon did, setting an example to the whole feudal world of what can be achieved in a short time thanks to timely and adequate reforms.
  However, his excessive ambitions, the inadequacy of autocracy, which he organized for himself, the strength of his competitors and the betrayal of the French bourgeois and the new nobility, and the tiredness of the population from wars removed him from power, making him a hero and, at the same time, a great loser of new history.
  Like all rulers, Napoleon believed, and to this he was also motivated by unconditional military talents, that the main way to strengthen and retain power is the conduct of predatory wars, during which it is possible not only gain popularity by your victories, but also significantly enrich oneself with military booty, and part of it to distribute for the same strengthening of own positions in power.
  However, the flip side of wars is the losses of alive power. The number of these losses is indicated in one of the French encyclopedias: "At least 5 million people - military and civilians - became victims of the Napoleonic wars" [5. P. XVII-XVIII].
  Napoleon"s biographer J. Tulard writes: "In 1813, the French, at whom began to draft 16-year-old sons in the army, called Napoleon a cannibal" [4, p. 321].
  Thus, in sacrifice to his ambitions and lust for power Napoleon brought unprecedented earlier number of victims of the war, and France itself became the victim of his ambitions, having turned from the leading into the secondary power, which ceded Great Britain superiority both in Europe and in the world.
  Like Caesar, Napoleon, penniless at first, was not spared the passion for wealth, luxury and other attributes of the "sweet" life in full accordance with the instinctive desire of any living creature as best as possible to settle himself to get the most pleasant sensations.
  He lived in stylish palaces, surrounded by numerous servants and new nobility in galunas, epaulettes and gold.
  True, he had enough money for all this luxury, since in all campaigns Napoleon was engaged in undisguised robbery, exporting gold, jewelry, art objects in astronomical quantities from Italy, Egypt, occupied European countries.
  His other instinctive desire, like that of Caesar, despite Napoleon's intensive load with military and state affairs, was the transfer own genome by the help of attractive females to the future.
  According to E. Roberts [6], from December 1804 to August 1813, Napoleon presented to his mistresses, who were at least 21, over 480 thousand francs. This amounts to almost $ 10 million in modern equivalent.
  In addition to the legal heir from the second wife - Maria Louise of Austria, he had a son from actress Eleanor Danuel de la Plagne, a son from Maria Valevskaya and a daughter from Francoise Maria Leroy. However, he was not lucky here - his rightful heir did not inherit anything and died early, and the rest of the children did nothing special during their lives.
  2.3. Winston Churchill. 1874-1965.
  I
  The high-born aristocrat, the greatest politician, the witty weirdo, the gourmet, the workaholic and the Nobel laureate. So Churchill is seen by historians, and with their filing - by the rest of the public.
  The British themselves named Churchill in 2002 as the greatest man in the history of their state.
  To find out if it is, then it would be nice to examine his nature by Churchill"s actions, that is, to find out what he was really striving for - were his goals high or low-lying?
  Winston Churchill was born in 1874 in one of the estates of the Dukes of Marlborough. He was the third son of the seventh duke of Marlborough.
  At first he tried himself on the military line, graduating from the military school and even participating in several conflicts and wars. Listed on active military service, he also tried out journalistic activities.
  Seeing that the latter is better for him, he abandoned his dreams of a military career, preferring to cover the military conflicts in the press, using the connections of his high-ranking relatives and receiving good fees for articles and books, improving in his literary profession.
  In the course of this ebullient activity, Churchill, not deprived of energy, skilled in journalistic work and communicating with different circles of society, having various connections in high society, realized that popularity, money, glory, the greatest possible comfort, reverence of descendants and, most importantly, - power over people is easiest to gain at some dexterity, abilities and connections in politics, especially since there along the path of his own father - who was Chancellor of the UK Treasury - he had a direct road.
  Already at the age of 25, Churchill tried to take a seat from the Conservative Party in the House of Commons, but was unsuccessful, failing to consider the dissatisfaction of the voters of the district with the Conservative-sponsored "The Church Tithes Bill," which provided to the Anglican Church funding from local taxes.
  Churchill then took an active part in the Anglo-Boer War. The escape from captivity made him famous, and he received several offers to run for Parliament. Churchill did not fail to take advantage of this, in mid-1900, for the first time passed in the House of Commons from the Conservative party.
  Four years later, Churchill found it more advantageous, apparently, for career reasons, and also because of some differences on a number of political issues, to join the Liberal Party.
  His hopes were realized, and already at the end of 1905, Churchill was appointed deputy minister for colonial affairs, and in 1908 he became Minister of Commerce and Industry. Under him, a law was adopted on the minimum wage, according to which the standards for working hours and wages for the first time were established in England, which can be attributed to the positive political activity of Churchill.
  Churchill received one of the most influential posts in Britain - the post of Secretary of the Interior - in 1910. The minister"s salary was 5,000 pounds a year, and Churchill did not fail to immediately abandon his literary work, thereby showing his true life priorities - a passion for comfort and other attributes of a "sweet" life thanks to money, despite the burden of power and the corresponding hassles.
  However, this was not the most important thing for him. The post of minister gave Churchill the opportunity to directly exercise his power over people, and the forms of this manifestation characterize him as a cruel, self-serving despot, despising the "lower" public and ignoring possible victims.
  This is confirmed by his actions in 1911 during the strike of sailors and port workers. Churchill directed the marines to suppress the riots and ordered them to open fire on the crowd [7].
  Hereinafter, the threat of a general strike thanks to the actions of Lloyd George was avoided, but Churchill in his conversation with him put it this way: "I learned about this with great regret. It would be better to continue and give them a good thrashing" [8].
  At the end of 1911, Churchill received the post of First Lord of the Admiralty and immediately took up the modernization of the fleet to prepare it for a future war. To replace coal with oil, he initiated the allocation of more than two million pounds for the acquisition of 51% of the Anglo-Iranian oil company, thereby automatically making the Persian Gulf region a zone of strategic interests of Great Britain.
  Churchill's actions during World War I were largely unsuccessful. Antwerp, which he was trying to protect, fell, the Dardanelles operation, one of the initiators of which he was in 1915, failed catastrophically. Churchill received his resignation. However, in 1917 he was appointed Minister of Arms, and in early 1919, Minister of War and Minister of Aviation.
  Churchill"s actions against Bolshevik Russia, which he wanted to strangle in the cradle as a new possible rival to the British Empire, were also unsuccessful, since all his attempts to end the Bolsheviks through the intervention of British troops ended in failure.
  In 1921, Churchill was appointed Minister for Colonial Affairs and signed the Anglo-Irish Treaty establishing an independent Irish state. The government coalition of liberals and conservatives broke up, and Churchill suffered several defeats in trying to get into parliament from the Liberal Party. He did not think long, reasonably choosing the solution most favorable from career considerations, and in 1924 he moved to the camp of conservatives.
  His expectations were met, and in 1924 he received a second position in the state - Chancellor of the Treasury. Churchill also failed the procedure of returning the economy to the gold standard and increase the value of the pound sterling. Deflation occurred, rose in the price of British exports, the economic downturn began, there was mass unemployment.
  As a result, Churchill did not receive an invitation to enter the government, and in 1931 he was forced to return to literary work.
  Along with that, he continued to be a member of parliament and opposed the pacification of Hitler, well aware of who was behind him and that Hitler's task was not only to seize foreign territories and suppress Bolshevism, but also to advance Germany to the leading role in the world under the slogan of purification humanity and the organization of a new - the most "progressive" - fascist-racist order.
  In this regard, after the outbreak of the war, the dismissal of the former pacification leaders and the appointment of Churchill as the country's prime minister, who could organize resistance to the aggressor, were quite natural.
  To defeat Germany, an anti-Hitler coalition was created as part of the USSR, Great Britain and the USA, the resources of which far exceeded the resources of Germany with its satellites, so the coalition's victory in the war was ensured.
  However, Churchill worked tirelessly not only to defeat Germany, but to deplete its main rival, Bolshevik Russia, by opening a second front with Roosevelt only at the end of the war (1944), and after the end of the war, in his speech in Fulton, he called for a cold war and the eradication of Bolshevism, that is, the elimination of the last rival of the Anglo-Saxons in the world.
  Moreover, Churchill"s primitively low-lying essence was manifested in a call, completely incorrect from the point of view of a civilized man, in a conversation with US President Truman in 1947 to deliver a preventive nuclear strike against the USSR, which would "erase the Kremlin off the face of the earth and turn the Soviet Union into insignificant problem", substantiating this proposal by the fact that the aggressive USSR does not yet have an atomic bomb [9].
  Paradoxical as it may seem, the victory over Germany led to the career defeat of Churchill, who did not become prime minister again due to the victory in the election of the Laborites. All his stormy activities did not save the British Empire from collapse, and this collapse was accelerated by the war, since the damage from it was irreparable.
  The ruin of the economy not only of England itself, but also of its colonies, the external debt, having grown to astronomical sizes - mainly to the USA, the absence of clear proposals for raising the economy led not only to Churchill's resignation, not only to the impoverishment of the inhabitants of the metropolis and its colonies, but also to the rapid collapse the whole empire and replacing the world currency - the pound - with the US dollar, and the transformation of Great Britain into a secondary power, instead of which its former colony - the USA - became the leading one in the world.
  Churchill's love of power was such that, despite his age (76 years) and a clear inability to fulfill the duties of the prime minister (strokes, heart failure, deafness), he was listed as prime minister from 1951 to 1955, refusing to resign.
  In addition, the years of his leadership, and this time were unsuccessful for the population of the UK due to the fact that his proposed cost reduction by reducing the import of food and industrial raw materials led to an increase in the prices of essentials.
  The work on military memoirs at a time when Churchill was out of work was mostly conjunctural, since he stated about all six volumes of his book "World War II," that he was not writing a book, but was making a fortune.
  Indeed, Churchill"s biographer M. Gilbert writes that this ambitious publication became for him a real enterprise in which he used a lot of people: naval, military and air force experts, scientists, historians, writers who did a great job: selection of materials, verification of facts, preparation of references. In addition, a group of trained secretaries worked for Churchill in two shifts. And besides, taking the opportunity to go down in history, former military, political figures and businessmen involved in military events willingly helped their memoirs on private occasions [9].
  Naturally, many English-language magazines began to print this work, at this, only one Life magazine paid Churchill $ 2 million for the right to publish. Over the years, this six-volume work was publishing in separate editions for decades. It is not surprising that such a well-known person as Churchill surpassed even the really talented prose writer E. Hemingway as the candidate for received the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1953.
  In 1965, after the death of Churchill, the Sunday Times newspaper commented: "Very few authors in the twentieth century received more money from their books than Churchill" [10, p. 24].
  Churchill died of another stroke on January 24, 1965, and was buried with state honors.
  II
  Churchill, at the beginning of his political activity, has not yet closed in complete and final love for himself and his clan. Therefore, he supported the social reforms carried out by the liberal government at the beginning of the twentieth century. In particular, in 1908 he initiated the law on the minimum wage, which established the norms of working hours and wages.
  Martin Gilbert in the preface to his book on Churchill [10] describes him as follows: "A shrewd, reasonable and cautious politician, Churchill was always a supporter of bold actions. One of his greatest talents was his exceptional mastery of the word, his love of language, which allowed him to eloquently and easily expound the most important things, convince and inspire people. He had a great sense of humor".
  Churchill also had a creative imagination. In particular, he proposed scattering foil from aircraft to bring down German radars, expressed the idea of creating a pipeline under the Atlantic Ocean, proposed the construction of a navigation device for pilots, and was involved in journalism and literature with success, eventually receiving the Nobel Prize.
  It must also be said that to a large extent his energy and tough control of the country in the war with Hitler Germany, allowed to mobilize Great Britain, despite casualties and hardships, to the all-out struggle against the enemy, which was crowned with success.
  However, the primary goal of Churchill was to achieve the highest power in the country, and, if possible, in the world, since the sun does not set in the British Empire. He followed this goal invariably until the last premiership, refusing already in a completely weak state to retire.
  Churchill once admitted to his mother: "If I do not succeed, it will be a disaster for me! Failures will break my heart, because ambition is my only support" [12].
  And one of the well-known prime ministers of Great Britain - Lloyd George, who worked with Churchill, described Churchill as a person who is ready to make a drum from her own mother"s skin to drum the march in own honor.
  An example for Churchill in his quest for Supreme power was Mussolini.
  Pierre Milza notes in his book "Mussolini" Churchill"s words about him: "Mussolini is the greatest living legislator" [13].
  And at a press conference in Rome in January 1927, Churchill said: "If I were Italian, I"m sure that I would be completely with you from the beginning to the end of your victorious struggle against the brutal appetites and passions of Leninism" [10, Chapter 22].
  For career advancement, Churchill actively used his connections in the highest circles of society.
  As an example, we can cite one case of Churchill's communication not with ordinary people, but extremely useful for his ambitions and aspirations: "In March 1907, Churchill went to rest in Biarritz, in the magnificent castle of his friend Baron de Forest and his father, Baron de Hirsch. "The king dines or has supper with us every day," Churchill wrote. Churchill moved from France to Italy, where he took a second car trip, this time with a new friend, F. E. Smith, a member of parliament from the Conservatives, a witty and brilliant man who quickly became his closest companion, despite political differences. From Italy they went to the de Forest castle in the Moravian Eichhorn, where they had fun hunting for hares and partridges" [10, Chapter 9].
  Churchill needed power not only for its sake, but it provided many other opportunities, in particular, to get good money through corruption, that he repeatedly used.
  Churchill, who did not have capital, but wished to live in luxury, rendered services to bankers, receiving a corresponding bribe for this.
  Sevastyanov A. N. in his book about Churchill writes the following: "The Jewish banker Kassel secured him participation in the loan issued by the Japanese government in the amount of 10.000 pounds (in current money - 500.000 pounds). Churchill wrote to his brother Jack about this financial transaction: "I hope to get a small profit from this." In 1905, Kassel paid for furniture in Churchill's bachelor"s apartment in the Mayfair district of London. Kassel"s financial support was ongoing. The income from the shares of the Etchison, Topeka and Santa Fe railway, which he bought for Churchill in 1907, enabled the politician to pay for the typist's services. When Churchill married Clementine in 1908, Kassel gave them £ 500 for their wedding, that is, about £ 25.000 in terms of current money" [11, p.20].
  "During the First World War, the production of explosives in the UK in large quantities (thirty thousand tons) required acetone, which was not on the market. The state was ready to pay for it in full without bargaining ... Weizmann, the head of the Jewish Agency, received from Churchill a monopoly on the production of acetone throughout the empire. You can imagine what fabulous profits such contracts bring!" [11, p. 21].
  "... Sir Robert Whaley Cohen asked him to mediate in negotiations with the British government to merge his private oil companies with the Anglo-Persian oil company, in which the majority of the shares were held by the British government ... Churchill agreed to represent Cohen's companies in negotiations with the British government. For his mediation, he received 5,000 pounds - the amount equivalent to the annual salary of a cabinet member" [11, p. 22].
  Churchill as the true dominant-power-lover could not help but wage or at least accompany wars and local conflicts, that had not only to support his image as a great strategist, but also strengthen his position in power as a fighter for the interests of the British Empire.
  In particular, he made considerable efforts to create the permanent conflict situation in Palestine - the territory mandated by Britain, having confronted actually Jews with Arabs in order to "fish in troubled waters" in the future, paving the way not only for Britain but also for the USA actual to dispose without hindrance of the region"s richest oil resources.
  As for the Second World War, Churchill, being the head of his country, in agreement with Roosevelt, was dragging out this war in every possible way, reasonably considering it the result weakening his opponents - the USSR and Germany. Of course, he had in mind the interests of Britain and the USA, that is, the Anglo-Saxons and himself as their protector.
  Churchill does not spare his opponents and participates in a number of punitive operations and wars: he fights with the Boers in the Boer War, goes to Cuba, where José Marty 's rebellion is suppressed, participates in punitive operations in Sudan, repressions against the Irish, Somalis, Rhodesians, fiercely fights with the Bolsheviks.
  But his greatest "achievement" was the Bengal famine in India in 1943-44, actually organized by him, in which, according to the estimates of the Indians themselves, about 7 million people died.
  More recently, journalist and international analyst Rakesh Krishnan Simkha, in an interview with Sputnik, outlined some of the details of this next brutal deed of Churchill, for who the Indians apparently have nothing to do with people.
  An abundant harvest of food grain collected in Bengal in 1942, the British has exported almost the entire to the metropolis. Rice prices went up, and by June 1943 it had become out of reach for the millions of poor people in this region, and in a relatively short time millions of people died a quiet death, because there was no one to help them.
  A member of the commission investigating the causes of hunger, W. K. Aykroyd described all the horrors of the mass hungry in his book with the sarcastic title "Victory over Hunger".
  And the aforementioned Simkha in his interview described Churchill's general attitude towards the Indians as follows: "Winston Churchill was simply the last of many bloodthirsty despots who controlled the fate of India for more than 200 years of British rule. He said: "I hate Indians. They are bestial people with bestial religion".
  In addition, Churchill organized at the end of World War II the completely senseless killing of over a hundred thousand people in Dresden, directing 800 bombers to this defenseless city. No military aims justify this attack. Perhaps he wanted to take revenge on Germany for the bombing of London and Coventry, but it is impossible to put oneself on the same board with the Nazis, although this was the case.
  Thus, between the wars, as well as during wars, Churchill shoots, burns, suppresses, starves both own and others subjects and citizens ostensibly in the public interest, but in fact in accordance with the animal instincts that dominate him, which are characteristic of all rulers: back in the Gaelic wars Caesar methodically destroyed the Celtic population, boasting this, and Napoleon did not pay attention not only to the suffering and numerous casualties among the civilian population during his wars, but also did not spare his soldiers, most of whom died not in battle, but from diseases, wounds, adverse climatic conditions(frost in Russia or the heat and plague in Egypt and Syria), or was simply cast at the mercy of fate in the same Russia and Africa.
  Personal and corporate egoism, corresponding to animal egocentrism, as well as suspiciousness and prejudice, corresponding to animal caution, were clearly expressed in obvious hatred and contempt for other communities: "I do not believe that a dog on the hay has any right to hay, even if she lay on it for a long time. I don 't recognize that right for her. I do not admit, for example, that great injustice was committed against the Red Indians of America or the black Aborigines of Australia. I don"t admit that injustice was committed against these people because a stronger race, a more advanced race, a wiser race, let"s say so, came and took their place" [14].
  At this, Churchill's hatred of other civilizational approaches and communities was reaching the highest degree.
  In particular, he, having not tolerated the rivalry of Germany with the British Empire, fought with all his might against it in the First World War, and in the Second World War he used every opportunity to bring Germany to the very bottom, having turned its civilian population into corpses, and cities - into ruins by total bombing of cities, and having offered to divide Germany into dozens of small states in order to get rid of this rival on the world stage forever.
  He hated the Bolsheviks with the same force, trying to destroy them with the help of intervention after 1917, and after World War II in 1945, Churchill ordered the British military to prepare operation "Unthinkable", a plan for a war with the USSR, which was to begin in July 1945, and then, besides calling for a cold war with the USSR (Fulton Speech), considered it necessary to destroy the USSR by nuclear bombardment, while it did not have nuclear weapons. M. Gilbert cites his words on this subject: "If I remained the Prime Minister, I would surely be able to convince the Americans to use their new weapons to deter the Russians" [10, Chapter 36].
  And he did all this literally after recent hugs and friendly conversations with Stalin, which clearly indicates his hypocrisy, corresponding to disguise for animals, in order to the enemy does not recognize during your true intentions.
  His hypocrisy is also confirmed in actions on the territory of his own country.
  At first - the first ten years of MP Churchill was full of such positive statements as the need to show mercy to the defeated Boers, criticism of the increase in defense spending.
  But, as soon as he was appointed Minister of the Interior, he began to suppress the protests against the authorities with unprecedented cruelty: in this way the mass social protests of the workers were suppressed, the performances of the women-suffragettes who demanded equal rights. The brutality of the new Minister, who ordered the police to treat protesters as hardened criminals amazed even his conservative colleagues, and against protesting dockers and sailors in Liverpool in 1911, he sent the Marines, allowing the use of weapons.
  Like all males among animals who have achieved power and are able to get what they want, Churchill, since the income allowed it, became a gourmet, consuming the best delicacies, the most expensive cognac and champagne, Cuban cigars. He also liked to play in the casino, used a luxurious state-owned yacht for himself and relaxed in the most expensive resorts in the world.
  As for women, it is possible that he wanted to consume them in large quantities, but in his youth, without serious funds, lacking an attractive appearance and the ability to look after girls, first he failed with the daughter of a high-ranking official Pamela Plowden, who preferred Count B. Litton to him. Then actress Ethel Barrimore also hesitated to marry him, the heiress of wealthy ship-owner Muriel Wilson similarly rejected the offer of hand and heart on his part, and the likely alliance with the daughter of Prime Minister Transvaal Luis Botha Helen never found a logical completion.
  Finally, fairly clever Churchill realized that it will difficult for him to find contact with women for a number of reasons, one of which was his inability to systematically court for them.
  Therefore, when Churchill met Clementine Hosier - the daughter of a dragoon colonel, whose mother was from the family of Earley counts, and probably was smart enough, in order to consider a promising politician at Churchill, she found him a profitable party for her daughter. Churchill did not resist, and after all his failures on the love front, and his age pressed - he was already 33 years old - he married Clementine, in addition, he had already achieved a lot in his career, having held the post of Minister of Commerce in 1908.
  Thus, he closed the problem of sex, which was doubtful for him, and engaged with all energy more attractive career development, showing genuinely the highest degree of dominance. Moreover, he kept this dominance until his very advanced age, refusing to resign from the post of prime minister already in a frail condition to the very last limit - at 80 years old.
  From this it is clear that despite the external brilliance, in Churchill, as in the other characters of our review, all the basic properties of the lower consciousness gathered: dominance was expressed in their fierce desire for power; the creation of the most favorable conditions for themselves, reflected in the desire for a comfortable and well-furnished life with getting always the best. As for the transfer of the genome, Churchill, due to his busyness and inability to deal with women, concentrated on his own wife, from whom he had many children.
  Churchill used all his talents and skills, as well as his good intellect, as can be seen from his actions, despite the distracting maneuvers in the form of literary creativity, to enter power and to be consolidated in it, making decisions, first of all, not to improve the lives of at least citizens of own state, but to maintain the dominance of the large owners of Great Britain and international capital, serving them, without sparing forces, and receiving considerable bonuses and privileges from them.
  2.5. John Fitzgerald Kennedy. 1917-1963.
  I
  Kennedy - the most adored, and not only by the residents of the United States, president of this country without an original name and with a short history, the former colony of England, which now overshadowed its former metropolis, and each president of which, as seen by many, owns the whole world. It seems that in front of John"s charm all his sins on the female part recede, and it"s hard to believe that he was insincere in his actions and state deeds.
  Therefore, it is interesting to take an open look at this wonderful example of masculinity and universal adoration from the side of known facts, for some reason set aside or forgotten, and figure out on this basis, what was influencing him in the first place.
  John Kennedy was born in 1917 in Massachusetts in the family of an Irish, Catholic, wealthy businessman and politician Joseph Patrick Kennedy.
  He graduated from Harvard University in 1941. Participated in hostilities in the naval forces. The rank of lieutenant he has ended the war.
  He was interested in politics, a successful activity in which could pave him the way to the highest power, at this, by the power, turning an ordinary person into a historical figure, about which legends add up, judging by one of his diary entries about Hitler, he was most interested in: "You can easily understand how in just a few years, having overcome the hatred surrounding him now, Hitler will turn into one of the most significant personalities in history. Cherishing the infinitely ambitious plans that he wanted to realize in his country, he posed a threat to humanity. But the secret, enveloping his life and death will outlive him for a long time. There was something about him that legends add up to" [15, p. 69].
  And in the advancement to the highest power, his father could really help him, being one of the richest people in the USA, a comrade-in-arms of President Franklin Roosevelt, who himself had dreamed of a highest power in the USA, but did not work out, but now he could try to promote inti power his not stupid, educated, charming and attractive son.
  And this rich man, close to mafia circles, did not think at all about decency in the race to the presidency with hardened politicians and used all means to achieve the goal.
  After the war, Kennedy took up journalism, working with Hurst, but having appreciated own abilities and inclinations, as well as yielding to his father's agitation, he plunged into politics.
  He was not able face any material problems, because the Kennedy clan dreamed of the highest political posts of at least one of its representatives, and was ready to provide considerable resources to achieve far-reaching goals, the ultimate of which was the post of President of the United States.
  During the years of John F. Kennedy 's presidency, the capital 1 the Kennedy clan was more than $1 billion, from which John F. Kennedy received his main income, not from the president 's salary.
  Intrigues and bribery, which was mostly done with John 's tacit consent by his father, from the very beginning accompanied Kennedy 's career growth.
  It all started with the House of Representatives. Joseph Kennedy began negotiations with Congressman D. M. Curley, who had financial and legal difficulties. Joseph offered to pay his debts and settle legal troubles if Curley vacated the seat in the House of Representatives.
  Joseph later admitted in a conversation with a journalist about the beginning of his son"s political career: "I just called someone, got in touch with people I know. I have many friends" [16, p. 19].
  As a result of the actions of his father, John F. Kennedy came to represent Boston County in the US Congress as a congressman from the Democratic Party (1947 - 53). He was a member of the committee on education and labor relations.
  The next step in Kennedy's breakthrough to power was the struggle for the post of senator from Massachusetts. In front of him was a serious rival - Republican Henry Cabot Lodge, a grandson of the former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the main oppositionist to US President Woodrow Wilson on on the issue of joining the League of Nations.
  John Kennedy owes his victory with a slight margin over Henry Cabot Lodge again thanks to the thoughtful and generously funded actions of his father and his team [17].
  John F. Kennedy was a senator on the Labor and Public Welfare Committee until 1960.
  Already in 1956, John F. Kennedy was seen as a future candidate for the presidency of the United States, partly because he personified the "new generation" about which he mentioned in the slogan during his first election campaign in Congress in 1946. In early 1959, preparations began for the presidential election, and in January 1960 he announced the registration of his candidacy. With a slight margin, he managed to defeat his opponent from the Republican Party, Richard Nixon.
  Again, for the third time, Joseph Kennedy ensured this victory to his son with not quite legal means. In particular, Eleanor Roosevelt outlined in a television interview the following: "Kennedy"s father is delivering heaps of money all over the country and he probably has a paid representative in every state now" [18].
  In US history, the 1960 presidential election is considered the dirtiest.
  Kennedy's rival, Richard Nixon, US Vice President, was supported by FBI Director E. Hoover and America"s richest man, Howard Hughes. Compromising evidence, bribery of voters, judges was used. Probably more experienced and become skilled in past election campaigns, Joseph Kennedy, who also did not suffer from a lack of money, was more successful.
  In addition, John Kennedy himself, as a young, successful and handsome candidate, influenced voters to a large extent with his charm.
  Be that as it may, with an extremely small margin of votes (119 thousand) with a total number of voters - 69 million, John Kennedy won.
  So John Kennedy became the 35th president of the United States.
  Thus, by intrigue, bribery, family ties, generous handouts to voters and, as a result, the successful elimination of competitors, John Kennedy moved to first place in the country.
  During his presidency, Kennedy did not do anything particularly outstanding, although he tried to revive the economy by cutting taxes, but without success, having failed to overcome opposition resistance.
  It should be noted, however, that Kennedy advocated equalizing the rights of blacks, created a national arts fund, and initiated a flight to the moon.
  However, unsuccessful were his actions in relations with other states, which he, like any ruler of a strong power, wanted to subordinate to his influence, but did not succeed.
  His attempts to overthrow F. Castro in Cuba led to nothing. Not only that, he received the Caribbean crisis in connection with Cuba, which put the whole world on the brink of nuclear war.
  Kennedy also decided to increase US intervention in the Vietnam Civil War, which ultimately, but already at his successors, led to the defeat of the United States.
  Kennedy did not live to see the end of his presidency. He was killed in Dallas, because, like Caesar at one time, he neglected the opposition, which in the person of large monopolies and the mafia couldn't tolerate he restrictions, which Kennedy tried to impose to them.
  II
  It must be said that Kennedy was not a fool, although, in fact, by the politician who held the highest office in the country, he was made by his own father, not by him oneself. Nevertheless, the son lived up to his trust: John Kennedy had a flexible mind, good professional training, determination, and even audacity, if he carried out a number of socio-economic reforms, signed the Nuclear Test Termination Treaty, effectively fought segregation, and proclaimed the US"s entry into space exploration, including landing on the moon.
  Kennedy struggled with unemployment and tried to boost the country's economy, having suffered as a result, because he tried to force the monopolies not to take out capital and production out of the country in pursuit of a higher rate of return, that, according to many experts, was the main reason for his death - who will allow for oneself to lose hundreds of billions of profit due to the whim of some Kennedy!
  As for greed and money-grubbing, John F. Kennedy was above this, but not because of the presence of nobility from birth, but because the wealth of the family allowed him to remain "in chocolate" all his life. He had no debts, he did not have to raise money for election campaigns, he did not need funds for a luxurious life - he was always accompanied by the maximum possible comfort and presence of the most beautiful women.
  For example, on the Honey-Fitz yacht, there was even an elevator. Inside is a lacquered dark wood finish. In addition, the yacht had a small copy of the White House Oval Office. It was here that the president was meeting with representatives of his administration in the midst of the Caribbean crisis.
  But to power John Kennedy treated not simply quiveringly, but also was making to all lengths to get and keep it, not having at all in his thoughts the concepts of conscience, nobility, honesty.
  One of the evidence of this is John Kennedy"s tacit consent, and by no means by weakness of own character, to the help from his rich and influential father in ascending to the summit of power, who did not disdain any intrigues, acting by bribery, connections and intimidation of those who disagree with the help of Mafia.
  The Kennedy family had a connection with the mafia since the 30s, when John's father made a fortune from the underground whiskey trade. His frequent golf partner was the influential gangster D. Roselli.
  John Kennedy was also in intense contact with the mafia leaders. In Cuba, in 1957, he was relaxing with influential mafiosi Meir Lansky, and one of the three mafia leaders in the United States, S. Dzhankana, helped to collect the votes in the presidential campaign in 1960, moreover, according to John Kennedy's mistress Judith Exter, Kennedy asked her to hand over a package of money to her good friend Dzhankana to bribe voters. In addition, Kennedy turned to Dzhankana with a request to remove F. Castro after the failure of the American landing in Cochinos Bay (April 1961).
  However, after the declaration of war to Mafia by the Minister of Justice, John F. Kennedy's brother Robert, arises the conspiracy of three mafiosi - S. Dzhankan, S. Traficante and S. Adonis. Jack Ruby, who killed Oswald, who allegedly shot Kennedy, was also the member of Mafia. This explains the connection between Mafia and the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
  In addition, John F. Kennedy was the actual hostage to the FBI Director E. Hoover, who had on him an extensive dossier with documents and photographs of not only his love affairs, but also on relations with the mafia.
  To avoid scandal, it was decided to change the head of the FBI after the re-election of the president, but Kennedy did not wait for this - he was killed. At the same time, there are many statements. that FBI agents sought to hide information about the Kennedy assassination - photos and video recordings were seized from witnesses to the assassination of the president. Almost all of them were missing. Key evidence, related to the disclosure of the assassination procedure, was falsified by the FBI.
  Thus, Kennedy"s murder itself could be the result of Kennedy"s breach of obligations to the mafia, which was being covered by the FBI.
  An important factor, at least contributing to the assassination of the president, was his policy towards the monopolies: in particular, Kennedy in 1962 lost the confidence of the business community, seeking to lower steel prices, in addition, he tried to stop the outflow of capital from the US economy to other countries with a higher rate of return, and thereby became the main enemy of the monopolies, who needed to be eliminated.
  Like all rulers, even temporary ones, Kennedy, wanted to raise the prestige of his power in the simplest way possible - participating in wars.
  Apart from the failed invasion of Cuba and the US involvement in the Vietnam Civil War, Kennedy managed to bring the entire world to the brink of a devastating nuclear war during the Caribbean crisis.
  Researchers attributed the Cuban crisis to Kennedy"s obsession with the idea of the Cold War and his penchant to create conflicts. He believed that he should be "tough", despite the dangerous situations that arise later. Kennedy stubbornly refused to compromise and remove American missiles from Turkey, which were not of special strategic importance for the United States [19, p. 351].
  Like almost all healthy primitives who are in power, Kennedy instinctively sought to inseminate as many women as possible, while simultaneously receiving a lot of pleasure, and not at all thinking of high morality, which, judging by his actions with the opposite sex, was inaccessible to him.
  Alan Brinkley in his book [20] writes that, having a wonderful family and a bunch of children, Kennedy hid his almost pathological sexual concern. Brinkley cites the following facts: "Almost all of his adult life, wherever he went, Kennedy was always looking for sexual adventures. It is not surprising that his status made him a particularly attractive prey for the ladies. Friends, assistants and sexually preoccupied politicians like him, joining forces, vied with each other to introduce the president to the fair sex. His list of don Juan included movie stars, fashion models, relatives of of friends and dear call girls".
  So in the case of Kennedy, who is adored by the majority of the US population, it is necessary to recognize by the will of inexorable facts the predominance of a primitive animal essence of consciousness in it, which, on the one hand, helped him to penetrate power, and on the other hand, demonstrated those qualities that are more appropriate alpha males of primates, rather than a highly moral and religious intellectual.
  Conclusion
  From this brief analysis, perhaps, of the most famous, or at least for this moment the most known and respected characters in the history, it follows, paradoxically for philistines, that the main aspirations of both Caesar and the other characters in our review were reduced to the seizure of power and its retention, which was facilitated by their conduct of actual and economic wars, the aspiration for the most open or implicit subjugation of own fellow citizens, which in nature corresponds to the high level of dominance, the most vividly represented by the alpha-males of monkey packs.
  Similar primitive (natural) strivings were promoted by other properties of consciousness noted above in considered characters, the main of which are greed and money-grubbing, paving the way for a sweet and comfortable life with funds obtained mainly by unrighteous ways, which in nature corresponds to the aspiration of each organism to provide itself with a "warm" place and good nutrition; voluptuousness, which in nature corresponds to the aspiration of each organism by the maximum possible coverage of the opposite sex to increase by all means the number of their "copies" in the environment.
  Whatever it was, but to help the desire for power more than anything can not only and not so much a high level of intelligence, which, of course, is not superfluous, but above all those properties of consciousness that directly contribute to the victory in the competition with similar dominant individuals - and they do not include compassion, pity, love, friendliness, mercy, honesty, - but help in the competition for power, which gives basic material wealth, cunning, insidiousness and deceit, which are a superstructure of such properties of the lowest (primitive) consciousness as dynamism, communicability, the aspiration to stand out, disguise, caution, sexual activity, helping to stay and gain a foothold in existence with the consumption as possible of the most pleasant sensations during the struggle for existence with the transfer of gained positions to own offspring.
  All these properties of primitive (lowest) consciousness, without which it is impossible to do to any living being, including man, are manifested in different ways in living beings, but already in their highest degree they can already be observed in a pack of nimble and nosey monkeys, who do not know what sympathy and pity are, but invariably show energy, sociability when feeling hungry, thievery under favorable circumstances, the trick when sharing food to snatch the most "sweet" pieces.
  In particular, human hypocrisy corresponds to such a property of primitive consciousness as camouflage - it allows the same monkeys to mask their true intentions, for example, by taking food from a weaker member of the pack before he runs away; human suspicion and prudence corresponds to the primitive property of caution, which manifests itself in monkeys during communication in order to avoid troubles on the part of a stronger being, as well as in dislikes to other populations of beings; human sexual licentiousness in using women for their own pleasure corresponds to the behavior of alpha male apes, for which are accessible to all females of a pack and, accordingly, the production of the maximum number of offspring.
  And all this is dominated by egoism as the desire to stand out in the community as much as possible, subjugate everyone to oneself and take everything desired, which corresponds to the egocentrism of any living creature trying not only to survive, but to provide itself with the best living conditions in the form of the most pleasant sensations.
  Thus, in the most famous and revered rulers: Caesar, Napoleon, Churchill, Kennedy and other lesser-known rulers who are hardly significantly different from those noted in the properties of their consciousness, in a concentrated form were gathered the main properties of one of the two forms of consciousness - the lowest (animal, or primitive, ancient) consciousness, prevailing over the properties of its other form - the highest consciousness (self-consciousness), reaching its peak and mass character at the last stage of the existence of technological civilization, but not affecting its foundation - a lower consciousness that does not change with the passage of time, and still prevails in the rulers.
  Higher one, and, consequently, indiscrimination in the means of achieving their goals that help them successfully defeat competitors for the highest authority, which, of course, is facilitated by a high level of intelligence and creativity as properties of higher consciousness, but already in the second turn, since the dominance that determines the enduring and strongest aspiration to occupy the most advantageous place for existence in the hierarchy of individuals, that is, a kind of power in one"s own niche of existence, is an integral property of the lowest consciousness and has nothing to do with values of the highest consciousness of a spiritual and aesthetic order, giving only a pleasant sensation of power over the fellow tribesmen, if one succeeds in attaining this, in which Caesar and other rulers succeeded in, and, as can be seen from their behavior, gave them the highest satisfaction.
  This, in fact, consists the nature of power, which, due to the duality of human consciousness to change impossibly e, as a result of which in power will always be the scoundrels, no matter how historians cover them, painting the supposedly great and glorious deeds of these figures, whose essence not much different from the essence of the monkey.
  
