Низовцев Юрий Михайлович
On the distribution of abilities by population

Самиздат: [Регистрация] [Найти] [Рейтинги] [Обсуждения] [Новинки] [Обзоры] [Помощь|Техвопросы]
Links
Кожевенное мастерство: сумки, ремни своими руками
 Ваша оценка:
  • Аннотация:
    What determines the manifestation of abilities and how they are distributed among the population is a problem that has not yet found its solution, since the necessary and sufficient conditions for the manifestation of the potential abilities of each person are not formulated, and what underlies the distribution of certain abilities is not shown.
  
  Modern science sees the solution to the problem of creativity in identifying giftedness, up to genius, in the design features of the human brain.
  However, reality indicates otherwise.
  Of course, the structure of the brain is directly related to a person's giftedness by one or another remarkable property, whether it is the ability to perceive a wider range of sounds with all their overtones, or to see the most subtle shades of colors, or to move unusually quickly from the concrete to the abstract, and the like.
  Of course, such a natural talent can dramatically affect a person's life, contributing to his success in his chosen field, which corresponds to his abilities.
  On the other hand, a person's interests may not correspond to his abilities at all, even if he knows about them. For example, the famous Russian poet Vladimir Mayakovsky had incomparably great artistic abilities (painting), but his interest was being focused on poetry, where he achieved considerable, but not particularly outstanding in comparison with his contemporaries such as A. Blok, N. Gumilyov, S. Yesenin.
  Most people are more interested not in their abilities, but in the opportunity to get out of poverty, get an education and start earning well anywhere, as long as they pay enough. The creative process thus passes them by, although, it would seem, if they were gifted, they could do the appropriate thing. This means that giftedness alone cannot be what motivates a person to be creative.
  Then what is the driving force?
  Of course, it cannot be the brain, since its main function is to control the body in order to keep it in existence with all the diversity of the brain structure. That is, the brain is just an instrument of the human consciousness, and exactly consciousness decides how to be and live a person, at this, the proof of this priority of consciousness is a temporary loss of consciousness in a sleep, during fainting, in the case of sleepwalking, when the human brain functions, but the person himself loses all his properties of a thinking and acting subject.
  Moreover, in addition to the brain's neurons with their trillions of connections, neurons concentrated in the digestive tract and spinal cord, which are even more numerous than in the brain, are actively involved in this control.
  The human brain, quite large relative to body size, really turns out to be the most capable of abstract thinking, but, firstly, the beginnings of abstract thinking are inherent in many animals, for example, crows and rats, secondly, material formation such as the brain is secondary, always acting as an information processing center, moreover, many of the simplest living things do without a brain, but they never do without an information processing center that replaces it in one form or another. That is, the properties of the brain largely depend on the genome, and the genome is a program recorded on a protein carrier. And if it is like that in people, then somehow it was written down with the difference that determines the fundamental difference between people and the highest primates, and this difference manifested itself in the development of the brain in hominids, while the brain in monkeys for several million years practically did not change.
  That is, this difference boils down to the addition of a program inherent only in animal consciousness, a program inherent only in humans.
  Therefore, scientists trying to prove that it is the brain, due to a certain (developed) structure of its cortex, that will necessarily make a person a brilliant creator, it is only necessary to identify this structure [see, for example, 1], fall into the trap of their own specialization.
  In addition, as has long been known from historical practice, removal in many cases of a significant part of the brain, often does not reduce the ability of a person, which appear to be picked up by parts of the brain that have not been lost, indicating that that the capabilities of the brain, its individual parts, as well as the rest of the neural clusters in the human body are connected as follows, that they are not always able, but still, to correct their functions if their partial deformation occurs.
  It should also be noted that compared to the few manifested and well-known geniuses of science and culture, there were many more undetected "geniuses", some of whom simply were not interested in realizing their abilities, as they were attracted to realization in areas unrelated to these abilities, not to mention many persons. with extraordinary abilities, lost in the mass of uneducated individuals.
  That is, the presence of an extremely developed brain with the appropriate abilities, giving hope for their brilliant manifestation, is necessary, but insufficient.
  For this reason, we will have to clarify below the "sufficiency" in reliance not on the brain, but on the consciousness of any person who always has the opportunity to realize himself in one capacity or another, but with different success. For example, if there is no pronounced ability to discover non-obvious new things, then anyone can always discover the novelty of one or another, combining what is known to them and getting benefits for everyone, as well as satisfaction for oneself. Moreover, if a person is not indifferent in his self-consciousness, then every day he can see new things for himself both in relationships and in observations of the world around him.
