The Genesis of Socio-Philosophical Understanding of the Peace and War Relationship in the Social World Development

Thus, the fourth stage is the stage of industrial institutionalization and world institutions, marked by ideological, idealistic, materialistic, managerial, psychological and peacekeeping traditions. A significant change that determined the position in the worldview was the industrial phase, which led to the consideration of peace and war as a world phenomenon. This phase was characterized by the emergence of world capital, world war, peace as overcoming war. The new trend of existentialism reproduced the understanding of the absurdity of war, as well as the search for the cause of hostilities and ways to resolve conflicts. The world institutions of the United Nations, UNESCO, etc. were formed to comprehend world problems. After the formation of the Club of Rome, the concept of the peaceful existence of the capitalist and socialist worlds emerged.

The consequences of the events described above were the ideological establishment of peace on Earth, the development of the information society, and, accordingly, the formation of information and virtual worlds, there was a discussion of a systematic approach and psychologizing management. These features characterize the next, fifth, stage.

It is important to define a systemic approach for our study. The following positions should be taken into account in its consideration: first, the direction of the methodology of scientific cognition, based on the consideration of the object as a holistic complex of interconnected elements (I. Blauberg, V. Sadovskyi, E. Yudin); secondly, a set of interacting objects at the biological level (L. von Bertalanffy); third, a set of entities and relationships (A. Hall, R. Fagin). And since the social world is a whole with a set of different fragments, including peace and war, chaos and order, organization and self-organization, etc., it is appropriate to study the issue with a systematic approach.

Another approach - poststructuralism is the embodiment of the principle of individual freedom, the power of chance, voluntarism, irrationality in human action. Poststructuralist K. Levi-Strauss, poststructuralists J. Derrida, J. Lacan, R. Barth and postmodernists F. Guattari, J. F. Lyotard, M. Foucault and others advocated the idea of creating free conditions for the development of the individual and the impossibility of total control of political power over the spheres of life.

M. Foucault considers the right of discourse as the right to speak, which promotes the development of competence in understanding, provides legalized and direct access to the body of already formulated statements (Фуко, 2004, p. 142). The need for discourse is determined by the harmonious combination of opinions of different individuals. Discourse is designed so that society does not oppose or contradict itself. Through comparison of facts, arguments, historical analysis, the truth can be achieved. That is, in discourse, freedom of action, thought, free access to information, harmony is born in the social world.

After the two World Wars and the attempt of the world community to hinder the war-making processes, the information revolution is gradually brewing, and a new information society, driven by new technologies, is emerging. The author of the concept of information society is J. Masuda: information permeates production, management, politics, life and all other aspects of human life (Masuda, 1983, pp. 336-338). The scientist put forward the idea of a new management of society on the basis of participatory democracy, the expediency of which is determined by the global problems of mankind: the relationship of war and peace in the social world, nuclear energy development, environmental pollution, inflation, international terrorism, etc. members of society and coordinated actions of all citizens.

Thus, the fifth stage was characterized by the formation of information and virtual worlds, which are based on objective and objectified worlds, at the center of which is the subjective world of man and the relationship “society - technology”. In view of this, we should highlight the systemic- holistic tradition in understanding the world.

At the present stage of the synergetic world we observe such trends in the development of the social world as hybrid and network warfare, hence the need to develop similar peacekeeping processes. Contradictions in international relations between states affect the state and form of social relations.

I. Wallerstein studied the modern world according to the world-system approach. “Studying the world system, we come to understand that intellectual activity is determined not only by intellectual or volitional qualities, but also by social timeliness - in the world-system sense” (Валлерстайн, 2004, p. 274). That is, society has the ability to use intellectual opportunities to build a new world on the basis of modern democracy and organization.

According to the network approach of M. Castells, new types of technologies, namely - the Internet define a new world order, the state of the economy, politics, etc., the whole society is forced to exist on the basis of network rules (Кастельс, 2000, pp. 8-15). There is a network business with new features, network social communication, network relationships, network war and peace, which are a distorted network effect (Коновал, 2019; Пічугіна, 2019; Ороховська, 2019).

It is necessary to turn to the worldview approach of P. Kopnin, which traces how the worldview affects the cognitive activity and social ideals of scientists, the search for and justification of the practical consequences of new scientific theories (Копнин, 1974, pp. 5-10). A person's worldview has a great social impact on his further actions and in general on the formation of subjects' respect for peace in the social world.

From the standpoint of a synergetic approach, the world is studied as the unity of order and chaos, war and peace, self-organization and management in the development of the social world as a complex non-equilibrium system.