  Biography
  
  1. Nizovtsev Y. M. The collection of the especial and outlandish - for the check with respect to creativity. 2019. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon. ASIN: BO7Z24KWLK. Yury Nizovtsev.
  2. Nizovtsev Y. M. Communes as a result of crash of all civilization. 2016. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon. ASIN: BO7Z24KWLK. Yury Nizovtsev.
  3. Gaius Suetonius Tranquill. The lives of the twelve Caesars. The life of Julius Caesar. Maximilian Ihm in the Teubner edition of 1907.
  4. Tulard J. Napoleon, the Myth of the Savior. Blackwell Publ. Ltd. 1986. ISSN: 0018-2648.
  5. The encyclopedia of the French revolution and Napoleonic Wars: a political, social, and military history. Gregory Fremont-Barnes. - ABX-CLIO, 2006. ISBN 978-18510-96466.
  6. Roberts A. Napoleon the Great. Penguin. 2014. ISBN 978-0-241-01919
  7. R. Holmes, In the Footsteps of Churchill. The Bubble Reputation. 1895-1901. Basic Books, NY, 2005, ISBN 0-465-03082-3.
  8. Н. Роуз. Черчилль. Бурная жизнь. М. "Издательство Аст". 2004. ISBN 5-17-014478-4.
  9. Winston Churchill"s bid ti nuke Russia to win Cold War - uncovered in secret FBI Files. Daily Mail, 2014. 8.11.
  10. Martin Gilbert. Churchill: A life. 1992. An Owl Book. Henry Holt and Company. New York.
  11. Севастьянов А. Н. Преступник номер один. Уинстон Черчилль перед судом Истории. 2017. ООО "Яуза-пресс".
  12. Churchill Randolph S. Op. Cit. V. I. 1899. 11.01. P. 441.
  13. Milza, Pierr. Mussolini. Paris, Fayard. 1999.
  14. To the Peel Commission (1937) on Jewish Homeland in Palestine.
  15. John F. Kennedy, Prelude to Leadership. The European Diary of John F. Kennedy (Washington, D. C. Regnery, 1995.
  16. Mochael O'Brien, John F. Kennedy. A Biography (New York: St. Martin's Press, 2005.
  17. "Rose Kennedy Speaks at a Tea, 1952", n. d., JFKL.
  18. Eleanor Roosevelt to JFK, June 2, 1958, JFK.
  19. Reeves R. President Kennedy. Profile of power. 1993. New York. Simon & Schuster. ISBN: 978-0-671-64879-4.
  20. Brinkley, Alan. John F. Kennedy. 2012. Times Book. ISBN: 978-0-8050-8349-1.
  
  Chapter 15.
  Why doesn't hope leave us?
  
