Pages:     || 2 | 3 |
Ring Determinism: Solving the Problems of Scientific Materialism Ravil Kalmykov ravil8@yandex.ru ABSTRACT Materialism traditionally has had difficulties with interpreting the subjective aspects of human life and of nature. The concepts of ring determinism and polyhedral monism suggested in this work, in the opinion of the author, resolves this problem. New concepts provide the materialists with a causal and ontological basis for any subjective phenomena. It allows interpretation on a quite solid methodological basis. At the same time, the problems of causal and ontological substantiation of autonomy for separate bodies in nature have been solved. The phenomenon of the occurrence of system properties has been given an explanation. The causal principle underlying the phenomena of self-preservation, self-control and self-organizing has been established. The basic nature of integrity and autonomy of a living organism, the basis of natural egoism and egocentricity is identified. The causal and ontological bases of the existence of such phenomena as mentality, soul and consciousness are discovered. Points of rapprochement of the positions of scientific materialism with a lot of other well-known philosophical doctrines are planned. The original quasi-dualistic treatment of a psychophysical (mind-body) problem is offered.

Chronic Problems in the Philosophy of Materialism In the opinion of many, the modern situation in the forefront of philosophical battles very much reminds us of a long-drawn "trench" war. The majority of key arguments on the part of all the philosophical schools participating in the battles for doctrines and a human world outlook have already been expressed and the alignment of forces has been determined. There are some rare sporadic critical attacks and maneuvers, but insufficient to change anything in the battle plan.

Apparently, without an essentially new powerful "super weapon", that is to say, without an essential methodological breakthrough, it is hardly possible to change anything in the foreseeable future.

In the role of such a "super weapon", the author of this article offers the concept of "determinism of a close circuit" or, "ring determinism". The author believes that this concept will correct the principal defects of materialism which still did not allow it, by virtue of an archaic methodology, to participate in a broad circle of the modern philosophical controversies on the of full volume grounds.

In particular, as soon as the philosophical debate touches the diverse aspects of the autonomous behavior of living organisms; man, his psyche and consciousness, materialism simply cannot sustain careful argument. These things have no basic ontological status in this framework. From the very beginning of materialism it was charged (and quite is reasonably!) with objectivism.

Recognizing an objective reality of the surrounding world, materialists gave it the status of the main and unique principle and automatically belittled the importance of the subject in his material surroundings. Therefore, the struggle of the individual in trying to subordinate the surroundings to his interests while simultaneously attempting to adapt to it and learn of its properties, was ignored. Thus, the individual was given a secondary role or reduced to insignificance. It is surprising that the philosophers tolerated materialism so long! In the ontology of materialism, the principle of general-purpose interaction implied that material unity of the world was basic. The existence of natural activity in such conditions should have implied either the negation of unity or its certain cleavage. Refusal was impossible, because it would be seen as surrender. As to the cleavage in positions, the principle was rather vague. That is why materialism had to reject it absolutely. In addition, it was necessary to give up recognition of the existence of local autonomy and activity. As a result, in any discussion regarding subjective aspects, the materialists assimilated the argument of the church; that it was "the will of God, and repeated constantly "all in the world is the result of united causative interrelationships".

The "elementaristic" direction in materialism, that took its roots from the "atomists" of Ancient Greece, was no better. Its weak point was the principle of interconnection of elements in the unified structural whole and the interrelationship and transmutation of material formations. Thus, despite the powerful methodological support on the part of natural and technical sciences, materialism appeared sidelined on the road of philosophical ideas.

Monism and determinism composed the methodological basis of materialism for an extended period. However, by virtue of stagnation, they became a real hindrance for materialism. Wellknown materialists perceived it for certain, and attempted at various times to introduce "improvements" in the doctrine. So, as a counterweight to the charges of objectivism, the idea of a subjective source of "secondary qualities" by John Locke, the anthropology of L.Feuerbach, the concept of "practice" and "learning consciousness" in dialectical materialism and the modern concepts of emergentist materialism began to appear. All these attempts at reform only made the pill a bit sweeter, and did not remove the main problem.

In John Locke's theory, external (sensations) and internal (reflexion) were thought to be the source of human cognition. He championed the idea of the mutual autonomy of the material and intellectual worlds and stated that in the phenomenon of "secondary qualities," the special role of the subjective factor appeared. However his subjective-objective parallelism applied only within the sphere of epistemology and had no ontological roots. For this reason his theories have simply withered.

All the remarkable theories in the anthropology of Feuerbach also rested on the insoluble problem of ontological underlying reasons for autonomous behavior and human intellection. The principle of general-purpose interaction, being used in its naked loneliness, categorically did not assume such "liberties" and buried them without a trace.

The concept of the learning subject created by K.Marx and V.Lenin could be to the point if it were considered in connection with the activity of the subject's private life. However, to introduce it was impossible for the above-mentioned reason. Thus, the ontological status of the learning subject hung helplessly in the air. Appearing in science as the sources of human knowledge, it disappeared completely in the science of being.

The concept of practice was offered in a similar mode, in the full separation from the concept of the practical subject. Thus, the attention of the authors concentrated only on the objective aspects of practical activities of someone only clear and abstract. Thats why practice and labour started to act as certain powerful mysterious and


semi-objective categories, seeking to crush everything that was human and social. That there is, for example, the statement, "It was LABOUR that created a man from an ape". However, this monumental theoretical structure had weight only within the special framework of sociology. In ontology there was nothing created which would correspond to this.