Thus, A. Nazaretyan, considering the origins of the harmony of nature and the balance of aggressions that form a flexible self-organizing system of the biosphere, turns to a synergistic generalization of fundamental factors that make inevitable social conflicts and periodic exacerbation of anthropogenic crises, but also serve as development. The first is the exhaustion of resources to support persistently unbalanced processes, which leads to inevitable competition. The second is the paradoxical tendency of persistently nonequilibrium systems to unstable states. The dialectical contradiction is that such systems are essentially focused on achieving and maintaining stability, but the long-term state of such stability creates their internal imbalance (Назаретян, 2012, p. 99).

Thus, we can distinguish the sixth - modern stage of the synergetic world, marked by the emergence of hybrid and network war and peace. At this stage there is a problem of holistic, dynamic uncertainty as a factor of subjective design, which are covered in the world-system approach of I. Wallerstein, the network approach of M. Castells, and there is a need to combine different approaches to understand ways to achieve peace in the social world. At this stage, we distinguish between hybrid, network and synergetic traditions in the study of the social world.

Conclusions

Thus, in this paper the genesis of the relationship between peace and war in the development of the social world was determined.

It was found that the social world in concrete historical manifestations was considered by philosophers through the functioning of state-building processes of government and self-organization, and the absolutization of one of them led to war, and harmonization - to peace. But the dialectic of these dichotomies requires further study in the context of a globalized social world. Therefore, for further research, the stages of formation of the problem were traced and the traditions of understanding the social world were determined. The first stage was characterized by the study of the world as a cosmic phenomenon - in the natural philosophical, mythological and cosmogonic traditions - and social - in the socio-organic, polis, paternalistic-subject traditions (philosophers of ancient India, Lao Tzu, Confucius, Plato, Aristotle). The second stage - the dominance of the theocentric position - was characterized by the distinction between heaven and earth in the philosophy of St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas. Here the theological tradition developed. The third - the stage of modernism - was marked by the dominance of the objectified world in connection with the invention of printing, the development of the institute of education, institutionalization of science and was associated with the progressive tradition represented by N. Machiavelli, T. More, T. Campanella, R. Descartes, F. Bacon and others. The fourth is the stage of industrial institutionalization and world institutions (UN, UNESCO, etc.), which was characterized by the consideration of peace and war as a world phenomenon, marked by ideological, idealistic, materialistic, managerial, psychological and peacekeeping traditions. K. Marx, F. Engels, F. Nietzsche, A. Bergson, F. Taylor, Z. Freud, N. Wiener, P. Hershey, J. Barney, etc.). In the fifth - the stage of formation of information and virtual worlds, which took place in the integrity of the relationship “society - technology”, we highlight the system-holistic tradition. He is represented by I. Blauberg, V. Sadovskyi, E. Yudin, and others. The sixth is the modern stage of the synergetic world, defined by the phenomena of hybrid and network war and peace and connected with the hybrid, network and synergetic traditions. He is represented by I. Wallerstein, G. Hacken, I. Prigozhyn, O. Knyazeva, S. Kapitsa, V. Bekh, V. Andrushchenko, V. Voronkova and others. Here the problem of the world as a whole in the dynamic uncertainty and technological aspect of the subjects' activity is actualized.

References

social world modernism theocentric

1Abaev, N. V (1983). Chan'-buddizm i kul'tura psikhicheskoj deyatel'nosti v srednevekovom Kitae. Novosibirsk: Nauka.

2Avgustin Blazhenny'j. (2000). Ob istinnoj religii. In Avgustin Blazhenny'j, Tvoreniya (Vol. 1). Sankt-Peterburg; Kiev: Aletejya; UCzIMM Press.

3Antologiya mirovoj filosofii (Vol. 1). (1969). Moskva: My'sl'.

4Aristotel'. (1983). Sochineniya (Vol. 4). Moskva: My'sl'.

5Bergson, A. (1994). Dva istochnika morali i religii. Moskva: Kanon.

6Berdyaev, N. A. (n.d.). Dukhi russkoj revolyuczii. Retrieved from E'lektronnaya biblioteka Gramotej: http://www. gramotey.com/books/371140173942.htm

7Binsvanger, L. (1999). By'tie v mire : vvedenie v e'kzistenczial'nuyu psikhiatriyu. KSP+ ; Yuventa: Moskva-Sankt- Peterburg.

8Bichko, A. K., Bichko, I'. V, & Tabachkovs'kij, V. G. (2001). I'stori'ya fi'losofi'yi : pi'druchnik. Kiyiv: Libi'd'.

9Bogdanov, A. A. (1989). Tektologiya: vseobshhaya organizaczionnaya nauka. Moskva: E'konomika.

10Burzhuaznaya filosofiya koncza KhI'Kh veka. (1971). In Antologiya mirovoj filosofii (Vol. 3). Moskva: My'sl'.