  Introduction
  It seems that everyone understands what hope is, but, nevertheless, its versatility and ambiguity thinkers of different historical eras have not been able to reduce to something fundamentally defined, pointing to one or the other properties of it and attaching to hope excessively negative or positive meaning. Let us try to define the phenomenon of hope by comparing it with fear, imagination, liberty and interest.
  The positive meaning of hope in all historical eras stems from the idea that one cannot hope for the worst, although it is also possible, but the phenomenon of fear is responsible for it.
  However, the contradictions of hope lie in the fact that, assuming future in the good, it can focus only on past knowledge, that is, only on their extrapolation into the future, which may not correspond to this knowledge, and this factor mostly leads to the collapse of hopes in the good. destroying human life. Therefore, whenever possible, each person should try to translate hope into a goal, for the achievement of which he already can no longer just wish in anticipation, but develop a plan of action using at least the methods known to him that contribute to the achievement of the goal. Unfortunately, most people are inactive and prefer to wait for manna from heaven, focusing only on hope, and most often getting disappointed, and even then - at best.
  In fact, the objective reason for the incapacity for work of hope is the almost complete absence of information that can help translate the image of the desired into reality.
  The negativity of hope also consists in its weakness, since a person who hopes for someone or for something does not have confidence in the fulfillment of hope due to lack of knowledge about the essence of events, and can only assume the course of events, in connection with which the probability of carrying out what is sought is not too high, and it depends mostly on the experience of a concrete individual, that is, hope in its present seeks support in the past, assuming the desired future, but at the same time, purely objectively, a lot of mistakes and stupidities are committed, which are essential slow down the process of development.
  Along with that, relatively short life of a person, in which he manages to do little, because he does not catch the passage of time due to the slow development of self-consciousness and, therefore, adequate mass assimilation of information coming as a result of his own activity, gives him only a hope for a prosperous future at the beginning of the path, and at the end of life's journey also leaves a person with nothing more than hope for life after death.
  It turns out that hope is almost the main phenomenon in human life, despite its ephemerality. This undoubtedly indicates the transience and insignificance of human life, as such, transferring the center of consideration of the matter from a person to his consciousness, since only hope remains that, at least consciousness will not disappear without a trace.
  That is, even here there is only an unsubstantiated hope, but still it is she who is capable of encouraging or at least comforting a person in his by no means endless life.
  But first, let's turn to the ideas of some thinkers about hope over the past few millennia.
  1. Historical excursion
  In his Dialogues (Fileb), the famous philosopher of ancient Hellas, Plato, asserts that hope is the expectation of good, which is achievable for reasonable people, but unrealizable for unreasonable (bad) people.
  At the same time, Plato thinks that hope does not depend on a person, believing its attachment to him is rather dubious (Timaeus): "... They (the divine beings) have attached to him another, mortal kind of soul, putting into it dangerous and dependent on the need for states: ... pleasure, suffering, audacity and dread, anger and hope, which is too easy to hearken to seductions" [1. Plato. Collected works in 4 volumes. T. 3. M. Thought, 1994].
  Indeed, a reasonable person will not hope for the incredible, the fabulous, the stupid, but, nevertheless, the probabilistic, indefinite nature of hope implies in any case the doubtfulness of hope, since passive waiting can lead to anything, if do not act, but to act, according to Plato, it is impossible here, since there are no ways to achieve the desired.
  Obviously, this is what Plato had in mind when he argued that hope does not depend on a person. Plato immediately noticed the negative quality of hope, which is reflected in its frequent infidelity and deception.
  Having pointed out quite rightly some properties of hope, Plato, nevertheless, did not clarify where, in fact, the hope came from, since the reference to the gods indicates precisely this, and did not give a clear definition of hope, so how one can expect benefits not only by hoping, but also by putting your hands under their flow, which happens not so rarely.
  No less famous philosopher of antiquity Aristotle believed that hope is a waking dream [2. Book V, 1].
  It is difficult to argue with this statement, since hope is only an image, not a real object.
  However, at the same time, hope does not appear arbitrarily, like some kind of dream, but is put forward by a person as a perspective at this moment - in the form of what is desired, but so far unattainable, and nevertheless, what is possible, which in itself makes it by a "pointing finger" for a person, allowing him not to stop at what has been achieved, but to look into the future, which, thanks to hope, becomes possible in the preferred version, which sets the individual in an optimistic mood.
  That is, Aristotle, like Plato, has noted only one of the negative characteristics of hope.
  Stoics correlated hope with fear and saw nothing particularly pleasant in either one or the other. In particular, Seneca, in his letters to Lucilius, stated the following: "As one chain connects the guard and the captive, so fear and hope, so dissimilar to each other, come at the same time: after hope, fear appears. I am not surprised at this: after all, both of them are inherent to a soul uncertain, anxious about the expectation of the future. And the main reason for hope and fear is our inability to adjust to the present, and the habit of sending our thoughts far ahead. Beasts run only at the sight of dangers, and when they run away from them, they no longer experience fear. We are tormented by both the future and the past ... " [3. Letter V].
  Realists Stoics have preferred to ignore the positive meaning of hope for a person in life, leaning more towards firmness of spirit, fortitude and patience, although, of course, a person is still not a beast, and in difficult times hope can cheer him up, but Stoics in the personality of Seneca quite rightly pointed to the peculiarity and importance of the present, since in a fast-flowing reality the past cannot be returned, and the future is not yet present, and it, contrary to all calculations, may turn out to be by no means desirable in the present, contrary to all hopes.
  Stoics, preferring firmness of spirit to hope, had in mind the weakness and infidelity of hope, which, in particular, is not able to affect the fatality of some diseases of loved ones, and the last hope for a posthumous life is actually unreliable, since no one has returned from the other world. Therefore, what else besides resilience can keep from falling into the abyss of despair because of their own helplessness.
  Thus. Stoics, as and Plato and Aristotle, have noted the negative nature of hope, with the difference that they emphasized not on it, but on firmness of spirit and patience.
  If Stoics, in their definitions of hope, operate by it within the framework of the real world, thereby indicating that everything for a living person ends with his death, then Christianity, in its understanding that the possibilities of knowledge end beyond the threshold of death, on the contrary, infers hope beyond the bounds of reality into the afterlife, presupposing salvation in it as the last hope, which, along with that, will always comfort in any hardships of reality, defining hope in the face of Filaret in the "Orthodox Catechism" as: "calming of the heart in God with the confidence that He constantly cares about our salvation and gives us the promised bliss" [4].
  Along with that, Christianity points out that hope in life is a manifestation of God's participation in it, contributing to a person's striving for the ideal, that is, for justice, love, goodness, freedom, becoming no longer a dubious expectation and deception, but becoming a virtue.
  In particular, the Russian religious philosopher A. S. Khomyakov points to faith and hope as holy gifts: "The creed contains the confession of the Church's teaching, but in order to know, that the hope of the church is inseparable from its teachings, its hope is also confessed: for it says "cherish hope", and not just believe what will happen" [5].
  On the other hand, Christianity, not differing fatalism, does not consider that predestination prevails in the world, and therefore it could not but recognize hope as possession of the "future good," which is thereby achieved [6].
  In addition, hope, as suggests, Christianity in its affirmation of the ideal, contributes to purification, correction and repentance.
  In Protestantism, the hope for earthly well-being in persistent labor corresponds to the following maxim of Christ: "Meek persons are blissful wherefore they will inherit the earth". (The Gospel from Matthew. Hl. 5, item 5). And Luther, in particular, stated that, since God created the person to strive for spiritual things and to realize this goal, he rewarded man with various abilities and talents, then only labor can be the only real way for the manifestation of this divine gift [7].
  But, if Christians hope for liberation from the sufferings of earthly life after death, the Jews believe that "God should be sought not on the other side of creation, but in the creation itself" [8, p. 343].
  Therefore, Jews, unlike Christians, hope in their expectation for the coming of the messiah, which "...will free them from foreign rule, avenge all enemies, will reign over the Jews and enslave for them all the peoples of the earth, and give them purely fabulous well-being: will command the sea throw away pearls and all its treasures, will dress its people into the purple decorated with precious stones, and nourish it with mannoy even sweeter than that sent to them in the desert" [ibid., p. 115].
  Islam, as an Abrahamic religion, also places its hopes on the help of God and the reward from him after death, but in addition to this, it quite pragmatically believes that hope can help a sick person who has fallen into despondency, not as a medicine, but as a means of getting out. from a stupor in the light of possible healing [9].
  It should also be noted that in the development of Christian ideas about hope, considerations of a very heterogeneous nature have emerged.
  In particular, the French religious philosopher Gabrielle Marcel believes that hope reveals the depths of the soul, putting up resistance to will and knowing, as well as - to sheer pragmatism up to the point of affirming the lively duration, aphoristically expressing this consideration in words: "... hope for the soul is the same as breathing for the body" and "to be" for the soul means "to be on the way" [10, p.198-211].
  According to Marcel, hope resists will and knowledge so strongly that it focuses only on itself.
  This thesis of Marcel means his misunderstanding of the essence of the soul and hope, since hope is only one of the properties of the soul, which helps the soul to strive for change: from hope, these changes virtually begin, the basis of which is dissatisfaction of soul with the available, and then already - with wording of the goals - the human soul, with the help of will strives to cognize the existence, the truth, overcoming all possible difficulties in beingness. Otherwise, its stay in beingness does not make sense, especially since it builds this beingness, using, in particular, hope - often wrong, but still as a guide in its expectations.
  Unlike Marcel, the German philosopher Ernst Bloch in his work "The Principle of Hope" expresses the idea that hope is not connected with faith in God, but with striving for a just future, relying in this regard not only on Judaism, but also marxism [11].
  However, such positive hopes were not justified due to the utopianism of the onset of world harmony, and the implementation of Marx's ideas failed in practice in achieving even socialist "harmony".
  The German religious philosopher Jurgen Moltmann tried to unite in hope social and religious views, because, as he believed, hope not only strengthens faith, but also leads a person to new achievements, and the continuously continuing process of creation is a triumph of Christian ideals and the salvation of the world and a person: "A historical future without heaven cannot be a forecourt of hope and the motivation for any historical movement. "Transcendence without transcendence" such as Bloch proposed turns eternity into indefinite endlessness, and the striving for completeness turns merely in non-stop motion" [12,, p. 180].
  And further: "Eschatology means not just the salvation of the soul, personal salvation from the evil world, only the consolation of a concerned conscience, but also the fulfillment of the legitimate hope of the last time, the humanization of a person, the socialization of mankind, the achievement of harmony of all creation. Creatively following Christ in love eschatologically became possible thanks to the perspective of the Christian hope for the future of God's kingdom and a person" [13, p. 240-241].
  Such argumentation of Moltmann reduces the hope to the resurrection of Christ and the general resurrection of those who believe in him, that is, to external reasons, which is nonsense in itself. No less absurd is his statement about the coming of God's kingdom and man. It is interesting what a person will do there in complete goodness and harmony, what to a person will strive for if everything is already there and nothing else is needed.
  Thus, the Abrahamic religions and their followers over-emphasize the positivity of hope.
  If for animals the forerunner of hope - the expectation of an opportune moment for attack or defense, is indeed positive, since it rarely deceives them, then the hope of a person, "corrupted" in his self-consciousness by doubts, regrets, support on theories and hypotheses that do not stand up to any criticism, bad habits, senseless stubbornness, hypocrisy, the desire to succumb to false slogans and promises of a joyful and happy tomorrow, following false authorities, etc., for the most part cannot but deceive not only an individual, but also entire nations.
  There are plenty of examples. Only Hitler, misanthropic sects, Karl Marx, Masons and other obscure communities claiming to rule the world are worth are worth anything.
  Pastors of Christians, Jews and Muslims overly trust "hope", combining it, in fact, with faith in the future salvation, who knows where and by whom, i.e. in an illusion, without analyzing its essence and origins, but still noting its positive role in ordinary life.
  Hinduism believes that nothing random happens in the world.
  This means that a person's hope is reduced only to guessing something, obviously planned by someone unknown, which deprives it of its own foundation, which consists in free creativity. All the "hopes" of the followers of Hinduism are essentially reduced to the desire to move higher up the caste levels and merge with the Absolute. As for reincarnation, due to Hinduism's view of this process as cyclical, nothing new can happen in it [14].
  In other words, the good for the Hindu is associated with faith, not with hope, and if hope still has to do, at least, with past knowledge, then pure faith is reduced to one or another delusion, since no one knows anything about the otherworld. The Hindu is not afraid of death because he does not hope, but firmly believes in his reincarnations. The lack of creativity in Hinduism in practice led the whole country to stagnation for many hundreds of years, and even in the present fast-flowing time it comes out of hibernation very slowly.
  That is, the actual substitution of hope by faith has shown, by the example of a whole large people, the real role of hope as a creative tool in the development of consciousness, culture and technology, and this tool the people of India has lost.
  Buddhism is also very skeptical about the phenomenon of hope: "Hope, - according to Buddha, - is just a different face of desire. And desire is still a goat". Padmasambhava puts it this way about hope: "Having freed yourself from hope, fear and all doubts, exercise, letting temporary experiences naturally arise and naturally release. Then all experiences will contribute to progress along the path".
  Apparently, Buddhism, believing a threat in fear, and in hope - deception of an unreasonable desire, turns to the belief in rebirth in order to avoid bad karma, and not to the hope of getting merit [15].
  Giving hope only a negative shade also affected the lag in the development of peoples who follow this religious direction.
  The French thinker - philosopher and mathematician - Rene Descartes in his views on hope, comparing it with fear, gives them the following definition: "Hope is the desire of the soul to convince itself that the desired will come true. Fear is the inclination of the soul, convincing it that the desire will not come true" [16].
  Below the problem of hope and fear will be considered in more detail, but here we can briefly say the following about them.
  In this definition of hope and fear, Descartes points out only certain aspects of these phenomena.
  In fact, fear is a warning about a threat, and hope is a perspective that allows you to assess the possibilities of going beyond the threat, if any, or the prospect of getting the best, that is, hope can be a response to a warning, as evidenced by fear, and maybe the expectation of something more pleasant than in the present moment.
  Thus, if we relate fear to hope, then fear is a kind of detonator in creating a situation for a creature that is beneficial, at least for survival, and hope allows to translate the warnings given by fear into images that, with their further development, are transformed into objects, contributing to the elimination of the threat.
  A more general definition of hope is as follows: hope is a need through the desire for something that is clearly more interesting or necessary than what is present, and this image of a still inaccessible object or phenomenon, if it is possible to transform it into a real object, is capable, as the individual believes, to change his life. however, there are no ways of this transformation at this moment, and one has to wait.
  The German philosopher Immanuel Kant did not stray too far from the Christian view of the hope in relation to virtue. He believes that the perfect realization of virtue and the happiness corresponding to it are impossible for a person in life - a person can only hope for this, that is, Kant, in essence, considers hope as an illusion in relation to the highest virtue and happiness, and therefore he the basis of hope transfers to beingness of God and the immortality of the soul.
  However, as for hope in life, then, unlike Christianity, for which the hope in life is a manifestation of the participation of God in it, contributing to a person's striving for the ideal: for justice, love, goodness, freedom, then hope in a human life, according to Kant, bears a negative connotation, since it moves away from the developed moral principles that Kant elevated to a moral law: "What could I hope for if I do what I am supposed to do?" [17, p. 662].
  Thus, Kant showed ambivalence in relation to hope, having noted its positive meaning in a religious context, and its destructive nature in the realities of life associated with morality, without having clarified the origins of hope and not having given it a definition.
  The German thinker and writer Friedrich Nietzsche, like the ancient philosophers, also has a purely negative attitude to hope: "... For this, he (Zeus) gave a person hope: it is in fact the worst of evils, because it prolongs human torment" [18, p. 281].
  In this view of hope as a deception, Nietzsche follows Plato, having refined the thesis of Plato about the infidelity of hope by believing it to be an unintentional deception, which only "prolongs human torment", thereby having noted one of the properties of hope, but not having given it a definition.
  Such an attitude to the phenomenon of hope could not but lead Nietzsche to pessimism, which was expressed, in essence, in the fact that humanity, if it comes in its development to something, then this will be a superman in the form of a half-animal, judging by those characteristics, which Nietzsche gave him.
  French philosopher and writer Albert Camus also tried to clarify the meaning of the phenomenon of hope in the world, which, as he believed, is absurd in relation to a person, and this world does not depend on his will [19, p. 152-180]. A person is not able to cognize the meaning of Creation in his short life.
  The world does not justify the hopes, which are placed on it, since the spirit and the world are not able to unite [ibid., p. 60, 71]: "... life, if it nourishes hope, it is an incorrigibly vicious life" [20, p. 147]. Hope is nothing more than an illusion, since "absurdity is the opposite of hope" [19, p. 54].
  Camus deduces the absurdity of the world from the inability of human thinking to comprehend reality, thereby transferring the palm to sensations. The human mind, according to Camus, can describe reality and no more than that: "Only philosophers professing irony are able to create exciting works" [ibid., P. 131, 136, 157]. Therefore, Camus's considerations boil down to the fact that a person is able for the only thing - to describe the world, which, like himself, will someday disappear along with all the creations of mankind, and in this world one must live not without benefit for oneself, without abandoning the fruits of sensations, maintaining steadfastness and reason in the tests of the absurd world, which do not has a future, and hence hopes due to the absence of continuous existence - salvation in such world is impossible [ibid., p. 153].
  Refusing hope in the real world, Camus also considers the hope of a person's afterlife as illusory, which also turns a person's life into the illusion of waiting for life after death, and this means, according to Camus, that a person should seek satisfaction in the present, and then he will cease to seek solace in fruitless hopes for a refuge in the next world and will find freedom in action [ibid., p. 151].
  Albert Camus, in essence, in his constructions about the infidelity of hope follows the Stoics, who believed that in a world filled with ignorance, vices, troubles and catastrophes, one should ignore such reality, giving it the meaning, that is currently required, courageously enduring its impact, about which, for example, Seneca said this: "While we fussily wander without a guide, listening to the noise of absurd screams that beckon us to various temptations, life is spent in vain among delusions, and it is short even if we take care of our spiritual development day and night... Our main task should be that we do not follow, like cattle, the leaders of the herd, so that we go not where others are going, but where duty commands ... No one is mistaken to harm himself, but everyone is a cause and a culprit someone else's delusion ... life is happy if it is consistent with its nature. Such life is possible only if, first, a person constantly possesses a sound mind; then, if his spirit is courageous and energetic, noble, enduring and prepared for all circumstances; if he, without falling into anxious suspiciousness, takes care of the satisfaction of physical needs; if he is at all interested in the material aspects of life, not being tempted by any of them; finally, if he knows how to use the gifts of fate, without becoming their slave ... Instead of pleasures, instead of insignificant, fleeting and not only disgusting, but also harmful enjoyments, there comes strong, unshakable and constant joy, peace and harmony of spirit, greatness combined with meekness " [21, p. 47-74].
  But, in contrast to the stoic rejection of pleasures, Camus prefers the views of Epicurus, who believed that free time depends primarily on sensations, since life is given in them. Therefore, Epicurus puts pleasure in the foreground as the absence of pain, suffering and anxiety, at the same time eliminating the false opinions that hope brings. [ibid.].
  Thus, Camus, in essence, following the Stoics and Epicurus, distance a person himself from the outside world. But it is precisely the outside world given for the development of the personality, and therefore of its consciousness in overcoming difficulties, troubles and her own vices. That is, Camus, perhaps unconsciously, preaches indifference and thereby stagnation in the development of both the individual consciousness of a person and the single consciousness, which represents life, making the body and everything connected with it nothing more than necessary instrument for oneself.
  Any development is unthinkable without project activities, the transition to which is impossible without the hope of implementing the plan, even if it is unlikely. Exactly what seems impossible at first, often gives the most interesting and effective result. But the matter is not in the result - hope is always a glimpse in the darkness, and it does not always deceive even after death, since ignorance of the otherworldly does not mean a complete cessation of everything after the death of the body, which is only the departure of consciousness from it.
  German philosopher and sociologist Erich Fromm gives hope a purely positive value within the framework of current reality - "when the moment comes for this" [22], that is, only in the present, believing that hope is the expectation in this present.
  He characterizes hope as follows: "Hope is paradoxical. This is not passive waiting and not forcing events that cannot happen in reality. She is like a hidden tiger that only jumps when the moment has come.
  This is not tired reformism or pseudo-radical adventurism. To hope means at every moment to be ready for something that has not yet been born, and at the same time not to despair if this does not happen during our lifetime. There is no point in placing hope on what already exists, or on what cannot be. People who have lost hope calm down, staying either comfort or in despair, while those who have strong hope see and carefully cultivate all the signs of a new life, they are ready at any moment to help the birth of something that is ready to be born" [ibid].
  That is, Fromm, unlike some of his predecessors (see above), does not equate hope with illusion, believing that hope requires to achieve goals.
  In fact, this is far from the case, since hopes are mostly illusory precisely because the probability of their achievement is low due to the lack of visible means of achieving the desired object, and the inaccessibility of ways to achieve the desired does not do them as a goal, but only constitutes an image of the desired, which, of course, attracts to itself, but the need for it is only virtual and is often replaced by other hopes that seem more promising.
  Therefore, the reduction of hope to "rational faith", or "vision of the present, fraught with the future," which penetrates into the essence of phenomena [ibid.], Is Fromm's pure fantasy, since even intuition is only the outline of the sought-for essence, and not the essence itself.
  Thus, Erich Fromm, who in his positivist attitude preaches the positive meaning of hope not as an illusion in the present, exaggerates the positive aspect of hope, since, as he believes, hope is a "vision of the present, fraught with the future," and this "knowledge" of reality consists in the ability to penetrate into the essence of events (rational faith).
  Here we can see Fromm's clear one-sidedness in his vision of the phenomenon of hope.
  Practice shows the incorrectness of hopes, as, indeed, of any desires, and their changeability, which for the most part are not justified in the same present, one might say, every day, which means, as a rule, their unattainability precisely due to insufficient knowledge of the situation, and just the appearance of a person's usual "wanting" for something.
  This refutes Fromm's main idea, which consists in the mysterious "ability" of hope to discern the essence of events. In fact, the verb "to hope" itself means the purely probabilistic nature of this "vision of the essence", since events even in the present are so intertwined and superimposed on each other that it is rather difficult for an ordinary person to understand them, and he can only guess where life will turn because he often does not know what will happen in the next moment.
  As for the achievement of goals, which Fromm confuses with hopes, it is not hope that lies at the heart of goal setting. This basis is the dissatisfaction of a person's consciousness with what exists, which first makes him want something else for his own consumption during a more or less long wait, which mostly ends in nothing, but sometimes-after a pause for "collecting" thoughts - a person seeks means to satisfy his own desire, which only in this case turns into a goal, and it is already possible to strive for it using the methods found.
  So this desire in anticipation without knowing how to be and what to do to satisfy it, is called hope, through which desire acquires a corresponding object in the form of an image, but it, like a "grape for a fox", is still unattainable.
  Along with that, the object of hope, contrary to Fromm's assertion, maybe not only the present, but also the past and the future, however, as a rule, hopes are associated with the future because they is provoked on it by the dissatisfaction of the consciousness of a person who wants better than he has: fewer threats and dangers, more delicious food, a variety of pleasures, good news, more comfortable housing, interesting and well-paid work, true love and sincere respect for oneself, more external freedom to satisfy one's desires, which also requires a lot of money, as well, if possible, more space for creativity.
  And from such dissatisfaction of consciousness a person cannot go anywhere. It is the starting point of all the needs of any living being, including a person, and these needs in the form of images appear in the human mind as hopes, which can then turn into goals if the means of achieving the desired objects will be attached to them.
  If, as Fromm believes, the objects of hope are only in the current reality, thereby, in particular, he automatically moves away from the problem of death, which, due to ignorance of the aftereffect of this phenomenon, is saved no by the "state of beingness", but is saved by the hope for life after death, which is not justified by anything, but hope does not have to justify itself and everything else. After all, illusory hopes are not only negative, but they also tend to comfort, since nothing else is available.
  American philosopher Richard Rorty, an adherent of relativistic pragmatism, examines the phenomenon of hope from the point of view of its correspondence to its benefit, believing that if a person is inside an object, for example, within the framework of social relations - in socium, then he primarily deals with texts, conversation. Cognition of the world is limited by his position and finding himself in a certain context of history, therefore he is not able to understand the true nature of reality, and also cannot "look" outside, yes, he does not need all this, because, turning to the past, he can create images of the future in the form of social hopes, transforming desires into expectations for the best, which cannot be definitively determined due to the factor of random changes, but, nevertheless, which lead to a creative searching for something new, inspiring optimism and contributing to the desire for a conflict-free existence.
  That is, Rorty believes that people can always agree due to some community of social hopes: "The work that was supposed to be done by proving the general nature of aa person should be done especially by novels and ethnography, which make those, who do not speak our language, to be sensitive to pain. Solidarity should be constructed from small pieces, it does not wait to be found in the form of a primordial language, which we all immediately recognize as soon as we hear it" [23. Part 2, chapter 4].
  Rorty's "bazaar" approach to the phenomenon of hope borders on absurdity, since it made hope the main factor in improving the state of society on the precarious basis of conformity.
  First, hope is just the expectation of something more favorable, not guaranteeing anything, and more often than not leading to another stupidity or even catastrophe because it does not have a solid foundation. which Rorty yet more restricts only to literature and conversation, denying the search for truth as a factor influencing the most effective approach to changing reality on an experimental and probative rather than "conversational" basis. What kind of improvement in the situation in society, and even more so about social harmony in this case, can we talk about?
  