Within the framework of modern emergentist materialism (M.Bunge, J.Margolis, R.U.Sperry), the availability of a number of natural entities, especially for a culturally developing person, such special systemic properties which qualitatively defines it as a whole and misses the elements composing it, was recognized. Actually it is one version of the well-known phenomenon of originating systemic properties, which is something like vitalism in a new way. Such reasoning would have no sense unless they were reinforced by some original ontology.

So, all the mentioned "improvements" had no support in ontology which is the systemic basis for any philosophy, therefore they should be relegated to a category of off-system cosmetic measures. And one more generalization: remodelling started from the private sciences or special sections of philosophy and as a result, they rested on an obsolete ontology, which did not give them a chance to develop. They were nipped in the bud. This leads to an obvious conclusion regarding the necessity of reforming materialism from an ontological base.

Today, it is clear to everyone that the principle of "general purpose interaction" does not uncover the essence of the majority of situations researched by philosophy. Evidently, before any two material formations start to interact, they are required to become apparent as separate natural entities. In addition to the principle of interaction, another principle should be introduced which would reveal the nature of "individuality", "isolation", and a local (private) natural autonomy in order to establish a necessary balance. This can have a different nature: spatial, material-field, structural, energy-power, functional, informative. As in materialism, all should happen under the supervisory control of determinism. It is possible to safely assume that in the basis of all these versions there should always be a local causative autonomy.

The Saving Idea As an illustration, we shall consider the widespread situation when two people, who participate in a surrounding social network of public interactions for some definite time, suddenly fall out of it, and fall in love. They cease paying attention to their environment and are engaged almost exclusively with each other. What then happens to the philosophical plan Society and nature have lost two active citizens, have lost two receivers and two sources of causative influence.

Causative catastrophe No! Determinism and the conservation laws teach us that any causative action should not disappear completely. So thats it! The structure of causal connections was only changed. Now the large number of causal connections of this couple is aimed not outward, but to each other (see figure 1). Here it is visually observable, that two generalized lines of causative action together become a closed causative circuit.

Figure 1.

Causal connections of in love pair.

Our essentially significant conclusion will be that we owe to the origination of this circuit, the appearance of a separate material formation the in-love pair! This pair starts to declare itself as a certain unified autonomous body, as the new natural factor showing autonomy in all the above-listed attitudes. Certainly, external causal connections of each of those in love are not torn completely. However the scale of internally oriented communications in comparison with the outwardly oriented, is much greater for the conservation of wholeness of the couple.

Similar situations occur in the broadest aspect of natural phenomenon. For example, when two atoms of oxygen are bridged by means of chemical linkage, into one molecule, when the electron and a proton by means of electrical connections are integrated into an atom of hydrogen, when the Earth and moon by means of mass attraction become a space tandem, etc. In all these cases in the basis of individuality, unity and a wholeness of alliance, lies within the closed causative circuit.

The consideration of a pair of connecting material foundations is just the simplest example. In the substantial world there are much more events where the variety of heterogeneous elements are connected into a unit by means of diverse connections. It is also possible to name as an example a human body or a political state.

In the second half of the 20th century appeared a special science, synergetics, researching general regularities of similar systems, which form on the basis of the great number of separate elements, by means of a special internal functional coherence.

The functional coherence is interesting. However there is no smoke without fire. As materialists and determinists, we are obliged on the basis of any functionality, to find out and accentuate a concrete causative situation. And so we state that such a principled causative actual situation in the case of complicated systems (as well as in the case of the two bodies mentioned above,) is the presence its nature of a new special factor. For the origin of this factor, the closed circuit of causal connections bears a considerable responsibility. This factor collects and integrates and sticks together in the unified system, all previously anarchical, separated elements. It is this factor, we think, which is the hallmark of all separately existing things in our world, of diverse systemic foundations and alliances. It is responsible for the principle of individuality. Therefore the doctrine of determinism should be immediately enlarged by including a special closed circuit determinism.

The structure of different composite systems can be rather diverse. The internal closed causative circuit can take tangled forms. If we put aside the concrete configurations and concentrate our attention on the property of insularity, it would be possible to consider this form as a ring circuit.

Thus, as a characteristic property of all separate material foundations we shall consider the presence of an internal causative ring. And the version of determinism controlling this property, we shall call ring determinism.

The previous rectilinear determinism together with the new ring determinism, embodies action of the principles of isolation and interaction. This now can form a good base for a massive attack by materialism on the entire philosophical front. Some applications of philosophy where the idea of ring determinism ensures a breakthrough will be mentioned below.

Useful Ontological Acquisitions So, first of all, the principle of autonomy of separate bodies and other material foundations receives an ontological reinforcement. Till now the materialists - substantsialists have only been compelled to recognize the presence of separate independent bodies in nature and regard it as a certain inevitable evil, as they could not explain its nature. They only attempted to retouch the real private autonomy, uniting all separate subjects by means of the principle of interrelation in the unified substantial whole.

Pages:     || 2 | 3 |

2011 www.dissers.ru -

, .
, , , , 1-2 .