11Be'kon, F. (1971). Sochineniya (Vol. 1). Moskva: My'sl'.

12Vallerstajn, I. (2004). Konecz znakomogo mira : Socziologiya KhKhI' veka. Moskva: Logos.

13Vasil'ev, L. S. (1998). Istoriya Vostoka (Vol. 1). Moskva: Vy'sshaya shkola.

14Viner, N. (1983). Kibernetika, ili Upravlenie i svyaz' v zhivotnom i mashine. Moskva: Nauka.

15Gegel', G. V. (1970). Nauka logiki (Vol. 1). Moskva: My'sl'.

16Gobbs, T. (1991). Sochineniya (Vol. 2). Moskva: My'sl'.

17Gusserl', E'. (2009). Obshhee vvedenie v chistuyu fenomenologiyu. In E'. Gusserl', Idei k chistoj fenomenologii i fenomenologicheskoj filosofii (Vol. 1). Moskva: Akademicheskij Proekt.

18Dekart, R. (1989). Sochineniya (Vol. 1). Moskva: My'sl'.

19Derlug'yan, G. (2013). Kak ustroen e'tot mir : nabroski na makrosocziologicheskie temy'. Moskva: Izd-vo In-ta Gajdara.

20Drevnekitajskaya filosofiya : sobranie tekstov (Vol. 1). (1972). Moskva: My'sl'.

21Il'in, I. (1993). Predposy'lki tvorcheskoj demokratii. In I. Il'in, O gryadushhej Rossii : Izbranny'e stat'i. Moskva: Voenizdat.

22Kampanella, T. (1978). Gorod Solncza. Moskva ; Leningrad: Izd-vo Akademii nauk SSSR.

23Kant, I. (1994). K vechnomu miru. Spor fakul'tetov. Antropologiya. Uspekhi metafiziki. In I. Kant, Sobranie sochinenij (Vol. 7). Moskva: ChORO.

24Kant, I. (1994). Kritika chistogo razuma. In I. Kant, Sobranie sochinenij (Vol. 3). Moskva: ChORO.

25Kastel's, M. (2000). Informaczionnaya e'pokha : E'konomika, obshhestvo i kul'tura. Moskva: Gos. un-t Vy'ssh. shk. e'konomiki.

26Konoval, V O. (2019). Merezhevi' tekhnologi'yi u suchasnikh umovakh suspi'l'nogo rozvitku: fi'losofs'ki' konczepczi'yi. I'nvesticzi'yi: praktika ta dosvi'd(2). doi:10.32702/2306-6814.2019.2.134

27Kopnin, P V. (1974). Gnoseologicheskie i logicheskie osnovy' nauki. Moskva: My'sl'.

28Kostomarov, M. I'. (1991). Zakon Bozhij : (Kniga buttya ukrayins'kogo narodu). Kiyiv: Libi'd'.

29Krims'kij, S. B. (2002). Fenomen mudrosti' u tvorchosti' Grigori'ya Skovorodi : do 280-ri'chchya vi'd dnya narodzhennya ukrayins'kogo mislitelya. Vi'snik Naczi'onal'noyi akademi'yi nauk Ukrayini(12), 42-46.

30Lenin, V. I. (1969). Iyul' 1918-mart 1919. In V. I. Lenin, Polnoe sobranie sochinenij (Vol. 37). Moskva: Politizdat.

31Lokk, D. (1988). Sobranie sochinenij (Vol. 3). Moskva: My'sl'.

32Lutaj, V. S. (2008). Suchasni' fi'losofs'ki' zasadi reformuvannya ukrayins'koyi sistemi "osvi'ta - nauka - virobnicztvo". Fi'losofi'ya osvi'ti : naukovij chasopis(1-2), 22-34.

33Makiavelli, N. (2003). Gosudar'. In N. Makiavelli, Traktaty'. Moskva; Kharkov: AST; Folio.

34Marks, K. (1959). Manifest Kommunisticheskoj partii. In K. Marks, Sobraniya sochinenij (Vol. 4). Moskva: Institut Marksa - E'ngel'sa - Lenina - Stalina pri CzK KPSS ; Gospolitizdat.

35Marks, K. (1968). Izmeneniya i dopolneniya vo vtorom izdanii broshyuiy' I. Mosta "Kapital i find". Voprosy' istorii KPSS(2), 67-80.

36Mor, T. (1978). Utopiya. Moskva: Nauka.

37Nadol'nij, I'. F (Ed.). (1999). Fi'losofi'ya : navchal'nij posi'bnik. Kiyiv: Vi'kar.