  Secondly, progress is based not on "bare" hope, but on conversion it into a goal, which is because real ways and ways of achieving a goal are already visible, as a result of which the probability of achieving the goal increases significantly, while only one hope plunges socium into the sphere of action of randomness, reducing it to a herd existence.
  Thirdly, harmony in socium is unattainable, despite all the hopes for it, due to the dual nature of a person, whose "wild" (natural, or purely egocentric) consciousness will never reconcile with the calls of cultural self-consciousness eness for equality and fraternity destroying any attempts to bring society to harmony, which by itself, that is, in the struggle between both forms of consciousness, ensures a change in consciousness itself.
  Hope is actually one of the tools for moving towards a new one, not allowing a person to rest on what he has achieved along with fear, interest, imagination, freedom on the basis of dissatisfaction of consciousness with himself and own environment.
  2, Identifying the source and meaning of the phenomenon of hope.
  Until now, the phenomenon of hope has been largely unexplored, probably because it seems obvious in itself, although a closer look reveals a variety of different and often contradictory sides to this phenomenon.
  In addition, hope is spoken of only in applying it to a person, without bothering to gain an understanding that in each person there exist and interact with each other the oldest natural consciousness and self-consciousness, at this the last exists only at a person, self-consciousness is based mainly on a culture of behavior, and not on following only natural laws.
  In ф person the peculiarities of natural consciousness manifest themselves, which is the only form of consciousness that is inherent in animals. Therefore, some characteristic features of the natural consciousness become the basis of the higher consciousness of a person.
  In other words, if in animals they manifest themselves in an instinctive-reflex form, then a person can use them completely consciously, but, of course, in an advanced version.
  Therefore, it makes sense to first see if animals or even amphibians have a feature of consciousness that resembles human hope.
  For this, first of all, it should be noted that any hope is initially an expectation of something or someone.
  And expectation itself characterizes any living being, which certainly needs a pause before performing any action, since it is necessary to mentally and physically prepare for the action, whether it be a jump or a solution to a problem.
  Thus, it becomes clear that expectation, or a pause before an action is not only a product of experience, but it is embedded in the genetic program of any living being, and experience only details the expectation for a living being.
  In particular, the predator is waiting for the right moment to attack, antelopes stray into a flock, placing their offspring in its middle, waiting every moment for an attack, and such an advanced and quick-witted creature, like a domestic dog, waits at the doorstep of the master's handouts in the form of a tastier piece. And this "hope" of the dog is sometimes justified.
  Surprisingly, this canine behavior strongly resembles the manners of individual people, for example, beggars on the church porch, who are also waiting for handouts for some unknown reason.
  That is, the experience and genetic program of, for example, animals are based on the use of randomness, which are systematized through the realization of a system of trial and error to increase the efficiency of preparation for the subsequent action in the corresponding pause.
  Generally speaking, randomness, gravitating more towards chaos, is not able to be a reliable support for the structural order, violating it all the time. Therefore, giving continuous changes to the living environment, it also contributes to the same continuous destruction of the emerging order, forcing living beings to completely obey themselves, especially without thinking, the basis of which is the reflex-instinctive mechanism of action - the same for all living beings, so that with they did not happen.
  However, Creation requires both destruction and more or less successful creation, which can satisfy consciousness, giving an impetus to its development by moving away from the meaninglessness of existence only at the level of consumption of sensations.
  Thus, in Creation, the most successful in terms of acquiring meanings in combining them with sensations is only what can figure out how destroy or create more effectively, which is facilitated by not random procedures and not some order, the indispensable condition of which is stability, but only creativity and initiative, always leading to a relatively rapid achievement of the expected or unexpected result, but harm, benefit or even a small meaning of which can only be understood by a being with these properties, that is, a being,, who is self-aware.
  Therefore, it is most effective to create and destroy, except for a subject possessing both consciousness at the level of sensations and self-consciousness, no one is capable, and it means that it is impossible for both a single consciousness and individual consciousness to do without this subject as the most effective tool for its own development and consumption of different life collisions.
  It turns out that, on the one hand, for a person who is at the same time an animal, the phenomenon of expectation as an instinctive preparation for action is embedded in his natural consciousness, and on the other hand, for a person a conscious expectation is nothing more than the desire to receive that or another gift from life for the work and hardships of life, and this is the expectation of a gift in the form of this or that image, that is, - the hope on finding it in reality, cannot but manifest itself in his self-consciousness, since it first presents a person with this or that opportunity, which in the future can turn into reality if a person turns out to be able to plan his actions in a targeted way, that is, counting on a concrete result through the use of certain methods of achieving it.
  Thus, in contrast to an animal, a person, thanks to his self-awareness, is capable of a target order of actions, despite the initially spontaneous nature of desires and expectations, since there is no exact knowledge for these expectations.
  However, since initially, in the manifestation of hope at a person is laid down a randomness in the form of a spontaneous expectation of something better or more pleasant - without exact knowledge of the future and the ways to achieve it, then a person is able to find in his consciousness only the image of the desired, which promises something useful or necessary, but so far this desirable is not available due to its unplanned nature and incomplete certainty, however, it is possible to achieve if, while waiting do not sit idly, but try to concretize the still unsteady image of the desired in order to understand what should be done to transfer from the expectation to action, or, faced with a different case, change one hope for another, which may seem more promising.
  Thus, the instinctive expectation of a threat or the preparation of an attack, characteristic of the natural consciousness, in man is combined with a more or less humble desire to obtain some specific compensation with appropriate satisfaction for work and suffering in the foreseeable future, but preferably faster.
  Since both of these forms of consciousness interact with each other, as a rule, with the dominance of one of them, then the object of hope can be both a gross desire for certain bodily pleasures that are still inaccessible, and a desire for creative success, that is, to a greater or lesser extent, respectively grossly physical or mental-cultural.
  This conscious expectation of receiving not only hardships from life, but also something most interesting or useful, or necessary, can be qualified as more or less justified hope not in the afterlife, but still at this world.
  However, like everything else, this or that life opportunity can degenerate into its opposite in the conscious actions of a person, which are often based on erroneous postulates and no well-thought-out actions.
  In this respect, hope is a phantom, when a person hopes, as he believes, for the best, completely unfounded or at random.
  For example, he begins to steal, hoping to get rich, but statistics say that almost all thieves, except, of course, representatives of the ruling elite, sooner or later end up in jail.
  Nevertheless, even unfounded hope has the positive property that it adds optimism when committing generally reckless acts, one of which, in particular, is the struggle for justice with power structures armed to the teeth. This struggle excites society, not allowing it to freeze and rot in stagnation, although justice, which in fact is different for everyone, cannot be achieved, and revolutionaries perish or become retrogrades.
  Hope itself reflects that peculiarity of self-consciousness, the dissatisfaction of which is not able to immediately transform into a goal, since a person never succeeds in planning his actions initially ideally exactly. The fact is that the amount of information is rarely sufficient and there can be strong and unexpected opposition to any action, and it is most often possible to understand the intricacies of events only by cutting the "Gordian knot" or, for example, by the typical Chinese policy of waiting, when everything will fall into place, and it will be possible to push back or destroy opponents, weakened in battles among themselves.
  Therefore, hope is a necessary intermediate link between the dissatisfaction of self-consciousness and the goal. In this link, dissatisfaction takes on the meaning and form of a need during a certain pause between actions by creating an image of the need, but not having approaches to it.
  Hope is a personal asset of self-consciousness, and not a weakened type of faith, the acquisition of which means the transfer of self-confidence, in particular, to the confident actions of a certain outsider omnipotent and omniscient supreme being, while the hope is that even during life you can find some desired fruits, and not just diseases and troubles. The only question is how justified these hopes are.
  Sufficient certainty of these desired fruits distinguishes hope from fantasies and dreams, which, as a rule, are far from the realities of life, and the most typical example of such fantasies is Manilovism (see "Dead Souls" by N. V. Gogol).
  And an example of a quite definite hope can be the considerations of the young Vladimir Ulyanov, later known as Lenin.
  At first, he simply hoped to make all other people, at least satisfied with life in the world without exploitation of a person by a person, without knowing specific ways to achieve such a result.
  But over time, he found in Marxism, as it seemed to him, effective methods of achieving harmony in society by destroying all kinds of exploitation of working people, and along the way exploiters. By doing so, he transformed hope for global harmony into a goal.
  True, this goal was not achieved both because of the unsuitability of the means, and because of its utopianism, which, in turn, demonstrates the problematic nature of any goal, if it is brought closer to desire, in which what seems reasonable, achievable and even necessary can be ordinary phantom.
  From this it can be seen that hope and goal stand side by side, but in hope there is no way to achieve the desired and it consists only in waiting for it, and the goal involves the use of certain methods that allow organizing the aspiration towards an established need, that, nevertheless, does not guarantee the achievement of the goal.
  That is, hope can turn into a goal if you can find adequate ways to achieve the desired or necessary. And vice versa, if the methods of achieving the goal turn out to be ineffective, then it is either lost or turns into fruitless hope, which, nevertheless, can fool your head for a long time, because desires, even stupid ones, are ineradicable.
  Thus, no hopes are justified without converting them into goals, that is, hopes in themselves are not by the challenge of a happy future - they do not directly create favorable circumstances, but give a perspective, sometimes, however, false, however in any case hope can comfort. or encourage, which often is life-saving.
  However, the weakness of hope lies in the fact that it does not solve incoming problems and is not able by itself to respond to current challenges, since hope is, as a rule, the desire to receive recompense in the future for the hardships of life, but not a solution to current problems.
  Among other things, the fragility of hope for success is emphasized, for example, by the fact that even the presence of such solid base as certain abilities or talents does not at all guarantee success in life, which, as a rule, is understood as the acquisition of popularity, wealth, fame, power, etc., without sufficient education, adequate identification of the areas of activity corresponding to the abilities, strong will, connections with the powers that be and a successful combination of circumstances.
  Since the expectation-pause is embedded in the gene program of each living creature, then its conscious form - hope - can never disappear anywhere during life, and even dying, every person, including an atheist, unless, of course, he is the last blockhead or simply abnormal, counts on life unknown to him in the future.
  In particular, the founder of cosmonautics K.E. Tsiolkovsky, hoped, that the atoms that make up his body, in accordance with the theory of probability, can gather in the same combination after a certain number of years, albeit unimaginable, which will pass for him unnoticed outside of time, and he will again appear after myriads of years in some kind of beingness as if nothing had happened.
  Each religious confession lures into its bosom individuals precisely by instilling in them hope for a future life, and many cannot avoid this temptation.
  True, it happens that false hopes lead to despair, but the continuing life with its possibilities and not always with joyless events again brings up hope for the best, and so on up to death itself.
  Otherwise, - if hopes disappear, then prospects also disappear: a person first becomes indifferent to everything, thereby dropping out of socium as its initiative unit, and then his life ends either with a quiet death or a mental disorder, turning him into a living corpse, since his self-consciousness has already lost the stimulus for development, and the animal (natural) consciousness that remains with him is not capable of turning a person back into a prosperous animal overnight, and he himself, thanks to the remnants of self-consciousness, does not desire this transformation.
  Hope differs from many phenomena of human consciousness in its ambiguity.
  On the one hand, for every person, hope is a humble and rather shaky desire in the form of a forced expectation of only the possible from a foggy future, but preferably during life, more or less specific deserved reward for work and suffering, which is able to console or encourage a person, regardless of whether his expectations will come true or not.
  On the other hand, hope in one extreme is an attempt to find a real way out of a situation in the present, which seems hopeless, in order not to fall into apathy or despair.
  In contrast to this extreme, hope may be nothing more than an illusion based on the events of the past, but, nevertheless, its value is that it leads a person away from despair in a situation with which he cannot cope, and the person is "happy to be deceived".
  Hope remains the last attribute of the consciousness of the dying person, who, having said goodbye to his life, still hopes for its continuation in an unknown form after the death of the body.
  Hope is like an interest, the determination of the content of which in its achievement means a transition to another interesting, i.e. as and for the interesting, one hope is replaced by another, seemingly more promising, but, unlike the interesting, without achieving the previous one.
  It can be said that hope is a ray of light from the past through the sliding, doubtful and controversial present to the future, illuminating the as yet inaccessible desired.
  Hope, being essentially a desire, and to the full extent not relating to knowledge, cannot be accurately calculated, as a result of which it is not able to be a reliable support and a guarantee of receiving what is desired, but it, nevertheless, remains the only one when everything else turns into nothing, and that is why it is so named in the Russian transcription.
  Not entirely reasonable hope, since it is for the most part a "raised" case, and not an accurate calculation, still allows us to flounder in the sea of events instead of drowning in it.
  Hope is a stripped down liberty - but still liberty - associated with the dissatisfaction of consciousness with oneself, contributing to the search for the best, but not possessing knowledge of methods of changing reality to achieve the desired, created in the imagination.
  Losing hope, a person loses liberty, that is, the independence of consciousness, turning into a living corpse - a zombie with whom you can do whatever you want.
  Summarizing, we can say that hope consists in an attempt to consciously construct and keep in one's own consciousness the image of an object or event, the arrival of which from the future to the present is most desirable, on the basis of dissatisfaction with the realities of the present, in order to escape from the everyday routine or something unpleasant for interesting or beautiful, or simply necessary, but as yet absent.
  However, the desired and already somehow determined image is not capable of transforming itself into an achievable goal, since the individual does not yet see ways to turn it into a real object for oneself, or under the current conditions this transformation is simply impossible, - for example, the plane loses control and one has to hope only in some kind of life beyond the grave.
  Therefore, hope is, in fact, a forced state of unabated expectation - a kind of ambush - already found in the form of a more or less distinct image of the desired interesting or beautiful, or at least necessary, in which the need for consciousness manifests itself without knowing the ways to achieve it.
  In some cases, for example, for the sake of survival, this state comes mainly from natural consciousness, and in ordinary life, the hope that comes from self-consciousness, filled not only with the positive, but also with prejudices, ignorance and all sorts of nonsense, can cheapen itself for unfounded expectations of a ministerial post or rich bride, who come from similar foolishness of self-consciousness.
  Nevertheless, hope, although devoid of knowledge and will, that does not allow a person to intensify his actions, lays the foundation for a departure from the miserable and unfaithful present to a better future, and thereby through hope is realized the progress of the individual in the development of its consciousness, not allowing it to drown in indifference or despair.
  Thus, hope is not a goal, not a challenge, not a forecast, not a belief, not a dream, not the creation of favorable conditions for oneself, not some thoughtful action, but the need through the desire for something that is clearly more interesting or necessary, and this image of a still inaccessible object or phenomenon, if it is possible to transform it into an attainable goal, is capable, as the individual believes , to change his life, however, the ways of this transformation are not found at this moment and we have to wait.
  Therefore, if ways to get to the desired or necessary can be found, then hope becomes a goal to which you can already strive for known, roundabout, experimental or unexplored ways, for example, with the help of intuition. The latter is expressed in creative activity.
  Summing up, we note that the hope within the self-consciousness of each person occupies a separate niche, contributing to the manifestation of the need for that interesting, which is still unattainable, but possible, thereby building a bridge between the future and the present.
  Therefore, the role of hope is not reduced to organizing the striving for the interesting, but to creating a perspective, more precisely, an image of this interesting or necessary, as well as to encouragement or consolation of a person in the created forced pause between actions, who realizes, that the interesting and the beautiful exist and can be achieved without letting a person fall into apathy or despair even in front of death, since promises interesting things beyond the grave, expanding his freedom beyond the bounds of life. It is this property that allows, in particular, Christianity to recognize hope as one of the virtues, along with faith, mercy and love.
  With the growth of self-consciousness and, thus, the increase in the self-sufficiency of civilization, the effect of natural factors becomes weaker and weaker, which means that they really manifest themselves as necessary external, but not fundamental for human consciousness.
  Consequently, the intensive development of communities of living beings-previously barely noticeable, and the main contribution to which was made by mutations (random changes in the genome) - begins only with the appearance of self-consciousness in them with its distance in large measure from randomness.
  But self-consciousness is not capable of becoming self-sufficient for a person, since all the conditions for existence in the form of living are provided by natural consciousness.
  Therefore, self-consciousness is forced to interact with natural consciousness in a person and this interaction is expressed, as a rule, in their incessant opposition to each other, since they mostly have opposite aspirations - the latter is responsible for survival organism in the environment, and the former - for social and cultural development of an individual.
  So in every person constantly compete in the sphere of desires: the expectation of the best food, comfort, a pleasant female (male), dominance in their own environment, coming from natural consciousness, and the hope for a life without special worries and distress in successful progress along the steps of life, cognition, love and happiness as a property of self-consciousness.
  Both of these hypostases of consciousness most often oppose, but at critical moments, for example, in the struggle for survival, they unite, and a person forgets about everything else, trying to find a way out of a situation that threatens death during some pause, and in a harmless situation he can think about a career, a profitable marriage, fame, creative luck, a house in Cannes, etc.
  3. Fear and hope are two sides of the same coin.
  Usually, hope is opposed to fear, since hope in difficult circumstances instills optimism, and fear, on the contrary, prophesies a threat, illness or death.
  In part, of course, this is true, but, in essence, hope and fear are sides of the same coin, since fear is a warning, and hope is a perspective that allows one to assess the possibilities of going beyond the threat.
  Indeed, a lot of subjects or situations that cause or giving birth to fear, such as the opponent"s hatred, diseases, death, cannot be eliminated, replaced, or circumvented, but it is possible to try to debar oneself somewhat from them, for example, to stop thinking about them, although the very threat, the precursor of which is fear, does not disappear anywhere from this.
  It is hope that allows you to get away from such objects or situations, leaving at least solace.
  Fear as a sensation for all living beings in reality is a reaction to a actual impending threat to a habitual existence, expressed initially in the appearance of alertness, and then the appearance of anxiety, which for warm-blooded creatures, in the case of turning of the danger into a real attack, is transformed first into fear, and then into the strongest fright (horror), creating the corresponding adrenaline release into blood that gives, for example, to antelopes the highest speed of rescue from a predator, and to a predator - aggressiveness in attack on the expected prey or rage in battle with the rival, acting thereby at instinctively-hormonal level.
  Thus, fear is a kind of detonator in creating for the creature a situation, that is beneficial for survival, that is, the status of maintaining the sensations entering the body, without which - and this feels every creature up to the amoeba - comes a void, that already animals know about, because for them it happens in a dream or during fainting.
  And in this regard, no living creature is able to become fearless, just as it cannot exclude pain from its life, which indicates the degree of damage to a particular organ.
  Fear indicates the reluctance of any creature to lose sensations, a significant part of which is obviously pleasant, and this reluctance affirms life, although not a single living creature, except a person, does not grasp own existence in the world, that is, it does not understand that this existence in the framework of the current time is ended with death.
  Hence the difference in the nature of fear between animals and humans.
  Animal fear coincides with the nature of fear in the natural (animal) part of a person"s consciousness, which, like consciousness of any primate, responds to real danger, but fear, which manifests in that part of consciousness that makes a person aware of himself in the environment, making him no longer not only a simple dynamic component of this environment, but also partly its owner and conscious transformer for its own benefit, has a different character, directly determined by relations in society, which in turn is based on the relationship between the natural (animal) and self-conscious components of human consciousness, since self-consciousness is inherent only to a person and his communities, and it should influence in some way on the natural part of consciousness and vice versa, especially since they act together in the human brain, and are inseparable in this regard.
  Therefore, for self-consciousness, since thanks to it a person is able to imagine, design and fantasize, may occur and the fictitious dangers, and respectively fear, associated with the existence of a person not in conditions of the wild nature, but in conditions of socium, are of a different character compared to the natural fear.
  Self-consciousness gives a person and his communities the ability to transform certain chaos, more precisely, the dominance of randomness in development, which is the reason for its slowness, into accelerated development, which is caused by a more ordered, that is, purposeful policy of acquiring benefits both by a person and his communities in their existence.
  Hope, as one of the most important components of self-awareness, allows you to translate the warnings given by fear, especially in socium, into images that, with their further development, can be transformed into objects that eliminate threats.
  For instance, the fear of the new, combined with the weakness of consciousness, paradoxically as it may be, allows you to engage the average person (philistine) in move towards the unknown, if this move promises him even more comfort and stability, even if it is deceiving. Without this, popular unrest would have been impossible, as well as, in fact, progress itself.
  Thus, fear is a warning about a threat, and hope is a perspective that allows to assess the possibilities of going beyond the threat, if any, or the prospect of getting the best, that is, hope can be a feedback response to a warning, as evidenced by fear, and hope can be also the expectation of something more pleasant and, therefore, more desirable than what is.
  4. Hope as a harbinger of liberty through imagination.
  Liberty for a person arises not in inaction, but in setting goals, developing ways to achieve them and the transition to action according to the developed plan, but any goal arises first as an opportunity, and if this opportunity promises something better or other necessary, then this opportunity manifests itself initially in the form of an image of a desired object or phenomenon, which a person hopes to achieve in the future, since he does not yet see ways to approach what is sought.
  This kind of opportunity, or hope, concretized in the image of the desired, provides a person with the prospect of liberation from the hateful present by further transforming hopes into goals that allow changing the ephemeral freedom of hope for freedom in the realization of goals, which makes a person more and more independent from the environment and gives him the ability to expand own activity to an increasing number of areas.
  The figurative character of hope, which concentrates mainly on the imagination of the desired need, plays the role of an initial reflection in consciousness (brain) of information from the senses, combined with data from memory into images of the supposed future.
  That is, a person thanks to information, perceived by him as the possibility of changing the situation to a favorable one for himself, depending on the level of his ingenuity, forms the image of a desired or necessary, as he believes, an object for improving life, creating for himself the prospect of the future, which can significantly affect the effectiveness of his actions to change himself and own surrounding.
  The figurativeness of hope also creates the basis for the manifestation of creative thinking, since creativity consists in the selection of unusual images, which, at the same time, can, with some refinement, solve the problem, which, with a lack of data, cannot be provided by analytical research methods.
  Unusual images reflect initially something unstable, unforeseen, unfamiliar, which creates a state of helplessness. However, one can try to translate them into a stable and effective combination in line with the new rules that bind what was previously assumed to be incompatible, which open up a new scale and direction of not images, but specific solutions, where its role should play a thought. Here the images themselves can suggest a way out to a completely adequate new solution, which is often associated with intuition.
  Thus, hope is one of the foundations of a person's self-awareness, making it possible for a person to be creative as a result of his departure from adaptive existence to a conscious transformation of the environment for his own purposes, the most effective ways of this transformation can be only the creative, allowing to solve current and emerging problems in a new way, and also with less effort and greater benefit.
  The greatest contribution to the creative process of changing reality and the person himself, and therefore his consciousness, contributes precisely the imagination, with which hope is directly connected, as it allows to approach the new and unknown in its simplest and most understandable form without using complex formulas and confusing analytics.
  It is hope, which is impossible without imagination, that is able to imagine the future not in the form of "dense" reality (beingness), but in the form of "subtle" matter - virtual reality - in a number of images based on knowledge of past events.
  If to imagine liberty as a state of dissatisfaction of consciousness with oneself, which is transformed into the development of ways of one's own change by influencing existing beingness, taking into account its opposition, then the basis of this dissatisfaction of consciousness, its aspirations for the new is incessant information flows that permeate the entire being of a person, which he can interpret, possessing self-awareness, in various ways, to the extent of their understanding. Thereby, each person inevitably makes all the time hesitation from habit to destruction of order, liberation from it. Having established one thing and joining it, sooner or later he begins to feel weary about it and decides to change the order, no matter how much his outward conservative nature resists by this.
  As a result of the emergence of a new one additional connections arise, the cognitive surrounding expands, which means a continuous increase of information flows to which each person is forced to apply.
  In other words, liberty is a constant striving for liberation from one for the sake of creating another, not necessarily better, but different, and it is precisely hope that gives a person such opportunity, drawing him an image of the desired, which, if it is realized in the future through the goal, is replaced in a different image, setting the course to development in its figurative perspective of the future.
  If the conditions of existence do not allow a person to completely dominate the circumstances, then no one and nothing prevents him from striving for this, which is not a little promoted by hope: approaching the ideal is also, in a certain sense, the acquisition of greater liberty.
  Nevertheless, the hope, the manifestation of which comes from the dissatisfaction of a person's self-consciousness with oneself and his environment, although it is one of the manifestations of liberty, does not have knowledge of ways to change reality to achieve the desired, what is its limitation compared to a more advanced manifestation of liberty - the goal.
  That is, hope is liberty, limited by ignorance of ways to achieve the desired.
  5. Hope as an undeveloped form of the interesting.
  It is also curiously to compare hope with interest and the interesting, since there is a lot in common between them and, most importantly, hope and interest are realized through desire, although behind the desire is always a person's dissatisfaction with himself and others in his attempt to find the best or at least to be saved.
  That is, behind the hope, as well as behind the interest, there is always dissatisfaction with the present, and the interesting is the product of interest.
  The accumulating dissatisfaction with oneself in the surrounding everyday monotony, sooner or later pushes the human consciousness to search for something other than the existing one, which is usually denoted by the term "interesting" (unusual, provocative, mysterious, incredible, frightening, exciting, disturbing, surprising, in one word - something other) as in simple, everyday life style, and complex relationships between people, as well as in engineering and art.
  Therefore, a person can be interested in anything, if only it differed in novelty for him, and extreme expression of the interested party is the gaper with an open mouth.
  Satisfaction is sought in interesting, but it is never definitively because, having stopped on one, you can lose the rest, which cannot be allowed, otherwise there is no new satisfaction in the other interesting, and even the open interesting itself cannot bring full satisfaction owing to a discrepancy of it to an initial image attracting to itself.
  Thus, the interest is being caused by the dissatisfaction of the person with himself in the possibility of embracing the immense, resulting in "snatching" from this endless list of the desired form (an image) in order to settle in it, but the found interesting is being either not given in its entirety, like a dance with someone else's wife does not translate it into yours, or it eludes beyond the horizon, like the setting sun into the abyss of the sea, or it turns into ashes after an instant of pleasure, like an expensive Cuban cigar, either it makes the dream object - the girlfriend"s favorite - a cantankerous housewife, either it takes the form of so much desired power, which turns out to be ordinary beastliness, or it captures you by rustling of banknotes, on which, it turns out, is impossible to buy really the most expensive and valuable, or it make you crush everything around for the sake the blossoming tomorrow, but it does not come in any way.
  In other words, interest does not attract finally to something or someone, since the discovered interesting does not completely coincide with the original image because of its vagueness, mutability and instability, not giving the feeling of receiving what was truly desired due to its limitation and deceptive of what was found.
  Now we note that the notion of the interest in translation from Latin (interest) means "to have value, to participate".
  This juxtaposition of interest and hope indicates that hope is similar to interest in the sense that the comprehension of one interesting means a transition to another interesting, which is still unknown and therefore may be more attractive.
  Likewise, the hope for someone or for something, upon careful consideration of what is desired, can pass to another object that seems more promising. This is how girls try to find a husband.
  However, the difference between hope and interest is that if interest in a certain object disappears due to its achievement, getting used to it and understanding it, just as a wife loses her attractiveness for her husband in comparison with still unfamiliar ladies, then an subject of hope remains for a person is still clearly unattainable, and detailed consideration and use of it is impossible, since it has only a figurative and rather unsteady form.
  Otherwise, hope would turn into a goal, the achievement of which can be planned one way or another with a high probability by some means. Therefore, to the one who hopes often has to choose at random "which way to run," if, of course, there is such a choice. In addition, one hope may be replaced by another - seemingly more promising, or it may remain so throughout human life.
  Hope, nevertheless, is similar to interest in the fact that not any object is chosen for consideration, but one that seems new, the most useful, pleasant, unusual and incapable of causing grief, that is, one that seems more interesting.
  But, alas, if the interest lies in the real attraction by a person to himself of an unusual, new, that is, more interesting in comparison with what is available, and a person often does not experience problems with the achievement of something interesting after a while in one way or another, which turns into a goal for this time, then hope is limited only to a hunchin the forced expectation of a chance to get out of the situation or to clarify it.
  More details about interest and interesting things are said in my article "Why and due to what are manifested the interest and interesting?" [24. Part 1, ј4].
  Thus, hope does nothing more than contribute to the manifestation of the need for something interesting or necessary, which is still unattainable, but possible, thereby laying a bridge between the future and the present.
  Hope cannot organize the aspiration for an object of interest to a person, it is just a desire for it, but hope can encourage or comfort a person in the created pause between actions, who realizes, that the interesting and the beautiful exist and, in principle, it can be achieved, thereby preventing a person from falling into apathy or despair even n front of death, because hope promises the interesting also beyond the grave.
  6. Hope for the eternal life of consciousness in alive.
  The positive meaning of hope, it seems, can be questioned, because hope often deceives, and you can be at a broken trough, if you trust it.
  For example, hoping for a refund of the loan taken, but losing your job, you can become desperate because of the apparent hopelessness of the situation. However, it is the same hope that helps to get out of this situation, because there is always hope to find a job in another city or even in another country and gradually repay the debt.
  In other words, hope, of course, can deceive if the individual is not too smart, but it can also cheer him up, providing new opportunities that are always available.
  Take the most extreme case as an example.
  A person dies as a consequence of a fatal wound. What can he hope for? It seems that apart from despair and horror, he is not capable of experiencing anything?
  However, as pain has a threshold, so horror disappears if a person remembers that the life of the body is not controlled by him, but by consciousness, which was previously called the soul, and consciousness is indestructible, since the purpose of beingness, in which we all find ourselves, is the development of consciousness as in its individual expression, and in a single one. It is the image of eternal consciousness that will always comfort any person at the end of his life path.
  With regard to this extreme case, especially since any person is not eternal, it makes sense to briefly outline one of the possible ways of interaction between beingness and the otherworldly, presenting this otherworldly in the form of a probabilistic model of the following type.
  Based on the analogy of the actions of any living creature with a television set, as well as using the information model of Creation with a holographic "laying" between beingness and an infinity out of time, stated in the work "New - paradoxical - representation of the picture of Creation" [24. Part 2, ј4], we can also try to find out what happens to consciousness after the collapse of its physical carrier-body using the method of exclusion.
  Since only living creatures can, while receiving and processing impulse packets of information, form both a part of themselves and space, and the moving objects in time from the passive, so far as consciousness after the death of the carrier-body loses this opportunity, falling out thereby from the current time.
  Being a particle of a holographic projection of an infinity out of time, "disconnected" on its part from the hologram during the life of the carrier-body, more precisely, having only one-sided connection with a single consciousness of this holographic projection on the part of the latter, each individual consciousness functions thanks to the body-carrier according to the corresponding program practically automatically under the control of a single consciousness, except for a person, who, thanks to self-consciousness, has the maximum degree of liberty in his actions. Losing own body, each individual consciousness "reunites" with the hologram, more precisely, it "enters" in the frameworks of the hologram and as its part and as whole (the entire holographic projection of an infinity out of time).
  In this particle (individual consciousness), which is a kind of frozen and along with that pulsating ultra-high-frequency clump of infinite information, a record of the life that has just passed is saved, by joining to infinite series of all past lives in one or another change. Nevertheless, due to the absence of current time in the hologram, the sequence of an infinite series of past lives is lost, but there remain the accumulated changes that the individual consciousness within the hologram can, in our understanding, surveying, but no more, since there is no past, present, or future in an infinity out of time, and there is no possibility to act.
  The inability to perceive and process information in the "immobility" of an endless hologram forces each individual consciousness in the hologram to start searching for new changes, besides the acquired ones, and they can be found only in time, that is, in beingness, having forgotten about previous lives in it for a new development (consumption of information) in alive.
  The connection between the holographic projection of an infinity out of time and beingness with finite objects in time is similar to the ratio of egg and hen, which are not able to manifest without each other: one gives the program, the other - the ability to develop on its basis in the course of current events occurring with finite creatures, that is, in time.
  Actually, life is revealed only when consciousness is combined with a certain organic material. In this alliance, communication is being made between the embryo (the protein carrier of the program) and a hologram, the representative of which is each individual consciousness.
  The hologram also ensures the functioning of the informational "bridge" between an infinity out of time and each individual consciousness in the programmed organics. Along with that, the body with the sensors in it and the information processing centers is the basis for the process of selecting and processing incoming information through this information channel.
  So, even if a cell with a genome is assembled perfectly, it will never revive without consciousness entering into it, which is nothing more than a particle of a single consciousness of a hologram, never losing tie with it, and therefore with an infinity out of time, creating thereby an appropriate information "bridge", without which can be no any life.
  Along with that, if each individual consciousness is, both an independent particle of a single consciousness of a hologram and it is the entire hologram with all its resources, then the body is a carrier of consciousness for the manifestation of these resources in time, which is being formed by each living being.
  As a result, each individual consciousness with the help of a single consciousness finds a program corresponding to its level of development and desired changes in one or another embryo, and begins life first in search of a renewed oneself with varying degrees of success, but with the inevitable finds, that one way or another are being discovered on the endless path of consciousness.
  Thus, consciousness does not travel after the death of the body along some nooks and crannies of the otherworldly, which is impossible, since time (current reality) absents there, the formation of which begins with the sense organs.
  Therefore, every individual consciousness of any being is forced to return to the germ of a new life, finding oneself again in it in other body by updated, but without memory of a past life.
  This return without memory of past lives is not equivalent to arriving from nothingness, because a hologram (otherworldly) is by no means nothingness (death) in its pure form, but an ultra-high-frequency formation with a kind of time in the form of discontinuities of infinity, in which, however, there are no events.
  By reuniting with it, each individual consciousness gains the access to any of its past lives and the access to all the secrets of beingness only for human consciousness, that it can comprehend at its own level. In this case, the human consciousness can assess its achievements in past lives, and accordingly choose something new for future life, quite consciously "placed" oneself in the beginning of the new life on one or the other habitable planet, in the required stage of the current reality. It could be a stage before the emergence of civilization, or any of the centuries of civilization.
  Each individual human consciousness takes its decision on further advancement in beingness in the borderline state of the transition from life to death on the basis of a block of information concentrated in a holographic projection of an infinity out of time, accessible for its understanding.
  This borderline state is a process of the gradual separation of consciousness from the body, which loses its ability to function in the normal mode of forming the own time not right away. In this state, the human consciousness has not yet completely left the body, but has already reunited practically with the hologram, thereby obtained a direct connection with it for its part and the corresponding access to all databases of the hologram.
  In other words, this borderline state between life and death does not last long, but its time, even second - while the body is still alive - is enough for consciousness to take advantage of the resources of the hologram that it already has access to: consciousness can be acquainted the information from the databases of the hologram, which it recognizes for solving current problems, and draws up a program accordingly for the next life cycle to continue their own development as the living.
  As soon as the death of the body comes, that is, its final disintegration, consciousness finds itself in the current reality as if it was not leaving this reality, in a new body, more precisely, its germ, since this individual consciousness has the responsibility not only of its own development, but also of the development of a single consciousness, as well as the retention of Creation in a stable state of eternal change, and all this is provided by nothing more than events that can happen to consciousness only in time, or in beingness, which got the title "beingness" exactly from the expression: "to be in deed".
  is, individual consciousness is not "delayed" in the hologram, although it is a particle of it, because it is always "present" in it. Moreover, each individual consciousness is not only a particle of the hologram, but it oneself is also the single consciousness of the hologram, however this consciousness can manifest itself only in time, or in beingness. Therefore, consciousness after the death of the organism immediately ends up in a new body for a new life.
  Similar model of existence of alive in Creation or other models offered by various religious confessions provide the last hope for a person, and this, in any case, cannot but comfort him, but nothing more.
  
  Bibliography
  
  1. Plato. Collected works in 4 volumes. T. 3. M. Thought, 1994.
  2. Diogenes Laertius. Life, teachings and sayings of famous philosophers.
  3. Lucius Anney Seneca. Moral letters to Lucilius. M., Publishing house Science. 1977.
  4. Филарет (Дроздов). Пространный Православный Катехизис Православной Кафолической Восточной Церкви. [Electronic resource]: Access mode: http: //krotov.info/libr-min/drozdovi.html (Filaret (Drozdov). Extensive Orthodox Catechism of the Orthodox Catholic Eastern Church).
  5. Хомяков А. С. Церковь одна. Electronic resource]: Access mode: http: philosophy.ru / hom / church.htm: http: philosophy.ru / hom / church.htm (Khomyakov A. S. The Church is one).
  6. Thomas Aquinas. Sum of theology. About the mutual ordering of the passions. Part 2, question 25, p. 4.
  7. Sirota A. Regularities in German history. Partner (Dortmund), No. 6 (105) maranat.de (2006).
  8. Дрейн Д. Путеводитель по Ветхому Завету. М., 2008. (Drain D. Guide to the Old Testament. Moscow, 2008).
  9. Access resource: http: //www.islamnaneve.com/
  10. Визгин В. П. Философия надежды Габриэля Марселя. // Опыт конкретной философии. М., 2004, с. 198-211 (Vizgin V. P. Philosophy of hope Gabriel Marcel. // Experience of concrete philosophy. M., 2004, p. 198-211).
  11. Bloch E. Das Prinzip Hoffnung. Bd. 1-3. B., 1954-59.
  12. Jurgen Moltmann. God in creation/ A New Theology of Creation and the Spirit of God. San Francisco: Harper and Row. 1985.
  13. Герман Гартфельд. "Глава 25. Юрген Мольтман". Немецкое богословие Нового Времени (Herman Hartfeld. "Chapter 25. Jurgen Moltmann." German Theology of the New Time).
  14. Альбедиль М. Ф. Индуизм. СПб. Петербургское востоковедение. 2001. ISBN 5-85803-160-9 (Albedil M.F. Hinduism. SPb. Petersburg Oriental Studies. 2001).
  15. Spiro, Melford E. Buddism and society, a great tradition and its Burmese vicissitudes. 2nd, expanded. Berkeley. University of California Press, 1982. ISBN 0520046714. ISBN 9780520046719
  16. Декарт Р. Об отчаянии. О надежде. О страхе. Избранные произведения Декарта. М., 1950 (Descartes R. On despair. About hope. About fear).
  17. Кант, И. Критика чистого разума. Соч. в 6-ти тт. Том 3. М., Изд. "Мысль". 1965. (Kant, I. Critique of Pure Reason. Op. in 6 vols. Volume 3. M., Ed. "Think". 1965).
  18. Фридрих Ницше. Человеческое, слишком человеческое. Сочинения в двух томах. Т. 1. Издательство "Мысль". М., 1990. (Friedrich Nietzsche. Human, too human. Works in two volumes. T. 1. Publishing house "Mysl". M., 1990).
  19. Camus A. Le Mythe de Sisyphe. Gallimard. Paris. 1942.
  20. Camus A. La Peste. Gallimard. Paris. 1947.
  21. Древнеримские мыслители. Свидетельства. Тексты. Фрагменты. Киев. 1958. (Ancient Roman thinkers. Testimonials. Texts. Fragments. Kiev).
  22. Фромм Э. Революция надежды. Навстречу гуманизированной технологии. Москва. АСТ. 2006. ISBN 5-17-037372-4 Erich Fromm. The Revolution of Hope, toward a humanized technology (1968). ISBN 5-9713-2297-4
  23. Richard Rorty. Contingency, Irony and Solidarity. Cambridge University Press. 1989.
  24. Nizovtsev Yu. It's the other way around. Answers to tricky questions about interesting things (Collection). 2018. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon. Yury Nizovtsev.
  