38Nazaretyan, A. P (2012). Antropologiya nasiliya i kul'tura samoorganizaczii : ocherki po e'volyuczionno- istoricheskoj psikhologii. Moskva: Knizhny'j dom "LIBROKOM".

39Neru, D. (1989). Otkry'tie Indii : v 2 kn. Moskva: Politizdat.

40Niczshe, F. V (2005). Volya k vlasti : opy't pereoczenki vsekh czennostej. Moskva: Kul'turnaya Revolyucziya.

41Orokhovs'ka, L. A. (2019). Transformaczi'ya soczi'al'no-ekonomi'chnikh vi'dnosin u merezhevomu suspi'l'stvi'. Problemi sistemnogo pi'dkhodu v ekonomi'czi'. Zbi'rnik naukovikh pracz'(5 (73)). doi:https://doi.org/10.32782/2520- 2200/2019-5-4

42Paternalizm. (bez dati). Otrimano z Novaya filosofskaya e'ncziklopediya: http://iph.ras.rn/elib/2279.html

43Pi'chugi'na, Yu. O. (2019). Nova kul'tura v konczepczi'yi merezhevogo suspi'l'stva Manuelya Kastel'sa. Young Scientist(1 (65)). doi:https://doi.org/10.32839/2304-5809/2019-1-65-4

44Platon. (2007). Menon. In Platon, Sochineniya. Sankt-Peterburg: Izd-vo S.-Peterb. un-ta; Izd-vo Olega Aby'shko.

45Platon. (2007). Pir In Platon, Sochineniya (Vol. 2). Sankt-Peterburg: Izd-vo S.-Peterb. un-ta; Izd-vo Olega Aby'shko.

46Platon. (2007). Tee'tet. In Platon, Sochineniya (Vol. 2). Sankt-Peterburg: Izd-vo S.-Peterb. un-ta; Izd-vo Olega Aby'shko.

47Platon. (2007). Fedon. In Platon, Sochineniya. Sankt-Peterburg: Izd-vo S. Peterb. un-ta; Izd-vo Olega Aby'shko.

48Russo, Zh.-Zh. (1998). Ob Obshhestvennom dogovore, ili Princzipy' politicheskogo Prava. Moskva: KANON- press; Kuchkovo pole.

49Skvorecz', V. O. (2010). Zhittyeustri'j ukrayins'kogo narodu: vi'd radyans'koyi do postradyans'koyi epokhi. Gumani'tarnij vi'snik Zapori'z'koyi derzhavnoyi i'nzhenernoyi akademi'yi(40), 133-145.

50Skovoroda, G. (1973). Vi'rshi'. Pi'sni'. Bajki. Di'alogi. Traktati. Pritchi'. Prozovi' perekladi. Listi. Kiyiv: Naukova dumka.

51Skovoroda, G. (1973). Sochineniya (Vol. 1). Moskva: My'sl'.

52Spinoza, B. (1957). Izbranny'e proizvedeniya (Vol. 2). Moskva: Gospolitizdat.

53Tejlor, F. U. (1991). Princzipy' nauchnogo menedzhmenta. Moskva: Zhurnal "Kontrolling" ; Izd-vo standartov.

54Uemov, A. I. (1970). Analogiya v praktike nauchnogo issledovaniya : iz istorii fiziko-matematicheskikh nauk. Moskva: Nauka.

55Fajol', A. (1923). Obshhee i promy'shlennoe upravlenie. Moskva. Otrimano z http://gtmarket.ru/laboratory/ basis/5783

56Foma Akvinskij. (2002). Voprosy' 1-43. In Foma Akvinskij, Summa teologii (Vol. 1). Kiev; Moskva: E'l'ga; Nika Czentr; E'l'kor MK.

57Frejd, Z. (2001). Po tu storonu princzipa udovol'stviya. Khar'kov ; Moskva: Folio ; AST.

58Fuko, M. (2004). Arkheologiya znaniya. Sankt-Peterburg: ICz "Gumanitarnaya Akademiya" ; Universitetskaya kniga.

59Khajdegger, M. (1999). By'tie i vremya. Moskva: Ad Marginem.

60Khorni, K. (1993). Nevroticheskaya lichnost' nashego vremeni : Samoanaliz. Moskva: Progress ; Univers.

61Shopengaue'r, A. (1999). Mir kak volya i predstavlenie. In A. Shopengaue'r, Sochineniya (Vol. 1). Moskva: TERRA- Knizhny'j klub; Respublika.

62Yaspers, K. (1991). Smy'sl i naznachenie istorii. Moskva: Politizdat.

63Club of Rome. (n.d.). Retrieved from Club of Rome: http://www.clubofrome.org

64Masuda, Y (1983). The Information Society as Postindustrial Society. Washington: World Future Society.

Размещено на Allbest.ru