  Chapter 16.
  What can be revealed from the other side of fear?
  
  Until now, the clear definition of the concept of fear, as well as the place and significance of this phenomenon in relation to both the main strata of society and society as a whole, has not been given. The attempt to solve these problems is presented in this article.
  I
  If any psychologist - and there are enough of them - will tell you that fear can be overcome, and even offer a number of methods to do this, send it as far as possible, since fear, like pain, are integral properties, without which the normal functioning of any living organism is impossible, which is the positive meaning of fear, while its negative value is the introduction of the psyche into an upset or stressful state, from which it is sometimes very difficult to get out.
  True, there are states of intense passion or craziness in which fear, like pain, are lost, but these states go beyond the normal existence without assuming the survival of the organism.
  Of course, a sense of a person fear can be weakened by pharmacological agents or hypnotic techniques, but these approaches are not related to real life, since they cannot be used constantly. Moreover, they destroy the system of interaction of the body with the environment and lead organism to rapid death in the case of more or less regular use the same as when using drugs.
  If it is impossible to get rid of fear at all, there are subjects or situations, causing fear that can be eliminated, replaced, or dispensed without them. For example, with an evil wife (husband) who regularly and gruelingly causes fear, you can divorce, replacing her with another, or you can never marry at all. You can do the same with a picky and nasty boss.
  True, the other subjects producing fear will not go anywhere.
  Besides, there are false, or invented, fears of non-existent dangers. Here you can fight them. Although directly to the true fear caused by the real threat, they have no relation.
  But, alas, a lot of subjects or situations that cause or giving birth to fear, such as the opponent"s hatred, diseases, death, cannot be eliminated, replaced, or circumvented, but it is possible to try to debar oneself somewhat from them, for example, to stop thinking about them, although the very threat, the precursor of which is fear, does not disappear anywhere from this.
  In addition, sometimes fear in relation to certain phenomena, especially social ones, has such a positive meaning that it needs to be supported, not fought against. Examples of this are shown below.
  II
  Philosophers and psychologists define fear as follows.
  V. I. Dahl points out that fear is an internal condition caused by a real or perceived disaster [1].
  This definition does not include the meaning of fear for a person and his communities, and also does not indicate the main objects or phenomena, except for disasters, causing fear for various strata of society.
  Psychologist A. N. Leontyev considers fear a negatively colored emotional process. At this, for animals, fear is an emotion based on past negative experience, which plays a role in the survival of an organism [2].
  This definition of fear practically does not differ from the definition of fear by Dahl V.I., except that he extended it to animals, indicating that it is important for the survival of various organisms.
  Psychologist and doctor A. I. Zakharov defines fear as "an affective (emotionally pointed) reflection in the consciousness of a particular threat to a person"s life and well-being" [3]. At the same time, he notes there that fear is based on the instinct of self-preservation, has a protective character and is accompanied by physiological changes in higher nervous activity, that affects the pulse rate and respiration, blood pressure, gastric secretion.
  In his definition of fear, A. I. Zakharov, like his predecessors, does not pamper us with novelty, emphasizing the reflection in it of a threat to existence and pointing to its protective character, that contributes to survival, and adds some physiological parameters, that is quite banal.
  Carroll Isard attributes fear to the basic emotions, believing that it is an innate emotional process with a genetically defined physiological component, a strictly defined facial expression and a specific subjective experience [4]. He considers that the causes of fear are a real or imaginary danger, at this fear mobilizes an organism for avoiding behavior, the running away [5].
  K. E. Isard adds little to the above definitions of fear above, so how everyone knows that he must go through fear, just as he knows that the appearance of fear implies a desire to get away from the subject of fear.
  All other specialists in this field of knowledge, in essence, utter similar ideas, confirming that fear refers to innate emotions as reactions to a threat associated with the instinct of self-preservation (J. Watson, W. James., Z. Freud, F. Riemann, O. Maurer, C. Spielberger, N. I. Konyukhov, F. B Berezin), sometimes introducing small details, which do not change essentially anything in relation to the concept of fear.
  In general, it turns out that apart from the demonstration of fairly obvious signs by the respected experts, nothing the informative about fear is said by them.
  The multivalued meaning behind the notion of fear for a person and his communities in their definitions of fear is absent. Besides, they do not identify the main subjects or situations other than disasters that cause fear for representatives of different strata of society, nor do they indicate the causes for the appearance of fear.
  Why it happens?
  The fact is that before going into details and trying to uncover the phenomenon, it is necessary to determine the points of application of this phenomenon. In particular, for this case, it is necessary to distinguish between animal consciousness and human consciousness, having shown their difference and accordingly having determined the subjects and causes of fear in connection with this difference.
  The bottom line is that for a person, in addition to the natural consciousness inherited by him from his ancestors, which developed in the living world for hundreds of millions of years, a mandatory presence of self-consciousness is characteristic, which first appeared in its infancy only at hominids several million years ago. Therefore, the subjects and causes of fear must be appropriately divided, especially since these subjects and causes of fear that appear for the first time during the development of the human communities are of a different - non-natural - character, depending already on the relations of people in society.
  In addition, it is necessary to identify individual differences in people's consciousness, to identify the strata into which they fall in accordance with the differences between natural (animal, or the lowest) consciousness and self-consciousness (the highest consciousness), and only then try to find the main subjects of fear for representatives of the identified strata.
  III
  Fear as a sensation for all living beings in reality is a reaction to a actual impending threat to a habitual existence, expressed initially in the appearance of alertness, and then the appearance of anxiety, which for warm-blooded creatures, in the case of turning of the danger into a real attack, is transformed first into fear, and then into the strongest fright (horror), creating the corresponding adrenaline release into blood that gives, for example, to antelopes the highest speed of rescue from a predator, and to a predator - aggressiveness in attack on the expected production or rage in battle with the rival, acting thereby at instinctively-hormonal level.
  Thus, fear is a kind of detonator in creating for the creature a situation, that is beneficial for survival, that is, the status of maintaining the sensations entering the body, without which - and this feels every creature up to the amoeba - comes a void, that already animals know about, because for them it happens in a dream or during fainting.
  And in this regard, no living creature is able to become fearless, just as it cannot exclude pain from its life, which indicates the degree of damage to a particular organ.
  Fear indicates the reluctance of any creature to lose sensations, a significant part of which is obviously pleasant, and this reluctance affirms life, although not a single living creature, except a person, does not grasp own existence in the world, that is, it does not understand that this existence in the framework of the current time is ended with death.
  Hence the difference in the nature of fear between animals and humans.
  Animal fear coincides with the nature of fear in the natural (animal) part of a person"s consciousness, which, like any primate, responds to real danger, but fear, which manifests in that part of consciousness that makes a person aware of himself in the environment, making him no longer not only a simple dynamic component of this environment, but also partly its owner and conscious transformer for its own benefit, has a different character, directly determined by relations in society, which in turn is based on the relationship between the natural (animal) and self-conscious components of human consciousness, since self-consciousness is inherent only to a person and his communities, and it should influence in some way on the natural part of consciousness and vice versa, especially since they act together in the human brain, and are inseparable in this regard.
  Therefore, for self-consciousness, since thanks to it a person is able to imagine, design and fantasize, may occur and the fictitious dangers, and respectively fear, associated with the existence of a person not in conditions of the wild nature, but in society, naturally, are of a different character compared to the natural fear.
  That is, in addition to the benefits that self-awareness gives a person, it brings many negative consequences.
  As for the lack of aware of himself by any living being, except man as a subject of action, setting goals before oneself, that are not related to the instinctive-reflex sphere of life activity, makes these purely natural beings quite satisfied with existence inside own niche of life according to standard programs that they do not understand and do not seek to consciously change. These creatures have no morality, and the laws of their existence are reduced to purely biological, in which aspirations to occupy the most favorable position for nutrition and reproduction predominate, and their very slow development occurs through to the action of due to randomness in the form of mutations in the genome.
  Intuitively, this situation was noted back in the 19th century by the Danish thinker Søren Kierkegaard: "If a person had no eternal consciousness, if some wild power was the basis of everything, a power that, interwoven in dark passions, gives rise to everything from great to insignificant, if the bottomless emptiness was hidden behind everything, which cannot be saturated with anything, what would life be then if not for despair? If it were so, if there were no sacred bonds binding humanity together, if one generation grew after another like leaves in the forest, if one generation followed another like the songs of birds in the thicket, if the human race was passing through the world without leaving a trace, like a ship gliding on water, or like a wind rushing through the desert like a thoughtless and barren whim, if eternal oblivion always eagerly awaited its prey and no force could tear this prey out of its claws, how in that case life would have been inconsolable and empty! [6, p. 20].
  Although, of course, such a situation is purely hypothetical, since a person was given forever not only natural consciousness, but also self-consciousness as the highest consciousness for their joint manifestation.
  Self-consciousness gives a person and his communities the ability to transform certain chaos, more precisely, the dominance of randomness in development, which is the reason for its slowness, into accelerated development, which is caused by a more ordered, that is, purposeful, policy of acquiring benefits both by a person and his communities in his existence.
  In other words, this new tendency in the development of living organisms can be expressed as follows: "The additional program of the consciously-targeted actions, that appeared in a living entity in the form of a hominid is distinguished by the lack of autonomy: it allows this creature to be aware of oneself and own actions within the environment only in conjunction with the previous program for the reflexive-instinctive mechanism of actions, providing a possibility of existence of an organism in the environment, that is, its nutrition, reproduction, metabolism, random variability. Therefore, on the one hand, the consciousness of a new creature bifurcates, but, on the other hand, it is not able to split completely, being one entity, in which, nevertheless, there is a struggle all the time due to the multidirectionality of aspirations, one of which aimed at survival in any way, others - to the harmonization of surroundings... In other words, it is possible to state the fact of the emergence of absolutely special, dual being, on the one hand, which is still as a part of the environment, but, on the other hand, - as a being, completely separate of the environment, who tries not only to understand own surrounding, but also to subjugate everything that is before him, that is, which believes oneself already not only by a live organism, and the extra natural essence, in a certain measure owning time... Let's note further very remarkable fact: the randomness in usual life, presented inside the person in the form of the lowest (animal) consciousness, and the highest consciousness (consciously-target expression of consciousness) are antagonists in the respect what, if the subject, having the highest consciousness, is mistaken, then he will be is capable to understand the mistake and to correct deeds, significantly having accelerated own advance on the way of development, while the randomness is some kind of edge of consciousness, making the essence of the lowest part of consciousness. Consciousness uses the random if it doesn't know what and how to do at this level of development, but, accepting in attention a random, though slowly - with kickbacks and zigzags - nevertheless moves ahead.
  Thus, the antagonism of the lowest and highest forms of consciousness both in the person, and his communities means emergence of the new driving force, providing the fastest development of consciousness in its carrier - the person [7, part 3, section 5].
  IV
  However, the emerging benefit in the new existence - with a dual consciousness - is understood by each person in his own way.
  For some persons are the closest the animal sensations in the form of aspirations for the most enjoyable - precisely in the sense of feelings - life: the animal part of consciousness dominates in them. Others, in which self-awareness prevails, are most striving to know the world around them, either to make the life of all people without sorrows and worries, or to develop their abilities. That is, value concepts in people can be completely different, and this, as you see, depends on the ratio of self-consciousness and animal consciousness in each person, as well as in his communities.
  Therefore, in the same way, the nature of fear of people depends on the degree of dominance in each of them of the animal or self-conscious component of consciousness.
  In particular, some people fearlessly go to death for the sake of their ideas, while others cling to life in every way, even if it turns into hell.
  As a result, the meaning of fear for humans compared to animal changes. If the animals it only warned and initiated to prevent the threat to life, for man himself and his communities he became not only a precursor to the threat, but a kind of engine of progress, because, in particular, he proved able to involve large groups and even masses of the population in the struggle for change in existence, accelerating the development of communities. The relevant evidence is given below.
  Thus, common to all people is the animal fear, expressed in reaction to a real danger, that is, in the aspiration to somehow avoid it.
  In addition to this fear, there are other - universal for all people - expressions of fear that already go beyond the purely instinctive-hormonal sphere, that is, the expressions of fear that a person realize and even plan, knowing their reasons, being already not in the wild environment, but in an organized society.
  These reasons of fear include real and imaginary objects and phenomena, for example, in the form of natural and social disasters; imaginary disasters that may come; formidable god who will punish for sins; dark streets with alleged bandits and rapists; unemployment; arrogant and unpunished bosses; strong and unpredictable neighbors; diseases; death and much more.
  But this is not enough.
  If we recognize the duality of consciousness of both a person and his communities and, accordingly, the mutual influence of these components of consciousness on each other, then the entire adult population can be empirically divided into several main strata depending on the degree of dominance of one or the other form of consciousness and its level, i.e. prevail of weakness or strength of these components of consciousness - animal and self-consciousness.
  Such basic strata are philistines, representatives of imperious structures and other "heads" (the power elite); informally-intellectual opposition layer; creative persons. These strata are supplemented in between by representatives of paramilitary and law enforcement agencies, ministers of worship, businessmen, managers, rentiers, criminals and all sorts of lumpen.
  It should be noted that intelligence has no direct relation to the lower (animal) consciousness, nor to self-consciousness, since it is a kind of reflection of the technical efficiency of processing information entering the system that controls the body (the brain for a person), being present in any living creature - from bacteria to person-genius. Consciousness merely owns by an available intellect and apply it. Intellect can be powerful in a notorious scoundrel and weak in an honest, educated and cultured person.
  V
  The weak development of self-consciousness and the equally weak manifestation of animal consciousness (low level of dissatisfaction of consciousness in both cases), which are in a balanced state, characterize the main largest group of any community - the so-called philistines (the common people), diverse in professions - from the baker and the farmer to the paramedic and clerk, as well as non-working individuals - from a pensioner to a housewife.
  The consequence of such weakness is their insignificant interest in any activity that is not directly related to their well-being.
  As a rule, powerful intelligence, which appears not only due to the possession of innate abilities, but also is developed and strengthened by long studies, participation in various educational programs, aspirations for hard-to-reach goals, to such individuals is not peculiar not only because of their lack of high aspirations, but also due to the influence of the mediocre or, as used to say, philistine environment, lack of accessible social elevators, financial resources for education, etc.
  Thus, philistines are one in the following.
  All representatives of this most significant layer of each community are guided mainly by their own reason and experience: preoccupied with themselves and their own well-being, they do not aspire to either "high" or "low" goals, limiting themselves to the desire of a hassle-free and well-fed life in which it are desirable see troubles only on the monitor screen.
  The philistines do not feel the desire for new at the expense of their own efforts, seeking a more comfortable state of life from the position of simple acquisition and consumption of finished goods.
  Naturally, the nature of fear inherent in the representatives of this stratum of society is associated mostly with the loss of stability of the society, where everything is familiar and comfortable enough of the philistine, like a frog in a swamp. Therefore, the philistine is always afraid of changes, a new, unknown, but due to the weakness of consciousness, and hence to non-independence, or more exactly, non-self-reliance, he tends to succumb to outside influences, which can lead nevertheless to a new one, although basically these influences come down to deceit in the form of unenforceable promises, and to the use of this layer of the population as a low-paid labor resource by these deceivers, as a rule, by politicians representing the ruling elite.
  Thus, the fear of the new, combined with the weakness of consciousness, paradoxically as it may be, allows you to engage the average person in a movement towards the unknown, if it promises him even more comfort and stability, even if it is deceiving. Without this, popular unrest would have been impossible, as well as, in fact, progress itself.
  In this regard, the philistine"s fear before the unknown opens the gates to liberty, making him more active at appropriate seeding, that is, this fear plays a positive role for society.
  Be that as it may, the conditions of existence of the philistine can be changed or they can change, or he himself can change them, just as the consciousness itself can manifest itself from an unexpected side, thereby causing other character of fear that can have both positive and negative connotations. In particular, the philistine can replace certain fears with others by making an attempt to change his own way of life, thereby moving to another stratum of the population, which, for example, was made by an illiterate pie seller at the bazaar Aleksashka Menshikov, having become under the Emperor Peter I in Russia at the beginning of the 18th century by the prince, never having mastered the letter - he learned only to sign the documents.
  The working philistines are also joined by the non-working, which include pensioners and housewives, who make up a significant part of the population.
  In itself, transforming into the philistines of often quite fairly clever and fairly developed individuals is caused, with rare exceptions, by a rather rapid drop in the level of both lowest and highest consciousness among pensioners due to the loss of the labor process and the absence of its fully-fledged replacement in the free time that appeared.
  The explanation for this is simple: with age, the functioning of the brain deteriorates, in particular, it is falling memory, quick of the reaction, quick wit, acuity in understanding one's own place in the world. Force, dexterity, enterprise, and, therefore, competitiveness in comparison with younger individuals are also declining due to health problems.
  In addition, a retired person is far from young, which means that he becomes more apathetic, indifferent to everything due to the lack of prospects, except for impending death.
  Therefore, for example, public life interests him only from the standpoint of maintaining stability, if, of course, it exists, but any changes, whose essence he does not understand and which he can no longer adapt to, are only disturbing him.
  Naturally, a pensioner in this respect becomes both selfish and conservative.
  However, like other philistines, pensioners are, albeit a dormant, but the formidable force that can sweep away any power if it tries to deprive them of a stable and trouble-free existence, as a result of the dissatisfaction of the lowest consciousness, which they have not lost, and which reacts harshly to a significant deterioration in living conditions.
  The main thing, except fear of loss of stability in society what pensioners fears and what puts them into a stupor is the lack of prospects. Therefore, pensioners, how they can, try to distract themselves from thoughts of inevitable and not so distant demise, impending illnesses and coming helplessness.
  Some spend all their time and miserable pensions for permanent treatment, believing at the expense of this dubious action they will delay themselves in a new and largely incomprehensible world for them, unreliable and offensive to the still preserved at them dignity.
  Others kill time by growing cucumbers in the summer, and in winter they seize these cucumbers for drinking the strong drinks, bringing themselves to a complete dullness.
  Still others spend days tapping dominoes with their knuckles, not wanting to think about anything at all, since now there is such opportunity.
  The fourth borrow their time with the composition of complaints to the wrong actions of all bureaucratic instances without special hope for proper response.
  The most optimistic dance and sing in the corresponding circles, and the cleverest write novels and stories, which no one needs and uninteresting, posting them on the Internet.
  The rest are trying to find at least some kind of work to think less about their sad fate.
  Housewives, who also represent a significant part of philistines, as and pensioners, fall into a kind of trap of lack of prospects, fearing already not close death, but impossibility to go beyond the scope of housekeeping.
  Petty daily worries just as quickly reduce the level of their animal consciousness and self-consciousness due to the inability to be distracted for following high aspirations, especially since they are dependent on the husband, who feeds the family, and in this connection become ordinary conformists.
  The only thing left for them from household burden is a look in rare moments of rest at a strange world from a window or on a monitor screen.
  They fear the meaninglessness of their life, but they cannot end it because it is impossible to leave their children, house without any means of subsistence.
  Thus, elimination or replacement of these types of fears for pensioners and housewives is impossible, and their negative nature is obvious.
  The Russian writer Anton Chekhov displayed the life of the philistines most clearly in his stories, of which the story "Gooseberry" stands out.
  The main character of the story leads a monotonous, boring life. He is saving up money for the estate to have gooseberries there. It was his dream: to live on the estate with gooseberries. He didn"t want anything more: "Village life has its conveniences, - he used to say. - You sit on the balcony, drink tea, and ducks swim on the pond, it smells so good and ... and the gooseberry grows."
  So what? He has accumulated money for the estate, has started gooseberries, gradually degrade - "aged, got fat, became flabby." He was suing his neighbors, fearing any changes, was not interested in anything but his gooseberry, ate a lot and was quite pleased with own existence.
  And about the need for changes, he was expressed like this: "Education is necessary, but it is premature for the people," "corporal punishment is generally harmful, but in some cases they are useful and irreplaceable."
  VI
  Be that as it may, the philistines are the main soil for formation of intellectual and imperious layers; representatives of these layers are being grew from this soil accidentally, hereditary or thanks to these or those proficiency, competence or abilities which raised them above the average level, and this soil they can ruin or improve, since the people are, as a rule, passive because of the load by the monotonous work for survival and nourishment; stagnant traditions; religious delusions; predispositions due to the low cultural level to the negative impact of the active propaganda of information frauds, even more fooling the people; the lack of the adequate education and upbringing, that does not allow it to use in large quantities social elevators and to set before itself the high purposes: similar sad and gloomy life does not promote transformation of all mass of people into bright, educated, cultural, creative, vigorous and sociable persons at all.
  Similar people stands out only a few percent.
  Thus, the faceless mass of the population outwardly acquires development in the person of their representatives in power and in informal-intellectual opposition to power.
  VII
  Among philistines are always individuals with a slightly higher level of the animal consciousness - this is a kind of result of fluctuations of consciousness. This factor in this case can cause them to strive not only for a well-fed, calm and comfortable life, but also for dominance among their own kind.
  Taking away from the highest consciousness the appropriate share of intelligence, which includes increased ingenuity, and from the lowest consciousness - speed of reaction, quite good strong-willed qualities and energy, skill to communicate, sufficient dexterity, cunning, insidiousness and unprincipledness, these individuals get advantage before the others - more inert members of the community in the form of philistines, highly moral intellectuals of all sorts and other relatively sluggish or anxious with another matters of members of the population, who are not able to deftly push aside or slander a rival, as well as really enjoy by the humiliation of the subordinate, and at the same time to endure the mockery from the side of their superiors.
  The lack of intelligence at the persons, broke into the power elite, is compensated by the involvement of numerous advisers, but because the decisions eventually have to be taken them, insofar they, as the true creators of their own happiness, initially consider their activities from the position of personal (corporate), and not the people's good, with a roll in the direction of retaining power, gaining a greater degree of their own dominance and the acquisition of all kinds of privileges, clogging up in addition to it the various management and economic structures with own mostly incompetent offspring.
  Therefore, the hopes of naive masses to correct these moral freaks, cunning, hypocritical rogues, representing the power elites of various states competing with each other, have no basis, regardless of the structure of the state and its degree of development - from despotism to parliamentary democracy.
  For the representatives of the power, a dominant inevitably is the lowest consciousness, that is, in their consciousness there is a clear lack of awareness of themselves as self-sufficient personalities and not as consumers. Power and practically the unlimited access to privileges and property belittles them so much that they see in the masses only a source of wealth for themselves and a field for the manifestation of their own low instincts. However, fearing the anger of the people and the counteraction the informal opposition, they are forced to resist anarchy, retaining, in particular, through reforms, the order that ensures the functioning and development of society, but, naturally, not from noble motives, but only from a sense of self-preservation.
  They always withdraw money in all possible ways, mainly from the budget, that is, from the people, since they have no abilities and desire for honest ways of earning, yes, there are no concepts of honor, conscience, decency in their monkey essence: well, how can"t take it away from the people, that is, the cattle, if it is possible to trample them with impunity with the help of courts and law enforcement agencies, all, that is required to the power elite to be luxurious life according their monkey concepts.
  Nevertheless, the need to protect the conquered place in the structures of power from the encroachments of competitors always overshadows this pleasant life with respect to sensations - and this is the most important thing for them. Otherwise, instead of having a pleasant feeling of omnipotence in relation to the large masses of the population, one will have to mock only his own wife, and only, if she allows it.
  Therefore, the main nature of the fear among these representatives of the population is a permanent phobia of losing their place in the power elite, where, without special talents, one can achieve significant benefits thanks to servility before the bosses.
  But some members of the power elite eventually get tired of this kind of fear - they want to move away from the accepted role of, in essence, the overbearing primate.
  Trying to eliminate this subject of fear - the loss of authority - means coming into conflict with the basic property of any living being - dominance among similar of oneself to improve the quality of the sensations received, especially if this property of the lowest consciousness is expressed more strongly than usual.
  It is a strong desire to prevail over others is the true cause of perseverance, due to which cling to power even in adverse circumstances.
  But if to those, who in power, the strong internal (animal) sense of dominance counteracts to eliminate the subject of fear, and only a few are able to overcome it, then replacing the subject of fear, for example, at the end of a career, is quite possible, especially since this character of fear annoy to some representatives of the ruling elite in the end - they want to move away from the accepted role, essentially an imperious primate.
  And they have for this, at least two outlets due to the proximity of their dual consciousness on the one hand to the consciousness of the philistine, and on the other hand, to the consciousness of a creative individual.
  Therefore, they can, in principle, replace their fear of the difficulties of managing large masses of people and the fear of the intrigues of fierce competitors on a quieter life of the philistine with his rather mediated fear of change due to a decrease in his own self-awareness and weakening of his animal consciousness to almost the level of a philistine, by sheltered oneself into an almost impenetrable shelter, for example, growing cabbage in the garden like Diocletian, who was recently the Emperor of Rome.
  They can also, on the contrary, having increased the level of their self-consciousness, move on into the category of creative people, thereby replacing the fear - representatives of the power elite, which negatively affects the development of self-consciousness, on the fear of a creative person to lose their creative abilities, which positively affects the development of self-consciousness, and to busy oneself by writing memoirs like Duke de Saint-Simon and the recent ruler of the USSR N. S. Khrushchev, or fabricating aphorisms and maxims as Duke de Larochefoucault, sincerely feeling proud of own creations.
  As a reverse example of a power-hungry lover, one can point to Hitler's closest assistant - his personal architect and Reich Minister of Armaments and Ammunition Albert Speer - the obliging, unprincipled and, at the same time, very talented and clever individual.
  He was the author of the project for the new Reich Chancellery and the territory of NSDAP congresses in Nuremberg, the master plan for the reconstruction of Berlin, he successfully led the German military industry and its reorientation to total war. In particular, from February to August of the 42nd year, German military production grew by 60%, two years later it doubled.
  Despite his quite high level of culture and even some independence, Speer was well aware of the crimes of the Nazis. Moreover, he used the services of Himmler, who supplied him labor from concentration camps, and Speer did not object to Hitler's other villainous plans. He enjoyed all the benefits provided to him by his position, fearing only disfavor from Hitler and serving him faithfully until the collapse of the Reich.
  Due to the fact that the intelligent Speer was an "ugly duckling" in the company of rude and arrogant Nazi bosses, they constantly humiliated him, and Goering even plotted against Speer. However, Speer did not leave his post and he was accepting all bullying, not only because of fear of Hitler, but also because he could not give up power, which was unlimited for him in the military industry.
  In addition, the loss of power, sometimes, means the loss of life or the confiscation of considerable property, that is, it is associated respectively with the disappearance of sensations in general or the replacement of familiar pleasant feelings with troubles and even deprivations.
  VIII
  Opposes this cohort, in fact, of scoundrels that make up the power elite (more about this in our works "How did the rulers act and doing now? and how - the people under them?" [8, section 7] and "What were the true aspirations of the glorified rulers and the reasons that caused them?" [8, section 8], the informal-intellectual opposition.
  Representatives of this community stratum as well as representatives of the power elite are arising initially from the wide ranks of philistines
  Among philistines always be individuals, who in their development achieve, despite all difficulties, domination over the animal consciousness of self-consciousness of the high level, which causes them mainly altruistic aspirations, the main of which is the desire to bring benefits to all the oppressed, and to transform the world into harmonious and happy for all without exemptions.
  Informal intellectuals, pursuing basically the goals opposite to the goals of the representatives of the power elite, are forced to appeal to the people, proving their rightness and anti-people of the elite-oppressor, which, in turn, must justify itself and stigmatize by shame of the rotten informal-dreamers who can only speak, not rule and predominate.
  Informal intellectuals should be understood as not indifferent people of intellectual labor, intellectuals of various kinds, as well as relatively few representatives of the rest of the population who managed to somehow rise in their self-consciousness to the level that dictates them an aversion to the immoral and self-serving behavior of the power elite.
  Informal intellectuals have the hope of reorganizing society in the direction of harmony, that is, equality, fraternity and at the same time liberty, without understanding that liberty always resists to equality, justice, destroying any stability. But this hope for harmonious world order can never disappear in their blissful consciousness: they as true humanists, are not capable to believe that horrors of our world cannot turn into prosperity of each person and all mankind eventually.
  Informally-oppositional part of intellectuals, to which various educated people from this or that generation can be attributed, are active, honest, sincerely wishing good to the people, that is, with the dominant higher consciousness, - have never joined and will not join to the hypocritical and self-interested governing elite of the state. Already reached level of the highest consciousness, putting material benefits on the last place among life values, will not allow them to commit similar. Therefore, they will always expose the unscrupulous, hypocritical and thievish individuals in power of this world, to fight for the rights and civil liberties of workers, involving them in this fight as much as possible widely.
  Thereby, their opposition to imperious elite does not allow society to freeze in place, being reflection of antagonism of the lowest and highest types of consciousness in each person.
  The struggle between them when the passive behavior the most part of the rest of the population occurs continuously with the dominance of a more energetic governing elite, which is provoking self-hatred from everyone else, and thus forming that antagonism that does not allow society to stop in developing.
  The problem of determining the true driving force of the development of man and his communities was revealed by us in the work "The Driving Force and Source of Development of the Person and His Communities (Against L. N. Gumilev's passionarity)" [9, part 3, section 3].
  In the result, the people, willy-nilly, are involved by energy of this struggle into a forward motion, which can also be evolutionary at the consent of the power elite with the opposition from the nonconformists-intellectuals to certain compromises in the interests of the working masses, but it can jump into a different course if there is no such agreement, which is reflected in the public consciousness as a clear injustice, transforming into a more or less successful attempt to remove the ruling elite from power upon the occurrence of suitable conditions.
  Therefore, given stratum of the population is most afraid of the loss by the masses of the aspiration for their own good, how informal intellectuals understand this good.
  A positive feature of this fear is that the representatives of the informal opposition to the authorities are trying to influence the philistines more and more persistently to involve them in the fight against the power elite that they hate, accelerating the course of social development thanks to this, and struggling with the power elite by all means, exposing its immorality, greed, stupidity, the ever-greater estrangement from the people and preference of the elite for purely utilitarian values, which on the whole significantly slows down the development of self-consciousness, thereby reducing the progressive movement of civilization to minimum.
  A characteristic feature of informal intellectuals thanks to the highest possible level of self-consciousness, which dominates over the animal consciousness to the greatest extent, and the presence of a clear sense of superiority in nobleness over representatives of other strata of the population, and the sense of themselves by the leading force in social development, is the lack for them of aspiration to exchange their main fear at other its expressions, characteristic of other strata of the population of society.
  One of the most striking examples of the fighter of the public good is the Russian democrat N. G. Chernyshevsky.
  In his articles under the general heading "On the new conditions of rural life" (1858-59), He expressed the idea of the immediate release of peasants with land without any ransom. Then, in his opinion, communal land ownership will remain, which will gradually lead to socialist land use. He believed that only through education would people learn to choose new and progressive paths, serve the population, be humanists and historical optimists. He believed that it is necessary to strive to meet the needs of people, which will remove the obstacles to the flowering of personality and the causes of moral pathologies. But for this it is necessary to change the living conditions in a revolutionary way. As a result, he was sent to hard labor in Siberia by the tsarist authorities.
  That is, he, as a true follower of the utopian socialists Fourier and Feuerbach, sought to excite the public, as it seemed to him, by the readiness of the peasants to switch to socialism directly from communal land ownership, assuming that the masses would adequately perceive his thoughts on such way to achieve the universal good.
  IX
  There are individuals in society, always crowded with deep feeling of dissatisfaction in relation to their environment, which comes to them from the lowest consciousness in its aspiration to creation of big conveniences to existence. However, this individualist feeling is combined with their highest consciousness, the dissatisfaction of which by insufficient public comfort, development of science and art, reaching high degree, altruistically demands to extend achievements of a civilization and culture to all.
  But, at this, the lowest consciousness dominates, because the activity of these individuals are manifested mostly instinctively, without much reflections, with a minimum of reasonableness, while giving, nevertheless, the most creative persons from all living. However, this dominance, unlike representatives of the power elite, is insignificant.
  This category of any community prefers non-standard life situations owing to rejection of only formal-logical approaches to life - such a life for them is boring and meaningless, like working on a conveyor for tightening nuts.
  True, there are not so many talents among them, but this does not depend on education and upbringing, but on the size of individual fields and subfields of the brain, as well as their combination - not too common - favorable for certain types of the creative activity.
  However, the specified combination of both types of consciousness at them, irrespective of existence of talents and abilities, steadily attracts them to creative activity.
  They always try to create, often forgetting about rest.
  Grafomanians write, artists draw, sculptors sculpt with varying degrees of success, composers mix sounds to achieve a somewhat interesting combination, inventors and innovators of all kinds create new devices, programs, receiving, however, often the same bike, but all they and other creators of the new or unusual, despite the mostly depressing results of their creative efforts, don"t want to join the ordinary civil "swamp", being intoxicated by the apparent for them the transformation of the world and society, Especially since the civilization level, indeed, is growing both culturally and technologically thanks to the efforts of representatives of their company, and not someone else.
  Naturally, they are proud of their ability to create, considering it a derivative of the divine power that creates the worlds.
  Therefore, creative individuals are most afraid of losing their creativity, which gives them the greatest possible satisfaction with their activities driven in transforming the environment culturally and technologically.
  The positivity of this fear is that it pretty much keeps them in their own stratum due to understanding by them own leading role in the cultural and technological transformation of society, and it strengthens them in own consciousness of the engine of cultural and technological progress of society. Pride to be the leader of science and art does not allow them to change to other, though maybe more lucrative applications of their forces.
  An example of such creative personality may be Ludwig van Beethoven. He worked in all genres of musical composition. Beethoven also created a modern piano style, far from the harpsichordist style. His work had a special influence on all subsequent symphonism. The melodies of his symphonies 4 and 5 are especially beautiful.
  The fear of moving away from creativity kept Beethoven in his line, despite camest deafness. He even in this state learned to extract wonderful melodies from his own soul.
  X
  It should nevertheless be noted that due to the insignificant, but nevertheless dominance in the consciousness of creative persons of the lower (animal) consciousness, a decrease in the level of self-consciousness that goes over a certain limit, turns creative individuals, who are useful for the development of society, into adventurers and scammers who begin to use their non-standard and effective approaches to solving various problems for own entertainment or with mercenary intentions.
  An adventurer, as we know, is an unprincipled person who plunges himself into various adventures for his own pleasure, and at the same time a person who hopes for a chance in some dubious venture.
  A scammer is an individual trying to deceive others for his own gain.
  Such were, for example, Casanova, Princess Tarakanov, Mata Hari, Elena Blavatskaya, Boris Savinkov, Madame Wong, Son Men Moon, Sergei Mavrodi and many others.
  They all consider themselves smarter and more resourceful than law enforcement officers and all others, but unlike representatives of the ruling elite, they do not despise these others and are not their oppressors, they only joke, as they consider, over people, and they deceive, as a rule, of the rich and noble, but can share the mined with ordinary people.
  Most of all they are afraid of losing their freedom for their semi-creative activity for their own benefit, and this is perhaps the only thing that constantly frustrates them, but they categorically do not want to exchange their position for another, believing that it is the most attractive of all available because of its a significant degree of creativity, which follows from the indicated correlation of their animal consciousness and self-consciousness.
  Similar adventurer and scammer were Russian intellectual with mathematical abilities, Sergei Mavrodi. He was fond of chess and poker. His tendency to adventures was manifested in a favorable situation for these acts - the beginning of the collapse of the Soviet Union.
  He became the founder of Russia's largest pyramid, which affected up to 15 million people. Mavrodi correctly calculated that human greed and the aspiration to get the unearned money will attract a lot of non-poor and stupid people to him who want to become richer without much trouble.
  Quite quickly, he was sent to prison for hiding income. However, he did not calm down, and a few years later began to organize new financial pyramids - one after another. People were believing him, apparently because he knew how to captivate them even when his pyramids were collapsing. He spent a total of 6 years in prison.
  He managed to take advantage of people's weakness to unearned income, not only in Russia, but also in Africa, Asia, and even in Israel, the USA, Italy, and France.
  His fear of losing freedom led him to the idea of becoming a deputy and thereby gaining immunity. True, subsequently he still had to hide, but even in an illegal situation and in prison, he did not leave his apparently fraudulent activity, which was extremely enthralling for him, although money attracted him a little - he was interested in the process of obtaining of money quickly and in large quantities.
  XI
  Slightly lower levels of animal and the highest types of consciousness with some predominance of the lowest consciousness, as well as a weaker intellect compared to creative persons are quite capable of giving a whole cohort of business people, not fallen in their self-consciousness up to the level of politicians and other deceitful parasites, which make up mainly the power elite.
  Business people are able to do a lot of things, trying it is non-standard to approach economic activity, but don't forget themselves at all, and their unselfishness comes down, as a rule, to charity for decrease of tax losses.
  It is their somewhat lower level of self-awareness by comparison with true inventors and artists turns the businessmen in crisis situations into the same scammers.
  True, they reject this in every possible way, but for the most part they choose exactly themselves, but not a public good.
  The basic nature of their fear is represented by the strongest and constant fear of deprivation of what they have obtained through "hard labor," and on which the officials, bandits, bankers-money-lenders, and other crooks and extortionists, who is quite a lot, can always put their heavy hand.
  Their life is hard and hopeless in this respect, but the obtained goods significantly are brightening it, and businessmen are not inclined to change their position to a calmer one precisely because of the predominance in their minds of the components of animal consciousness, which gravitate so much towards pleasant comfort, active breeding of progeny and excellent nutrition.
  An example of not bad businessman is Bill Gates. He, together with Paul Allen, founded Microsoft in 1975. Paul Allen was engaged in technical ideas and promising developments, and Gates - in negotiations, contracts, etc.
  Having borrowed the basic idea from Xerox and Apple, Microsoft has proposed a fairly simple and users Microsoft Windows operating system.
  Having engaged in the spread of this system, Gates, on the wave of the personal computer revolution, over time has become one of the richest people in the world.
  In 1997, the ransomware tried get with him money, but the extortion failed.
  The relatively low level of his self-consciousness is confirmed by Gates' hobbies with various electronic systems and toys in his own super-comfortable house, which he shows to guests, as well as his passion for the play in bridge most of all.
  He compensates for the fear of losing the extracted funds not only by distraction on the bridge, but also by the relatively recent shift of his activities to charity, thereby trying to increase the number of his fans who can protect him if something happens.
  XII
  Business people who fluctuate with respect to morality are joined by similarly unsustainable economists and managers.
  They are also characterized by the prevalence of animal consciousness, but not such high as those of the power elite. However, their self-awareness is at a higher level than that of the power elite, but lower than that of creative individuals.
  However, this level of self-awareness is slightly higher than that of businessmen, who for this reason are more prone to fraudulent transactions at the slightest opportunity, that is, if they do not see immediate danger.
  Management economists tend to have good intelligence. They know how to build good models of effective management in the economy, science and even politics, but being on the salary at the power elite, they serve it, and therefore unlikely can be a role model ethically,
  They try not to argue with their employers, especially since the final decisions are by no means made by them, but by representatives of the power elite, within which there is always a struggle for great credentials, and the decisions themselves are, as a rule, not caused by the interests of the country or people, but by their thirst for own conservation and enrichment.
  Picking up crumbs from the master's table, these figures console themselves for all available humiliation by all sorts of entertainment in their spare time, the quality and quantity of which depends on their financial solvency.
  They are afraid most of all to lose the favor of own bosses, so as not to lose their position and material goods obtained, which are more significant in comparison with the philistines. In this regard, they are mostly loyal to their superiors, even if the decisions of superiors do not look quite adequate.
  Such manager and financier were Jean-Baptiste Colbert during the reign of Louis XIV in France.
  Colbert, the son of a merchant, owes his career to the first minister of France, Mazarini, who he had a manager, so devoted and inventive, that Mazarini after ten-year Colbert to ministry recommended him to the king, at whom he became the de facto finance minister over time, although formally the king himself controlled finances.
  Colbert served the king as faithfully as Mazarin, exposing abuses in financial matters. He streamlined the tax system, having increased the kingdom's income, ensured by increasing exports the growth in the flow of money to the treasury, regulated the preparation of goods in industry,
  ensured the creation of the navy by attracting, in particular, the population of coastal areas, providing him with various privileges, organized the development of new colonies, organized the construction of new highways and much more.
  His devotion to the king and success in working for the good of the state he achieved the preservation of his posts in the power elite, despite the plebeian origin. However, all his efforts were in vain, since the funds he had obtained and the streamlining of the state system did not benefit the country, but the wars, which the king led continuously, having bankrupted the state as a result.
  XIII
  Even a small bias in the direction of the lowest consciousness in his quest for domination and the best (a nice, well-fed, with plenty of entertainment) life is pushing the philistines to the transition, if not directly into the ruling elite - to do this, similar persons should own by quite high degree of dominance, - then, at least, into the managers, security officers, in fact, serving imperious elite and who is craftier tries to break through immediately in the power elite. They perfectly understand that in this environment it is possible, without having special talents, to achieve the considerable benefits if, of course, to pay an attention only to the bosses, diligently serving them, and to neglect by the others.
  Representatives of military, paramilitary and law enforcement units - from military to police, from prosecutors to security guards - differ from philistines, on the one hand, by a slightly higher level of the animal consciousness, whose dissatisfaction is expressed by a tendency to aggression against the weak individuals, and the peculiar concepts of labor, which consist in the desire to evade its most burdensome and severe forms. On the other hand, they differ from the philistines by a certain weakening of self-consciousness, as a result of which they are always prone to conformism in the most pronounced form, regularly following the obviously stupid or even criminal orders of their superiors, which does not combine with dignity and normative ethics.
  Naturally, they prefer not the usual labor activity in the field of production or in the service sector, the specific services to the state for the most part with the prospect of career growth. As a rule, not possessing high intellect, they, nonetheless, gain a good salary and practically the impunity for the oppression and even petty plunder of ordinary citizens, all the more so since nothing threatens the lives of the vast majority of these individuals in peacetime.
  For acquiring these advantages, the security officers and military agree to endure all the antics of their usually short-sighted, rude, but cunning bosses.
  Having given themselves to this rather humiliating occupation, which does not require special thought, after service they wander to their fruit and berry plots or apartments with a joyful sense of deliverance for at least some time from the vigilant eye, as a rule, of the jackasses-bosses, in order to play in the cards, watering the garden, and drinking and snacks, as well as bickering with his wife, who is always dissatisfied with the career growth of the husband.
  Reading the literature and other intellectual activities are inaccessible for most of them thanks to the rapid "drying out" of the brain because of the specifics of the service, which does not require reflection, since there are a charter and instructions.
  Most of all they are afraid of their immediate superiors, who, with the slightest disobedience, can deprive them of such a profitable job at, as a rule, rather miserable intelligence.
  They are not able to eliminate this fear during service. Therefore, they often abuse alcohol to distract themselves from this fear at least for a while.
  To help them get rid of this fear can only replacing it with the fear of the philistines due to the proximity of their levels of consciousness, which happens in the case of resignation or retirement.
  The examples in this section are not needed, since everyone knows the structure of the army and law enforcement agencies, where servility and rank dominate, but not talents.
  XIV
  The attendants of a cult performing functions of spiritual psychologists-comforters of the flock during working time, and along with that being nothing else as the lackeys of the authorities, claim that give themselves to service to God about which they actually don't know anything, since God on the dogmas of Churc is inaccessible to this world.
  And this means either deception or self-deception, which indicates the predominance of the lowest consciousness in them, inclined to receive benefits just so, and not according to the results of hard work, which they always try to replace by the lung labor, though and dubious.
  All this indicates the considerable weakening at them of a self-consciousness owing to what they give themselves to the certain stranger invented, but not real and effective, and themselves lead a prosperous existence, besides, being for many by very respected persons.
  But this service to God, with the exception of fanatics, is insincere in their hearts, and therefore in their free time they invariably succumb to worldly temptations, for example, intrigues, vulgar entertainments, such as rolling on Mercedes cars, or, at best, the fuss in the garden and vegetable garden.
  Above all, the vast majority of these servants of God are afraid to show this insincerity to their flock, which can simply destroy them, as happened in France after the revolution of the late XVIII and in Russia after 1917. Therefore, they are the most skilled hypocrites and deceivers, even in comparison with fraudsters.
  It is in connection with this that they wear strange robes, assume a benevolent appearance and a wise expression of physiognomy, sing psalms, read long sermons and all the time refer to sacred scripture created by the earliest rogues of the same type for the stupefaction of the population, which they allegedly associate anything to higher powers for future heavenly bliss, although they themselves, being by no means stupid, do not believe in heaven or hell, sell candles and other objects of worship, and live quite good.
  In this section, examples are also not necessary, since everyone knows from history what the Popes of Rome did, among whom was even the woman, and which traded by the indulgences, removing for money sins from parishioners. Not much different from them and other Ministers of worship in different countries of the world.
  XV
  Criminals and various kinds of lumpen, in particular, chronic unemployed, tramps, professional beggars, etc., have such trend into the side of the lowest consciousness that they have only a memory of the highest consciousness.
  In other words, they have only not numerous formal ties with society. For this reason, they kind of return to the level of animals, more precisely, - on the level of sensations. Neither public life, nor wealth, nor the power - nothing is interesting to them.
  Having suddenly got money, they immediately spend on drink or squander them, they sell their votes to anyone at an opportunity, they can kill and rob just like that, and in this regard - they are even worse than animals.
  Therefore, their main fear, like that of animals, is the prospect of the loss them of pleasant sensations, and they don"t even think about death, believing that the main thing is to use all the opportunities to consume accessible sensations at the expense of a stupid society, which partly contains and feels pity for them.
  Russian writer Maxim Gorky, who was at one time in their unpleasant society, described lumpens as follows in his play "On the Bottom" so.
  Only acquisition more or less pleasant sensations - he can"t imagine anything more - makes even at the very bottom of the life of the owner of the flophouse to squeeze out all their remaining juices from the wretched lodgers, taking away the "last penny". He buys stolen goods, beats his wife and her sister, and eventually dies at the scuffle in the time booze.
  His wife is smart, cruel, heartless and depraved woman, mocks her own sister and offers own lover to rid her of the annoying husband.
  The young sister of the wife of the owner of the flophouse, suffers all abuse, but after the death of the owner of the flophouse, she ends up in the hospital and then goes missing.
  They all do not find the strength to get out of this swamp because of the catastrophic fall in the level of awareness of themselves as individuals, respected by themselves and others. At the same time, they do not refuse to consume the dubious sensations provided to them and are afraid of losing them.
  XVI
  But perhaps the most disgusting are the rentiers.
  These not stupid idlers-for the most part natives of the layers of society close to the power who categorically do not want to work anywhere with the available capital, - pleasantly decomposing at different rates, live on percent from the capital.
  The rentier differs from lumpens only in the idea of their own value in their insignificant self-consciousness, linking it, however, not with own merits, which were gone or they absented, but with the possession of financial or other means, which forces them to take care of capital saving in every way, turning into lumpens with its loss.
  It is the concern for the preservation of capital and the thought of the terrible collapse of entire parasitic life with its loss that make their existence, filled with all kinds of entertainments, at the same time so disturbing and restless that everything for them becomes not sweet.
  But this eternal fear they, as true and conscious parasites, prefer to any kinds of labor activity, spending their lives, if the funds are sufficient, for moving from one resort to another, from one estate or hotel to another, from one pleasant pastime for another, but surely getting the boredom in this time, and turning own life in a ghost, in which their faces are erased, transforming into meaningless masks.
  Some biologists-evolutionists, in particular, Savelyev S.A. (book "Cerebral Sorting"), consider such catastrophic final natural, stating the following: "... the mankind already created perfect ways of the behavioral selection, which will destroy our consciousness and will destroy the traces of mental faculties without any additional efforts"[10].
  Naturally, this statement is too strong, since consciousness, without which all become by nothingness, is indestructible in being, unlike a person and his civilization, but nevertheless, the fact of degradation of this part of the population is obvious, and the degradation will only grow for the philistines and strata, near them, in the first place, due to the underdevelopment of their self-consciousness, which agrees just on a well-fed and trouble-free life.
  However, behavioral selection, associated only with animal consciousness, is opposed both in society and in every person by an indestructible self-consciousness that will not allow returning to the animal world, but, paradoxically, compacting of the current time due to the action of self-consciousness will destroy civilization, more precisely, will lead it to update, consisting of two possible forms - the equilibrium civilization and technological civilization.
  More details about the compaction of time and the forms of civilization regularly appearing on all inhabited planets can be found in our works: "Miracles in a sieve" [11, chapters 4,5] and "What has self-consciousness led, and what will it lead to?" [7, part 3, section 5].
  The coming and imminent update of the current civilization means that the awareness of this fact by the population of the planet will automatically bring the most important fear to this population because of the collapse of the entire social order in general.
  
  Bibliography
  
  1. V. I. Dahl. Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language. 4 volumes. SPb. 1880-82.
  2. Leontiev A. N. Needs, motives and emotions. Moscow. 1971.
  3. Zakharov A.I. Day and night fears in children. SPB Union. 2000.
  4. Isard K. E. Theory of differential emotions. The Psychology of Emotions. Peter. 2007.
  5. Isard K. E. Fear and anxiety. The Psychology of Emotions) Peter. 2007.
  6. Søren Kierkegaard. Fear and awe. M., "Republic", 1993.
  7. Nisovtsev Yu. It's the other way around. Answers to tricky questions about interesting things (Collection). 2018. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Amazon. Yury Nizovtsev.
  8. Nisovtsev Yu. Open eyes yours-own (collection). 2019. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Amazon. Yury Nizovtsev.
  9. Nisovtsev Yu. The collection of the especial and outlandish - for the check with respect to creativity. 2019. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Amazon. Yury Nizovtsev.
  10. Savelyev S.A. Cerebral Sorting. Publisher: VEDI. 2016.
  11. Nisovtsev Yu. Miracles in a sieve. 2016. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Amazon. Yury Nizovtsev.
  
  Chapter 17.
  Why does happiness always elude us?
  
  Surprisingly, in all known times, sages of various kinds tried to define or at least explain that what in real life could not appear in any way, calling this abstraction by happiness, and still continuing this fruitless occupation, to which the people are listening without any doubt not only out of stupidity, but also because they always wants better than they have at themselves, thereby moving the entire civilization forward, but upsetting until own death by the lack of the advent of happiness, however, consoling themselves with the existence of paradise, inasmuch somewhere must be happiness - let even behind the coffin.
  1. Is happiness completely attainable product of human activity?
  Everyone has an idea of misfortune and various troubles, meeting with them repeatedly, but no one has yet really explained what happiness is, reducing its meaning, at best, to pleasure, satisfaction of emerging needs and well-being, that is, to the positive experiences, to which in fact all living organisms strive in their self-sufficiency, while happiness is a completely independent category, reflecting a certain activity of only human consciousness.
  And without cutting off happiness from pleasure, well-being and complete satisfaction with surrounding, a person would hardly have any differences from animals that also strive for greater comfort, satiety, reproduction and other pleasant things, and happiness would be reduced in this case to physiology, namely, - to the release of endorphins (hormones of happiness), which is associated with the system of encouragement and centers of pleasure of the organism.
  Nevertheless, almost all famous thinkers tried to show happiness as a completely attainable product of intellectual, emotional and moral human activity, not forgetting about pleasure and satisfaction in this case, but not taking into account that abstractions - but happiness is a perfect image of the desired, purely individual for every person, - in real life do not happen.
  As a result, in fact, it did not work out to define elusive happiness, except for reducing it to the highest good or virtue with a certain amount of pleasure and independence, as well as self-sufficiency, but there are many descriptions of "true happiness" in real life that contradict each other.
  In addition, happiness, in order to accommodate it in real life, tried to divide into parts and certain levels, emotional, mental, intellectual, depending on the reasons for it, for example, as the model of the pie, according to which happiness is determined by the conditions in which a person has fallen; by the nature of the personality, since there are people supposedly always cheerful and happy, for example, fools, and people are always sad and unhappy, for example, hypochondriacs; by the correct setting of goals, which can permanently invigorate and give satisfaction.
  In addition, some thinkers believe that happiness can be brought by the benevolence of fate, by success, luck, etc.; that happiness is the permanent joy; possession of all possible goods; complete satisfaction with oneself and life.
  This undoubtedly indicates that everyone understands happiness in their own way, but no one can penetrate into the essence of this manifestation of self-consciousness, which is not surprising, since what is happiness can be understood only by meabs of the transition from the character and actions of a person to the dissatisfaction of self-consciousness of a person, which supports own activity, in particular, and by such stimulus for the development, as happiness, which can only be an imaginary positive due to its abstractness.
  As for ordinary reflection, that is, reflections on the nature, so to speak, of trivial happiness, it, as a rule, correlates with external factors, with the character of the individual, the tasks he solves and the relationships that arise.
  However, for persuasiveness, we can cite several of the most common characteristics of happiness, given of it by famous people, which, surprisingly, are quite banal and very contradictory, and most importantly, they all do not give a clear definition of happiness, do not indicate its initial source and do not explain what for happiness is really need to.
  Seneca. True happiness ... enjoy the present, without the anxious dependence of thoughts about the future.
  Rubin T. Happiness does not come from doing easy work. It is the aftertaste of the satisfaction that comes after solving a difficult task that required everything you could do.
  Emets D. Happiness is all life, minus misfortunes and obvious absurdities.
  Mahatma Gandhi. Happiness is when what you think, say, and do is in harmony.
  Dalai Lama. Happiness is not something we get in ready-made. It comes from our own actions.
  Voltaire. Happiness is an abstract idea made up of several sensations of pleasure.
  Voltaire. The seeker of happiness is like a drunk who cannot find his home in any way, but knows that he has a home.
  Buddha. Thinking that someone else can make you happy or unhappy is ridiculous.
  Flaubert G. Happiness is a fiction, the search for it is the cause of all disasters in life.
  Cicero M. Happiness is nothing but well-being in honest affairs.
  Fromm E. Happiness is an experience of the fullness of beingness, not an emptiness that needs to be filled.
  Dostoevsky F. A person is unhappy because he does not know that he is happy.
  Turgenev I. A happy person is like a fly in the sun.
  [1]
  Nevertheless, this kind of characterizations of happiness, mostly in the form of its outer shell, was repugnant to some prominent thinkers. So they tried to get into the depth of this strange phenomenon, which seems to exist, but at the same time like the horizon - always slips away, and which, in their opinion, has no direct relation to pleasures.
  Kant I. Happiness is the ideal not of reason, but of imagination.
  Pythagoras. Don't chase after happiness: it is always in you.
  Levanti O. Happiness is not what you experience, it is what you remember.
  Voltaire. Happiness is only a dream, and grief is real.
  Buddha. There is no path to happiness, happiness is the path.
  [1]
  However, this approach to the concept of happiness in the same way does not reveal the essence of this phenomenon of human consciousness, does not explain it, does not indicate its source and mission, being just a description of some aspects of its manifestation.
  Nevertheless, we will present additionally some fundamental approaches to the study of the phenomenon of happiness.
  2. What the thinkers of different eras considered by happiness.
  The simplest and most direct understanding of happiness in life was that of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristippus (435-355 BC).
  He considered all kinds of pleasure as happiness, provided all pain is eliminated, that is as if quite reasonable.
  However, as a true philosopher, he could not be satisfied with such a primitive approach to happiness, and declared that the inner pleasure of the spirit, regardless of external influences, is a true manifestation of liberty, since it is necessary not to let the enjoyment enslave the spirit: "... the best lot is not to abstain from enjoyments, but to dominate them, not to obey them "[2, p.571. (Diog. Laert. II 75)]. Nevertheless, Aristippus argued that liberty by liberty, but one must live with pleasure [3, p. 248-249].
  However, Aristippus rejected the pleasures, which later bring great displeasure, thereby urging to obey the custom and the law [4, p. 132].
  As an application to the hedonism of Aristippus, let us note his primordial wisdom by the way he answered the question: "Who is better to be, dominant or subordinate?" And he answered as follows: his path "not through power, not through slavery, but through liberty, which most surely leads to happiness" [5, p. 94-96 (Xen. Mem. III 8)].
  Thus, Aristippus sees happiness in the satisfaction of a person's desire for a pleasant, joyful, free pastime, that is, - in comfort and relative independence, as if distracting himself from what is happening in reality, which only does what puts each person sooner or later into a difficult situation, from which it is necessary to somehow get out. And so it continues until death, which is already hopeless.
  Therefore, it makes no sense to imagine happiness in the form of pleasure and comfort, which in reality are perishable products due to disturbing thoughts and everyday threats of varying degrees. All drug addicts are well aware of this, who no longer seek pleasure from life in it.
  This means that a person should look for happiness not in dubious pleasures, reminiscent of a feast during the plague, but in something else.
  In contrast to Cyrenaics, whose main representative was Aristippus, Stoics rejected pleasure as a guarantee of happiness due to the fact that in a world filled with ignorance, vices, troubles and catastrophes, obtaining pleasure is quite problematic, and pleasure itself often causes illness, and at its excess - and death.
  Therefore, the Stoics decided not to adapt to similar "bad" reality, but ignoring it, to live in harmony with themselves. They believed that only by developing one's personality in opposition to any external forces, one can avoid one's own destruction and loss of face, and to this abstinence and virtuous actions based on knowledge can lead. Exactly It is the only guarantee of human happiness. In other words, this personal happiness can only be achieved by immersing yourself in your own inner world, which, unlike the external world, is possible to control. [6, p. 148-191].
  This view of happiness quite clearly reflects the following statement of the ancient Roman stoic philosopher Seneca (4 BC - 65 AD): "All people want to live happily, my brother Gallion, but they have a vague idea of what a happy life is ... While we fussily wander without a guide, listening to the noise of absurd screams that beckon us to various temptations, life is spent in vain among delusions, and it is short even if we take care of our spiritual development day and night... Our main task should be that we do not follow, like cattle, the leaders of the herd, so that we go not where others are going, but where duty commands ... No one is mistaken to harm himself, but everyone is a cause and a culprit someone else's delusion ... life is happy if it is consistent with its nature. Such life is possible only if, first, a person constantly possesses a sound mind; then, if his spirit is courageous and energetic, noble, enduring and prepared for all circumstances; if he, without falling into anxious suspiciousness, takes care of the satisfaction of physical needs; if he is at all interested in the material aspects of life, not being tempted by any of them; finally, if he knows how to use the gifts of fate, without becoming their slave ... Instead of pleasures, instead of insignificant, fleeting and not only disgusting, but also harmful enjoyments, there comes strong, unshakable and constant joy, peace and harmony of spirit, greatness combined with meekness " [7, p. 47-74].
  Such narrowed view of the Stoics on happiness testifies to the fact that, asserting the adherence to duty and the order of things in a state of immersion in their own controlled inner world as a guarantee of happiness, they remove themselves, like monks, out of the outside world, which is just given for development. personality, and hence its consciousness, in overcoming difficulties, troubles and their own vices.
  That is, being satisfied with your inner world in attempts to achieve harmony in it, which supposedly corresponds to happiness, it is impossible to experience the whole gamut of sensations and comprehend many ideas that appear as a result of struggle, grief and disasters in beingness. Satisfaction by oneself, preached by the Stoics, does not mean striving for happiness in the form of some kind of perfect image, but only a detachment from all real aspirations inside one's own stagnation and temporary serenity, which leads only to the "joy" of preserving one's own uselessness for the world.
  Unlike Aristippus, who imagined happiness in the satisfaction of a person's desire for a pleasant, joyful, free pastime, Epicurus (342-271 BC) represented happiness as a dependent on sensations, since life is given in them. Therefore, Epicurus puts in the forefront pleasure as the absence of pain, suffering and anxiety.
  Epicurus finds the way to eliminate anxieties in getting rid of false opinions, leading to equanimity and tranquility, limiting needs, moderation in pleasures, since immoderation in them threatens with suffering. In addition, Epicurus sees removal from anxiety in self-removal from public and state affairs, since unreason and injustice reign in society.
  In this state of serene repose, equivalent to the achievement of happiness, a person is self-sufficient and he has nothing to share, and nothing to do with others: "... among our desires, some should be considered natural, others - empty, and among the natural, some are necessary, others - only natural; and among the necessary ones, some are necessary for happiness, others - for calmness of the body, and still others - just for life. If, in this consideration, no mistakes are made, then any preference and any avoidance will lead to bodily health and mental serenity, and this is the ultimate goal of a blissful life. After all, everything we do, we do so that we have neither pain nor anxiety; and when this is finally achieved, then any storm of the soul dissipates, since a living being no longer needs to go to something as if to a lacking one, and to seek something, as if for the fullness of mental and bodily benefits. Indeed, after all, we feel the need for pleasure only when we suffer from its absence, and when we do not suffer, then we do not feel the need. That is why we say that pleasure is both the beginning and the end of a blissful life; we have cognized it as the first good, akin to us, with it we begin any preference and avoidance and return to it, using suffering as a measure of any good" [2, p.402-411].
  Similar happiness resembles the state of a detached sturdy plant, which no one and nothing bothers and which no one needs. But man is not a plant and must seek happiness in a gradual approach to the desired image, which he himself created in his imagination, which is incompatible with a state of rest and serenity.
  Aristotle (384 - 322 BC) defined happiness as "the activity of the soul in the fullness of virtue" [8].
  Thus, the path to happiness, and its main aspect, is morality within the framework of an active mind, which also gives a kind of pleasure and leads to satisfaction with life in general, since happiness as perfection chooses virtue, and virtue directly passes into happiness.
  Here Aristotle makes two mistakes at once.
  First, he again reduces happiness to pleasures, but of a different kind in comparison with natural ones, while pleasures have no direct relation to the wavering cloud of the most perfect and most desirable, how it seems to man at least at certain moment, which is designated by him as happiness, being only the "driving belt" of life, making life not so disgusting.
  Secondly, Aristotle believes that it is possible through virtue to actually achieve happiness, but happiness, as a pure abstraction, is present in being only virtually - you can strive for it, but it is impossible to achieve it.
  In other words, happiness as the highest good is inaccessible to a person in real life. It plays the role of a beacon, the light of which everyone is seemed in his own way in accordance with the chosen means for rapprochement with him and dreams of the future. But this light comes from another space, which is not directly related to the current reality, and it can only be seen, but not achieved.
  If ancient philosophers of Europe are looking for happiness in real life, then Eastern philosophers in the material world do not note it.
  However, in personal life, in their opinion, happiness is quite achievable if you get a good home, great clothes, nice friends. But this is not enough for complete happiness without inner peace. [9].
  Such "wisdom" is actually far from the truth and is very contradictory.
  Although happiness does not literally occur in real life, it always illuminates it like the sun, which gives life by its light to inhabitants of Earth. Along with that, repose is good only in a dream, and in life there is nothing better than a struggle that gives space for the manifestation of all abilities and intentions of a person, thereby developing his consciousness in actions, that, actually, is required from life for consciousness.
  Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), like most of the ancient philosophers, believed that happiness can be manifested only in "the perception of perfect good."
  However, Thomas is quite controversial in his approach to the concept of happiness.
  On the one hand, Thomas claims that "... intelligent nature can achieve happiness, which is the perfection of the intellectual nature ... but the sensual nature is not at all capable of achieving the designated goal" [10. Section 1].
  On the other hand, he believed that "... in this life only some complicity to happiness is possible, but perfect true happiness in this life is impossible ... ... as long as happiness is "a perfect and self-sufficient good", then this means the absence of any evil and the fulfillment of any desire. But it is impossible that in present life there is no evil at all" [10. Section 3].
  Thomas in this respect is inferior, in particular, to Epicurus, who sees the removal from anxiety not in abstract reasoning, but in self-removal from public and state affairs, since unreason and injustice prevail in society.
  That is, Thomas did not find at least some acceptable answer to the solution of the question of achieving happiness in the current reality, stating the impossibility of achieving it in it, in contrast to Epicurus, but still half-recognized the possibility of a reasonable human nature to come to happiness.
  Thomas's similar approach to the phenomenon of happiness is explained by the fact that he was unable to determine the essence of happiness as an ideal image that can be sought, but not achieved, due to the distracted, imaginary nature of this image, which does not coincide with the realities of life, but from which follow unambiguous answers to the questions raised about the manifestation or non-manifestation of happiness in current reality.
  I. Kant (1724-1804) equates happiness with morality, calling it "the highest good", to which we must strive, obeying the demand of duty, only within the framework of which happiness is an acceptable goal: "As for the principle of our own happiness, then ... this principle is useless because it subsumes morality with motives that, rather, undermine it and destroy its entire sublime character, mixing in one class the motivation for virtue and the motivation for vice and teaching only one thing - how best to calculate, and the specific difference between the two is completely erased" [11, p. 221].
  Thus, good, as a condition of bliss, occupies a dominant position in this unity, and this thesis immediately leads Kant to God, because in real life no bliss flows from good. That is, happiness can be found only in another world, if you behave correctly in this, receiving appropriate satisfaction from your own adequacy: "... the moral law requires from everyone the most accurate observation. Consequently, the judgment about what should be done in accordance with this law should be simple enough so that the most ordinary and inexperienced mind could handle it, even without being sophisticated by worldly experience" [11, p. 417].
  In essence, Kant has not understood the nature and mission of happiness, but he grasped its uncertainty and subjectivity in real life, which he noted in his statement: "Happiness is the ideal not of reason, but of imagination" [12], which, however, he did not explain, i.e. has not revealed the source of happiness, its mission and did not give a definition of happiness.
  Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) considered the highest good of a person to be his personality: mind, abilities, and physicality. But then he points out that we must take care of both the acquisition of personal funds and our own good name: "... for our happiness and our enjoyment, the subjective is incomparably more important than the objective... notably, health is so much higher than all other benefits that a truly healthy beggar is happier than a sick king... ... we should not, however, make the false conclusion that we should not worry about acquiring the necessary and decent funds. But wealth itself, that is, a large surplus, contributes little to our happiness, and therefore many rich people feel unhappy: they have no spiritual development, no knowledge ... ...everyone should strive for honor, that is, a good name... Thus, for happiness of human life, the most essential thing is that what a person has in himself ..." [13, p. 2-7].
  Unlike Kant, who nevertheless felt a certain inaccessibility of happiness, its non-everyday character, Schopenhauer follows the beaten path, explaining what is most needed for happiness in beingness, and what is unnecessary and even harmful, believing that since there is misfortune, then the deviation from them due to the measures he proposed, it will be just right for finding happiness.
  Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900) was rather contradictory person, striving to be original in everything.
  Therefore, his approach to happiness was also contradictory, but much less original.
  On the one hand, he, in essence, repeats the thoughts of ancient philosophers (see above), arguing, for example, that "Misfortune has escaped you, enjoy this as your happiness" [14].
  And here he asserts something opposite: "Only his thoughts, and not external circumstances, make a person unhappy or happy. By controlling his thoughts, he controls his happiness" [15].
  Proclaiming that there is happiness in life, and even of various scales: "Every little happiness should be used as a sick bed for recovery - and nothing else... When you will value what you have, and not live in search of ideals, then you will truly become happy" [15], Nietzsche, in contrast to this, says that happiness is elusively final: "The pursuit of truth is the same as the pursuit of happiness" [15].
  Thus, Nietzsche not only did not give a definition of happiness, but also did not indicate its source, and he sees mission of happiness in humanization, which is not accessible to everyone [16].
  That is, Nietzsche did not note the main thing in a person - his self-consciousness, thanks to which each person, and not only the chosen ones, can create in his imagination an image of own happiness and correct it with age or in the case of a change in circumstances, striving for this image, and believing, that it is achievable.
  Unlike previous thinkers who anguished over the problem of happiness, and sometimes offered quite witty and convincing solutions, modern psychologists are surprisingly far from understanding the essence of the problem and are even ridiculous when talking about it.
  In particular, Maria Heinz decomposes happiness into short-term and long-term, associating positive emotions with the first, and deep satisfaction with the second [17, p. 35-128].
  Generalizing, Heinz concludes that happiness is the joy we feel when we strive to reach our potential.
  Positive emotions are found at every step, even from tickling, but what does happiness have to do with it, and satisfaction is especially grateful felt after the difficult function of natural needs in a toilet. As for the potential, then it is especially joyfully revealed in drunkenness and partying, after which you have a headache and it is impossible to remember what you said.
  It seems to John Gottman that happiness and success in all areas of life are determined by the awareness of own emotions and the ability to cope with their feelings [18, p. 17].
  Success has nothing to do with happiness at all, being very often is not as a cherished dream, but just the result of hard work or is at all achieved by chance, for example, in card games. Besides, having realized one's emotions not in time, you can be instead of happiness in a unworthy position for yourself, for example, rejoicing in someone else's misfortune.
  Generally speaking, most researchers of the problem of happiness, as we saw above, confuse happiness with positive emotions and satisfaction, trying to combine happiness with the current reality.
  In particular, the Russian philosopher N.A. Berdyaev believed that in a state of happiness a person stops, because he no longer has anything to strive for. In this regard, he considered the concept of happiness to be meaningless and even harmful: "Human liberty and dignity do not allow to see happiness and satisfaction as the goal and the highest good of life. There is an insurmountable conflict between liberty and happiness ... I agree to misfortunes and suffering in order to remain a free being ... ... he (a person) prefers free creativity of spiritual values to happiness. But a person is also a being - diseased, divided into two, determined by the dark unconscious. And therefore he is not a being striving at all costs for happiness and satisfaction. No law can make him a creature that prefers happiness to liberty, satisfaction and tranquility to creativity. For this reason alone, a person's life cannot be completely subordinated to the law. Grace gives only a moment of joy and bliss" [19].
  That is, Berdyaev again introduces happiness into reality, while only the dissatisfaction of a person's self-consciousness acts in it, just not allowing him to stop, but suggesting again and again to strive for an ideal way of existence, composed by himself, and this image in no way can combine with the current reality with all its vices and troubles.
  In addition, Berdyaev, like the Stoics, as well as Epicurus, confuses happiness with satisfaction and tranquility, while happiness is a product of dissatisfaction with self-consciousness, which stimulates a person to achieve that ideal image that he creates himself in the process of overcoming many difficulties, troubles and miseries, but a person is not able to coincide even in his consciousness with the ideal, developed by himself, but is able to significantly change his self-consciousness in such striving.
  And this desire for happiness does not oppose liberty, as Berdyaev believes; on the contrary, it supports this aspiration, since liberty is also a product of dissatisfaction of consciousness, but consciousness in whole, which leads into the development of ways to change a person's self-consciousness by means of influencing a surrounding beingness taking into account its counteraction. [20, chap. 1].
  But if happiness stems out of self-consciousness, then liberty is a product of the interaction of instinctive (natural consciousness) and realized (self-consciousness) in a person, interacting with each other in their contradictory aspirations, producing through a person the destruction and creation of reality [21, part 3, section 3]. And in this respect, liberty is broader than happiness, which comes only from awareness of oneself, but happiness always shimmers before a person as a perfect and purely individual image that attracts a person to him and, at least, does not make him worse if he really strives for it, but not pleasure or serenity.
  3. Source, definition and mission of happiness.
  Happiness, if it is presented, as is typical for the majority, as extremely pleasant sensations, before the emergence of a person among the rest living beings, was not present in their consciousness, since the aspirations and actions of all living beings were determined not by opinions, but only by instincts and reflexes, being an unconscious reaction on the impact of the environment. This reaction has always been only adaptive in relation to this environment, which they, as and themselves. if changed, then without any goal-setting and without striving to go beyond the environment in any respect.
  Subconsciousness, more precisely, the presence of only natural consciousness, or the absence of subjectivity, naturally, rejects the understanding of such an abstraction in the sphere of emotions and intellect as happiness. Therefore, all living things, except for humans, from amoeba to primates, are content with just striving for pleasant sensations, without separating themselves from the environment, and no more.
  Imagination in the form of certain abstractions is peculiar only to a person who, having self-consciousness, is able not only to adapt to the environment, but also to consciously change it for himself with the appropriate goal-setting, striving for images, constructed by him in consciousness, which do not exist in nature, and thereby placing himself in one way or another above it.
  Therefore, a person is able to strive not only for pleasant sensations, but also set goals for himself, the achievement of which, as he sometimes believes, will provide him with a local paradise for some time. True, each subject represents this paradise in his own way, but he must satisfy him completely - both mentally and emotionally - preferably for the rest of his life, although he does not refuse any period of presence in this paradise-happiness.
  However, attainment of any goal, be it fame, honor, power. money, love immediately devalues what has been achieved, so how paradise, or happiness does not appear, except for some satisfaction with what has been achieved, which previously seemed so desirable and perfect, but turned out to be coarse, primitive and unreliable. At the same time, diseases, adversities, troubles in communication do not go anywhere, despite any achievements.
  But every person believes in the coming of happiness, reasonably believing that since there is misfortunes, then there must be something opposite to them, understanding by happiness precisely his own imaginary paradise, which in fact cannot have anything to do with reality, except for a short-term pleasantness, as well as foretaste of attainment of the desired passionately.
  But this desired happiness in a strange way always slips away, leaving only the rough reality and the hope that next time it will finally happen.
  This means that the instinctive dissatisfaction of the consciousness of any living being with the current situation in its striving for more pleasant sensations, in the human consciousness, additionally receives the already conscious dissatisfaction with the existing state of affairs, and this dissatisfaction can be expressed in some abstractions, the extreme expression of which is the concept of happiness as such an absolute, which can give complete satisfaction both in a state of mind and emotions, if not permanently, then at least for a while.
  But, alas, abstractions never turn into reality, and happiness always only beckons, remaining within the limits of possibility, but not reality.
  However, the pursuit of happiness, dictated by the dissatisfaction of a person's self-consciousness, presupposes, as a rule, an intensification of his efforts to achieve happiness, which ensures a significant share of the progress of civilization and, at the same time, the development of human self-consciousness, since he cannot accept, like animals, what is, but must by all means seek and desire happiness, not admitting the thought that it exists only in his imagination, but in reality, receiving, at best, only positive emotions, followed by disappointment with what has been achieved, no matter how hard any person tries, combined with suffering and misfortune of all kinds,
  Therefore, happiness should be defined as an expression of that side of dissatisfaction of self-consciousness, which, having formed together with the intellect an ideal image of a completed positive existence, strives for it, but does not find consent in the reached with this image.
  Indeed, the achievement of any set goal can only give satisfaction, but not happiness, and even then for a short period of time, because dissatisfaction in self-consciousness with what has been achieved does not disappear anywhere as the main stimulus for activity, and drives a person further, and if he refuses this race, trying with all his might to suppress the dissatisfaction of own self-consciousness and at the same time considering himself happy in the achieved satisfaction, that is, in inactivity, then he quickly turns into a worthless creature - a living corpse that is not needed even by his own consciousness.
  Thus, the maximum satisfaction with what has been achieved and even the most pleasant sensations at the same time, which some people consider to be some semblance of happiness, not only do not lead a person to happiness, but, on the contrary, can stop him in development, which is equivalent to the greatest misery, since competitors are not asleep.
  It turns out that, in essence, mission of a person, about which he does not know, because he cannot admit that he is just an instrument of his own consciousness in the form of animal (natural) consciousness and self-consciousness, acquired and significantly developed since the era of hominids, consists to strive to the impossible, without which the development of self-consciousness is inconceivable. And waiting for something better or even the struggle to satisfy their ambitions, which, for example, is characteristic of males of primates, who have not become humans for tens of millions of years, only reduces humans to the likeness of a monkey.
  On the other hand, a person's lack of understanding of the impossibility of achieving in real life happiness, in quality of which he can imagine anything, in particular, one good thing or something questionable, but pleasing to him, that, truly, rather foolishly, encourages him with the best intentions and full energy to achieve both personal and general harmony, complete satisfaction and the highest enjoyments in both intellectual activity and emotions.
  This phenomenon resembles to some extent an unfounded belief in heavenly tabernacles, where you can get if you lead a righteous life, with which, for example, Immanuel Kant was agreed.
  Be that as it may, but the inevitable dissatisfaction of self-consciousness as the motor of its activity, being by doing so by the very source of the striving for happiness in the form of the image of the perfect and desired, formed in the mind, always throws away the past and strives into the future, regardless of obstacles, hardships, troubles and catastrophes (what kind of happiness is there in the form of complete goodness), that is necessary for the development of self-consciousness, which is simply unable to completely immerse itself in serenity and harmony - some "happy" beingness, like into a vat of jam, in which, despite all sweetness of this wonderful substance, one can only choke.
  Moreover, for some reason, rarely does anyone remember the action in man of his animal nature in the form of lower consciousness, which is often called subconsciousness.
  And this animal consciousness, as a rule, counteracts the intentions of self-consciousness with its utilitarianism, striving only for pleasantness, comfort, favorable conditions for reproduction and domination over neighbors, and it is only hindered by absurdity of the intentions of self-consciousness in its aspiration, for example, to improve oneself and harmonize social relations, in than most thinkers see outcome of human activity presenting it as individual and general happiness [see, e. g., 21, Part 3].
  Even before a person, in the process of developing self-consciousness, learned to create in his imagination ideal and more or less integral images of the desired, he had to face in purely practical activity the satisfaction of his purely vital needs. Some of them were necessary, like getting food, but not interesting, others attracted him by the pleasure obtained, for example, in the process of drawing or making original hunting or household tools.
  That is, a person, could not, like animals, be satisfied only with the provision of life processes, and after completing everything necessary for life support, he, in the intervals between work, felt dissatisfaction with the fulfillment of only the obligatory, and this accumulating dissatisfaction with himself in the surrounding everyday monotony sooner or later was pushing him to search for something different from the existing one, which is usually denoted by the term "interesting" (unusual, provocative, mysterious, incredible, frightening, exciting, outrageous, surprising, in a word - something else) both in simple, everyday life, and in complex relationships between people, as well as in technology and art.
  Therefore, anything can interest a person, as long as it differs from the routine, diversifies life, and at the same time changes the environment of human communities, since the interesting things were giving fruit in the form of new ways of hunting, cooking, breeding plants, taming animals, etc.
  Thus, interest as a regularly arising and to a certain extent conscious attraction to something new for oneself in current circumstances, is characteristic only of a person due to awareness of himself, with the help of which he tries to take himself out of the established order. It leads him to the discovery of things and phenomena of interest to him, promising not so much profit as a temporary departure from the bored reality.
  In other words, satisfaction is sought in interesting, but it is happened never definitively because, having stopped on one, you can lose the rest, which cannot be allowed, otherwise there is no new satisfaction in the other interesting, and even already found interesting cannot bring full satisfaction itself because of its imperfection, the elimination of which requires, as a rule, a long, time-consuming and tedious refinement, which is not so interesting.
  Be that it may, to be engaged boring, sometimes nasty, but necessary affairs it is impossible all time - the distracting and entertaining interval between them for pleasures and sufferings is necessary; along with that, it is not bad sometimes to chase the unrealizable - for happiness, love, good for all, which, nevertheless, is attractive due to the intense arrival of new information that gives food for the senses and the mind.
  On the other hand, it is impossible to linger for a long time in an attractive (interesting, that is, intermediate place), not only because it becomes habitual and cannot surprise with anything, but also because it does not wait for everyday work, it"s necessary to be fed, again the routine makes to: and all life is made up of "the runs" from one interesting to the next at intervals of uninteresting, but necessary to ensure a banal existence.
  Nevertheless, what is interesting, is characterized by the fact that it significantly increases information flows, capturing the entire society not only with its new products, but also with new approaches to education and everyday life, thanks to new technologies and new forms of cultural development.
  More information about the problem of the interesting can be found in the work "Why and due to what are manifested the interest and interesting?" [see, e.g., 22, Part 1. Section 4].
  Due to the continuous replacement of one interesting with another, and the variety of finds, a person needed something intimate of his own, purely individually stable, like the light of a lighthouse, to which he could strive all his life, which he could endlessly trust and not lose hope of reaching this guiding star in the darkness of everyday life, which also could not be provided by religion, whose lengthy dogmas and promises are designed for the maximum possible coverage of the population.
  At first, a person has drawn attention to beauty, more precisely, to what seemed to him beautiful and unusual in its fundamental difference from the everyday things around him, delighting him.
  It was sunrises and sunsets enchanting with their beauty, moonlight in the silence of the night, extraordinary play of butterfly wings, dew flickering on flowers. All this and many other beautiful things have always remained unchanged, repeating themselves every day or every season, or every year, if, of course, you pay attention to it.
  All these unchanging phenomena that did not depend on a person, but which he could observe, could not help but lead him to the idea that he himself could try to create for himself something similar - individually beautiful, which will only be his creation, and about which he will not tell anyone, but this own beauty will "warm" him all life, even if it turns out to be just as inaccessible for copying, and in this respect - otherworldly, like the beautiful.
  Naturally, in contrast to external, natural beauty, a person could create his own more or less stable and attractive beautiful for himself only in own imagination, depending on his own ideas, desires, intentions, experience, character, preferences, etc.
  The resulting image of the sincerely and invariably desired, of course, could be corrected during life due to age, changing conditions, but at its core it remained unchanged, beautiful and alluring as before, and so close that it seems that if you reach out hand, it's yours. The hand was being stretched out, but the beautiful image of one's own desired always removed, remaining just as desirable and beautiful, but since this image was by own creation, there was always hope of achieving it.
  And if the beauty of natural phenomena or the contemplation of masterpieces of painting, the appeal to genius texts and music penetrating into the consciousness brings a person episodically only the enjoyment by this beautiful, but does not change the essence of a person, his self-consciousness, then the image of an individually beautiful and desirable, which he created only for himself, and to which he always strives, overcoming any difficulties and doubts, invariably acts on his self-consciousness productively, that is, develops it in this striving.
  However, the degree of touching the beautiful in nature or in art, as well as the richness of the individually created image of the beautiful and at the same time the desired for a person, which he has denoted as happiness, depends on the level of development of a person's self- consciousness: the higher it is, the more inclined a person is to really beautiful, the lower this level, the more addiction a person experiences for pleasures, small interesting and simply curious, since his self-awareness approaches the lower, or animal form of consciousness, aimed not at high ideas and feelings, not at beauty in the world, not at his own improvement, but only at the consumption of sensations from eating, reproduction, domination and the convenience of one's own accommodation, which thereby become quite attainable happiness, but in fact - its ersatz, similar to animal well-being.
  Happiness is higher step in the development of a person's self- consciousness in comparison with interesting, coinciding with it in that it is also the object of attraction, albeit are in a different category. But if the interesting is reachable, turning into uninteresting, when it is discovered, then happiness does not lose its quality of individually beautiful, since it slips away all the time quite naturally, since the inner image in the form of vague sensations and wavering desires cannot coincide with the result obtained in rough reality.
  Therefore, happiness, like interesting, never finds final solution. But if the interesting just periodically changes, then happiness, being until the death of a person in a state of a vague image, is not able to turn into a specific object or phenomenon that satisfies the one who is looking for it, and this quasi happiness, which was found, is immediately depreciated due to its catastrophic non-coincidence with the sought individually beautiful internal image.
  Unlike interesting, happiness is not a direct source of information due to the extreme abstractness, non-viability and vagueness of image of the desired for a person, and in his understanding - the perfect, but happiness thanks to attraction of a person to itself, creates a process in which a person willy-nilly changes, that means also the change in his self-consciousness - not necessarily for the better, but certainly in the different - still unknown, which is interesting for consciousness in a whole accumulating all own changes.
  So happiness only beckons in the brevity of a human life, but, nevertheless, it always leaves hope for its own arrival, as a result of which every person strives for it again and again, and therefore happiness is always present in life not directly as certain good, but in the image of what everyone wants most of all, and most of all every person always want the inaccessible and unfeasible so far.
  
  Bibliography
  
  1. https://burido.ru/1008-tsitaty-pro-schaste
  2. Диоген Лаэртский. О жизни, учениях и изречениях знаменитых философов. М., Мысль. 1986, с.571. (Diog. Laert. II 75)].
  3. Doring K. Aristipp aus Kyrene und die Kyrenaiker// Die Philosophie der Antike. - 1998/ - Bd. 2. - Hbd. 1. - S. 248-249.
  4. Виндельбанд В. История древней философии. - Киев. Тандем. 1995. - С. 132].
  5. Ксенофонт. Воспоминания о Сократе. - М., Наука. 1993. С. 94-96 (Xen. Mem. III 8)].
  6. Гусев Д. А. Социальные предпосылки зарождения античного скептицизма и специфика стоической теории познания. - Философская мысль. 2015. No 1, с. 148-191.
  7. Древнеримские мыслители. Свидетельства. Тексты. Фрагменты. Киев. 1958. С. 47-74.
  8 Аристотель. Никомахова этика. Книга 1. Соч. в 4 томах. М., 1983.
  9. Dalai lama XIV. How to practice. The way to a meaningful life (www. Theosophy.ru
  10. Thomas Aquinas. Sum of theology. Volume IV. Question 5.
  11. Кант И. Основоположения метафизики нравов. Соч. в 8 тт. М., ЧОРО. 1994. Т. 4, с. 221.
  12. Кант И. Изречения. Калининград. Издательство РГУ им. И. Канта. 2010. ISBN 978-5-9971-0077-3.
  13. Шопенгауэр А. Афоризмы житейской мудрости. Глава 1. 2015. Litres. ISBN 978-5-699-75854-8.
  14. Ницше Ф. Веселая наука. М., "Мысль". 1990
  15. Ницше Ф. Человеческое, слишком человеческое. Книга для свободных умов. М., "Мысль". 1990
  16. Ницше Ф. По ту сторону добра и зла. Лениздат. 2014
  17. Мария Хайнц. Позитивный тайм-менеджмент: Как успевать быть счастливым. М. Альпина Паблишер. 2014. С. 35-128. ISBN 978-5-9614-4795-8
  18. Джон Готтман, Джоан Деклер. Эмоциональный интеллект ребенка. Практическое руководство для родителей. М., Манн, Иванов,Фербер. 2015. С. 17
  19. Бердяев Н. А. Избранные мысли о вере и Боге. Счастье. Yakov.works /4/texts/Berdyaev/04 Bog.htm].
  20. Nizovtsev Y. M. In what, how and for what liberty is acting. 2014. Amazon.
  21. Nisovtsev Yu. The collection of the especial and outlandish - for the check with respect to creativity. 2019. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Amazon. Yury Nizovtsev.
  22. Nisovtsev Yu. It's the other way around. Answers to tricky questions about interesting things (Collection). 2018. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Amazon. Yury Nizovtsev.
  
  Chapter 18.
  The origins of cunning and its main difference from creativity.
  
  Cunning is often confused with ingenuity, while it is nothing more than a tactical machination, at the expense of which will not win the war, but you can deceive some people. Therefore, it makes sense to clarify the origins of cunning and creativity (ingenuity), and to identify on this basis their differences and the means that are used in both cases.
  All living beings are in the information flow, forming their own world from it, interspersed into their common beingness, consisting of things and organisms, that is, from the passive and the active.
  In beingness, each being must ensure survival by foraging food at the expense of the environment, devouring lower organisms and dodging enemies, and thus seeking to improve its own position for self-preservation, as well as to ensure the most intensive reproduction of oneself and regular nutrition.
  One of the ways to solve such problems is the instinctive distortion of information coming from some living beings to others through their senses.
  For example, flowers-predators are luring insects by a pleasant smell and opportunity to gather nectar inside the calyx of the flower, and then they close the petals and digest the insect, got there.
  The vulture turtle has a small process on its tongue, which wiggles, luring small fish who think that it is a worm.
  The South American Cantilea snake has a bright, thin and mobile tip of the tail, reminiscent of a worm, luring by it small animals.
  On the other hand, for example, cicadas and praying mantises, which normally have a protective coloration, at the moment of danger, reveal a bright color, frightening off a predator; chameleons take on a threatening pose and bright color.
  Such distortion of information, which manifests itself among living beings, helps them to solve the problems of survival and adaptation to the environment. In other words, in order to solve the problem of keeping the sensations entering the body, living beings instinctively try to deceive other creatures, who are solving similar problems in the competitive struggle for existence.
  Thus, deception is an instinctive form of information distortion, which manifests itself as an effective means of survival.
  Since a person is basically also a natural organism, he is not alien to instinctive deception, for example, in the form of pretense, which often allows him to improve his position in society, get rid of enemies and gain friends.
  With the acquisition of self-consciousness, a person has significantly expanded the sphere of action of all consciousness. In particular, he was able to use distortion of information to achieve his own goals, not purely instinctively, but also quite consciously. For example, by planting for an enemy of the false information in a war, you can lure an enemy into a trap and destroy.
  This kind of conscious actions based on natural (instinctive) deception began to be called cunning, which manifests itself in various forms depending on the goals being set.
  Fishermen trick fish with such a trick as a variety of spoons.
  Women fool men with skillfully applied makeup.
  Merchants mislead buyers with cunning tricks in the form of discounts on low-quality goods
  Philosophers deceive the simple-minded public with sophisms.
  Economists and financiers are always cunning with the people, offering them a sure way to improve their lives in the form of financial speculation that enriches only themselves.
  Politicians are disingenuous with the public, promising them a speedy improvement in life only in order to stay in power for as long as possible.
  Adventurers of all stripes insidiously promise quick enrichment due to participating in win-win lotteries and all sorts of pyramids.
  Ozhegov's dictionary does not provide a direct definition of cunning, but indicates that "to cunning means to act with cunning, insincerely" [1].
  The teacher's encyclopedic dictionary gives the following definition of cunning: "The moral and ethical quality of a person, manifested in dexterity, deceit, secret action. Cunning is a way to deceive the enemy's vigilance or a means to get any desired result" [2].
  While quite correctly noting the fundamental feature of cunning, which is deceit, these definitions do not indicate the original source of cunning, which, as we noted above, consists in the instinctive distortion of information that comes from a creature to its surrounding, caused by the need to keep this creature in existence thanks to tactical tricks not related to strategic intentions, which no creature, except a person, is capable of.
  All these trickeries, based on primitive deception, are only related to solving the same, in essence, primitive (natural) tasks, such as creating maximum comfort, the best nutrition for oneself and the most favorable conditions for reproduction, which is facilitated by enrichment; domination over others, which provides thanks to the acquisition of power, moreover, domination allows not only to use all the available goods, taken away from others, but also to humiliate rivals, while receiving pleasant, albeit primitive, sensations incompatible with human dignity.
  In other words, all means of crafty behavior to achieve the goals of enrichment and gaining power, consisting in various machinations, tricks, maneuvers, escapades, evasions, etc., are limited only to adaptation to own surrounding. Therefore, they are not associated with the achievement of high goals of the development of technology, science and culture, that is, progress in the form of raising a person's self-consciousness to a higher level in its development.
  So, the opinion that cunning is similar to ingenuity, more precisely, creativity, is a misconception since cunning, referring only to tactical tricks, does not look far, solving only momentary problems of improving the quality of life, and thereby is not able to serve as an effective means of developing self-consciousness, acting purely for solving adaptation task,, that is, within the natural consciousness of man, although with knowledge of the matter.
  Thus. if the initial source of cunning in a person's consciousness is the instinctive deception of others as an adaptive-protective means of survival and improvement of position in one's own niche of existence, which only contributes to retention in existence, then the initial source of creativity - the desire for new sources of information as a means of development, since the reluctance to seek and consume new information leads to the displacement of any organism from the niche occupied by it, degradation, and, in the end, death.
  Indeed, in a community of living beings, the loss of the aspiration to change oneself, albeit instinctive, in accordance with a changing environment, that is, the loss of a timely response to continuous changes, means imminent death.
  As a result, the survival of any organism no longer tactically, but as if strategically is facilitated only by the attraction to new sensations, reflecting a changing reality. It is they provoke its development in accordance with the inevitable resistance of the environment.
  However, the development of all living beings, except for humans, proceeds relatively slowly, since their striving for the new is limited only by instincts and reflexes.
  Therefore, all these creatures are forced to act by trial and error, where random plays the main role. This is what caused such a slow evolutionary development of living beings in comparison with the accelerated movement of the human population in the direction technical and cultural progress.
  What contributes to the most intensive and rapid development, which manifests itself only in human communities?
  In essence, the only significant difference between a person and all other liviing beings is his awareness of oneself in time, which, in part, pulls him out of a state of constant adaptability.
  This new state of superiority over the environment, which he can already manage independently in accordance with certain plans and projects, setting himself more and more new goals, and not only utilitarian ones, can be explained by the appearance in his genome of another program, additional to the existing program of growth, development and the functioning of the body. This new program is designed not only for adaptability to the environment, and for the most part - on the design-target activity of the organism, which led it from the time of the hominids to awareness of oneself. That is, a new program in the genome presupposes not only a purely adaptive activity in the environment, but also a systematic change in the environment for their own purposes, which are gradually moving away from the pragmatic towards the development of science and culture, which contributes to the accelerated development of human self-consciousness even more [3. Part 3, ј5].
  If in human self-consciousness, cunning is based on an instinctive (natural) distortion of information (deception) for the sake of survival currently, then the basis of creativity is laid in the aspiration of a living being to respond as quickly as possible to changes in the environment, which is facilitated by other forms of reflection of reality, to a greater extent corresponding to the ongoing changes. Therefore, any living being is forced breaking away from the existing and look for something new.
  In the self-consciousness of a person, this desire for new information in its extreme and most effective form can be expressed in an attraction to fundamentally new solutions that maximally accelerate the development of human communities, and the main characteristic of this desire - creativity - is the non-obviousness of finds, that is, they appear not as a result of formal logical approaches, but outside of them, since the latter are within the limits of existing knowledge and methods, and creativity only uses existing knowledge as a support, trying to solve problems outside the framework of the known, anticipating changes in the environment and outpacing them with their own findings, which can even change reality itself in unexpected way.
  The most typical example of such going beyond traditional knowledge into the sphere of the non-obvious are the epoch-making inventions and discoveries that gave the world electricity, atomic energy, computers, and in art - opera, harmonious symphonies that introduce a person into a state of self-deepening and enchantment; paintings that revive the past; magnificent examples of poetry that make readers shed tears with delight.
  Self-consciousness allows each person to turn to new means for the manifestation of creativity in comparison with the means of natural consciousness based on the method of trial and error, albeit with varying degrees of success.
  The most important means of displaying creativity is imagination.
  An additional program of self-consciousness represents the upper information circuit - the circuit of creative imagination. It appeared in time immemorial among several species of primates, having shifting, them into the category of hominids, that is, enough self-active (initiative) creatures, capable thanks to this program, which is configured to artificially transform the environment, to use own imagination without adaptive restrictions, giving scope to emerge the productive considerations of the future in the form of planning and modeling of their own actions, presenting them mentally, as well as in the type of fantasies, which for the most part are fruitless in relation to their implementation, but nevertheless occasionally having turned into new inventions, scientific discoveries, unusual, but impressive forms of art [4].
  Such fantasies, built not on sand, but on a solid foundation of accumulated knowledge under certain properties and actions of an individual fall into the category of insights (intuition), being the most productive road to the finds in the form of non-obvious knowledge, that is, knowledge, that does not follow from known rules and interrelation directly.
  It is the intuition that leads to new images, first vague and then acquiring more distinct forms, that provides the most significant shifts both in the process of cognition and in art, producing the initially sought object (phenomenon, regularity, art object) in its figurative integrity, although and without details. But these details can be cleared up analytically and experimentally later, while non-obvious knowledge has already appeared in a mental form, which over time can be translated into drawings, paintings or sculptures.
  Apparently, the principal components of intuition (for this state more precise is the term "insight") is, first, experience, i.e. a set of the developed models, ready to immediate application. Knowledge and skills without experience will not help instantly or is even stretched in time to solve the arisen problem in the particular sphere. Secondly, an equivalent component of intuition (insight) is the insertion by the person of itself in state of insight that often occurs automatically in a stressful situation of danger or, on the contrary, at the relaxation moments, and even in a dream, but more often in the moments of awakening (by the way, emergence of insight in minutes of awakening in no small measure is defined by connection to work of a brain of some other centers processing information, such as: motor centers; centers that control the visual functions), third, insight comes only at a particular goal-setting to which have to correspond certain "technological" practices.
  Along with that, insight can be caused artificially when keeping of the specified three positions, exemplified by the actions of shamans and sorcerers.
  The ordinary person also, happens, enters in similar state unexpected for himself, receiving sometimes answers to questions, which are not resolved by the known methods. This as if automatic entrance to state of insight means also automatic exit from it that in itself retains identity of the person.
  Similar state, which is not controlled by human reason, is called as inspiration. It has various forms and is reached, as a rule, irrespective of the person at the moments of a stress, relaxation, half-asleep state and other unusual states.
  The mechanism of intuition consists in such combination of the highest (self-consciousness) and lowest (natural) forms of consciousness, at which consciousness begins to work automatically (without long reflections and logical constructions), as it occurs at animals for their survival, and along with that into this automatic scheme relatively short-term are involved all practices of the person in the form of the gained experience in this sphere, the available knowledge and abilities with certain target orientation.
  Similar rather short-term harmonious merge of target programs of a self-consciousness and the ideal programs of the lowest consciousness for a survival which do not counteract each other, as usual, and work in unison, for example, helping the person to escape from a misfortune, reflects their reciprocal interest to search for an exit from an extreme situation whereas in routine circumstances their interests and aspirations, as a rule, diverge that clearly is looked through in contradictory actions of each person.
  If voluntary or involuntary address of the person with a definite purpose to own lowest consciousness does not contradict aspirations of the last, related mainly to the survival of the organism, then the person receives necessary to him if, of course, he will understand the answer.
  To do this, and relevant experience is required.
  A person in the self-consciousness pushed back the lowest consciousness on the background and by that considerably came off from the environment, having become the subject into temporary process. In other words, he has understood that he is in temporary process with all advantages of this comprehension, but along with that he has lost former unity with the environment.
  However, the lowest consciousness did not disappear in him. It means, in principle, he is capable to shift of it into the forefront temporarily, that is to enter into it, but without loss of the highest consciousness, without forgetting who is he actually, and, thanks to this, at some point to get out of the lowest consciousness, more precisely, to shift it again to the background [5. Part 2].
  Another way to be creative is to use randomness more or less consciously, since it is akin to surprise, and therefore non-obviousness.
  However, it is impossible to directly use randomness both for creation and destruction, even consciously, because when setting goals in the current time, it is not present in the human mind, and cannot be taken into account by it. Actually, therefore, occasions or phenomena that are interfered in specific actions of a person about which he did not know or simply extraneous factors that he could notice but did not attach importance to them, qualified by him as something spontaneous. That is, to use randomness, at least time is required to understand its nature and possible application.
  How important this is for the expansion of information flows is clear from the arbitrary nature of randomness: if a random phenomenon is akin to surprise, then randomness falls out of a known series of current events and, possibly, - available knowledge. In other words, randomness may well be non-obvious and extraneous phenomenon, to the database of mankind, being out of a known order.
  Consequently, randomness is the direct neighbor of unobvious new knowledge, and through it can be achieved new knowledge, and not through logic or combinatorics. Therefore, randomness and non-obvious new can quite naturally converge, if you move away from traditional research methods and use some methods of using randomness for your own purposes, which are described in the article "How can one attract randomness and take advantage of it in the process of creativity?" [5. Part 9].
  Fundamentally randomness is something external, more precisely, extraneous, closer to chaos than to order. Its independence from the established one can redraw the order in a completely unimaginable way and thereby denote the unknown, and therefore also fundamentally new knowledge.
  However, randomness can manifest itself in this way only through a self-conscious being who is consciously being not satisfied with what is available, and therefore is capable to choice only what interests him, setting goals for himself, unlike all other living organisms, which only instinctively strive to the better conditions of existence.
  A higher degree of creativity is already connected with obtaining fundamentally new knowledge, which is not obvious, that is, no combination of known knowledge, no conclusions in the form of formal logic can give it, as and experiments aimed at improving the known.
  It turns out. that non-obvious knowledge is really connected with randomness, and the explanation for this lies in the fact that both non-obvious new knowledge and randomness are beyond the known, that is, they manifest as the unforeseen [ibid.].
  In addition, for a person, the constant means for displaying creativity is interest, which, in essence, is an inescapable attraction to new forms of reality, which he can not only note, but also construct independently.
  In particular, his significance was also noted by K. A. Helvetius: "If the physical world is subject to the law of motion, then the spiritual world is no less subject to the law of the interest. On earth, the interest is an omnipotent wizard, changing in the eyes of all creatures the appearance of every object" [6, p. 34].
  The dissatisfaction of a person in his self-consciousness requires more than the efficiency of actions, a comfortable existence, a high position, it pushes him to something beyond, unreal, illogical, that is, what would show him to himself and everyone around him his non-triviality, having caused first of all respect for oneself.
  Hence a conscious interest arises in the form of striving for everything unusual, surprising, disturbing, or even frightening, such as lightning in a thunderstorm, or to such seemingly senseless exercise as mountaineering, which is reflected in the concept of "interesting", which gets close with utilitarian aspirations only for the most limited individuals, but even they are capable and willing of the extraordinary, finding own interest, for example, in the otherworldly, which is reflected in their belief in the unknown, which attracts them with heavenly bliss after death, and in life gives them a sense of superiority over unbelievers who are not aware of the ecstasy of faith and touch to the miraculous and, therefore, the highest.
  Persons opposite to them - intellectually developed and rather educated to understand many things and really understand something in their chosen field of activity, - prefer to look for the interest in some singularity which they do not understand, but would like to solve, for example, having made a discovery or an invention.
  So, Leonardo da Vinci built a helicopter prototype, wrote a still unsolved image of Mona Lisa, Franklin invented a lightning rod, Foucault - a pendulum, Leo Tolstoy wrote "The Death of Ivan Ilyich."
  If the abilities and interests coincide, the resulting effect, similar to resonance, leads a person to creative discoveries (creativity), since in this case he sometimes succeeds in finding a truly new one both in technology and in art.
  Between these extremes all the other people of the world are located, the interest of the overwhelming majority of which lies not so much in the unusual, but in the sphere surprising or perturbing them, as a rule, within the limits of consumption of a certain mass product.
  This may be fashion, politics, sports, spectacles and other areas of impact on the person, far from high aspirations, but bringing this type of pleasure to people, which is always associated with the influx in one way or another of new information.
  Along with that, in such interests and in connection with them, these ordinary people (philistines) reduce themselves mostly not to the subjects of activity, but to objects of influence, serving, in fact, alien and, very often, mercenary interests, allowing to earn on themselves to every kind of rogues.
  Thereby one more category of the subjects of action is revealed, who are trying to force the others to serve own interests comes to light and they can be designated as parasites as their only interest is the aspiration to satisfaction of the most primitive (animal) needs - the best food, beautiful females, domination over tribespeople. By these they replace cultural values and ethics of general behavior, hypocritically preaching to others the execution of rules and norms that are beneficial only for them, and also distracting the masses from destroying them as typical and conscious parasites by providing new items of consumption [3. Part 1, ј4].
  Thus, interest is not only an attraction to the new, the unusual, but the objects of this attraction divide society into certain strata - some are attracted to the seductively-primitive, where they can find a place for using cunning to achieve similar utilitarian goals, others - to high technologies or spiritual values, and the achievement of these goals will inevitably require the use of creative approaches.
  And if the animal-primitive, but naturally pleasant, such as power or comfort, can be achieved in many cases with the help of cunning, then to come up with a phone, the Internet, win the war through a well-chosen strategy, discover America or the law of gravity no way with one cunning.
  
  Bibliography
  
  1.S.I. Ozhegov and N. Yu. Shvedova. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. Moscow. 2003.
  2. Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Teacher. dic.academic.ru.
  3. Nizovtsev Yu. It's the other way around. Answers to tricky questions about interesting things (collection). 2018. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Amazon
  4. Nizovtsev Yu. What is the mechanism of imagination not revealed by science so far? 2020. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Amazon
  5. Nizovtsev Yu. Open eyes yours-own (collection). 2019. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Amazon.
  6. Гельвеций К.А. Об уме. Москва., 1938.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 Ваша оценка:
Связаться с программистом сайта.

Новые книги авторов СИ, вышедшие из печати:
О.Болдырева "Крадуш. Чужие души" М.Николаев "Вторжение на Землю"

Как попасть в этoт список

Кожевенное мастерство | Сайт "Художники" | Доска об'явлений "Книги"