  Nevertheless, the distribution of abilities by population that each person potentially has depends both on the level of both components of consciousness - the animal and self-consciousness, determined by the intensity of the manifestation of these properties of consciousness, and on the interaction of both components of consciousness, on knowledge, the human experience as well as the environment, which, at least, not preventing the manifestation of all these abilities.
  It should be assumed that the necessary and sufficient conditions for the manifestation of the human abilities, which are always potentially available to him, but to varying degrees, are the following.
  Dissatisfaction of a person in his consciousness with himself and his surroundings which manifests itself as a source of development for each person and his communities.
  The contradictory interaction of the animal component of consciousness and self-consciousness, creating a driving force for the development of a person and his communities.
  Interest, which is a stimulus for the development of self-consciousness.
  Combining logical and intuitive approaches as a way to achieve a non-obvious result.
  Only a certain combination of these conditions, having a different degree of their expression, provides an opportunity to realize the potential abilities of a person inherent in his nature.
  If the human consciousness is the foundation of everything-insofar as it determines a person's activity as a living being-then what compels a person to manifest activity within that consciousness?
  Undoubtedly, the source of this activity is inevitably a dissatisfaction with the status quo, driving the individual to strive for something better-just as any living being seeks superior food, greater comfort, and a higher degree of safety. In a changing world, stagnation means-for any creature, including a person-falling out of the general flow of life onto the sidelines, followed by eventual dying (defeat, ruin, etc.) at the hands of competitors who have surged ahead.
  Without the dissatisfaction, any living being becomes a thing-that is, a passive object incapable of harboring aspirations, whether spontaneous or conscious.
  Naturally, the intensity with which dissatisfaction manifests determines a person's drive to express the abilities they feel they possess.
  The driving force behind a person-propelling a developmental acceleration unparalleled in any other species-lies in the fact that, alongside the capacity to act instinctively and reflexively to adapt to the environment (seeking food, reproduction, comfort, and advantages over others - dominance), a person have acquired the additional ability to consciously direct their actions toward altering that environment. In doing so, he within the framework of his community shapes own future across time, whereas all other beings-lacking a concept of time-exist essentially as entities distributed spatially across specific natural niches.
  In other words, the dissatisfaction within the human consciousness is channeled along two distinct paths: the instinctive-reflexive and that of self-consciousness.
  In other words, the human consciousness-unlike that of all other living beings-manifests as dual in nature: it is instinctive and reflexive, akin to that of animals, yet a person also possess self-consciousness in time. Over time, this awareness-coupled with cooperative action within communities-leads to verbal communication and abstract thought. This process automatically renders consciousness contradictory, as the animal component embodies a purely biological survival drive-characterized by specific forms of dissatisfaction-centered on nutrition, reproduction, comfort, and dominance in adapting to one's environment, all while relying on the part of the brain common to all animals, particularly its most ancient region: the limbic system.
  The part of consciousness that enables a person to act with deliberate planning-thereby anticipating the future-is most keenly interested in discovering the new; this allows for the improvement of life and the broadening of one"s horizons, while also providing novel sensations that foster a shift from egocentrism toward altruism, thereby facilitating interpersonal interaction. This property of consciousness, encoded in the genome, is primarily reflected in the cerebral cortex.
  Naturally, the human drive toward the new and the unknown often results in the collapse of all plans-or even poses a threat to life itself-therefore the animal component of consciousness, which remains steadfast in its urge to survive at any cost, inevitably resists such conscious intentions, compelling the individual to exercise caution, at the very least.
  The interaction between these two components of consciousness-one egocentric, the other largely altruistic-manifests as constant conflict, with agreement occurring only rarely, specifically when the bearer of that consciousness faces the very real possibility of death.
  In this constant struggle between the two components of consciousness, each strives to prevail by asserting its finest qualities; over time, the person's self-consciousness on the whole undergoes refinement. Consequently, the life of their communities transforms at an ever-accelerating pace, culminating in the emergence of civilization-with all the advantages it offers over animal communities.
  Yet, within this interaction, the natural (animal) component of consciousness remains-for the individual on the whole as in the form in which it was present at birth-unchanging, unlike self- consciousness, which is capable of development. At this, the primal component often exerts greater influence due to its antiquity and its honed perfection in addressing the challenge of survival.
  Thus, while human relationships based on self-consciousness continue to evolve, the animal component of the human consciousness remains constant and ineradicable; this makes it impossible to transform this semi-animal being into a perfect being living in a society free from conflict, violence, rivalry, envy, hatred, and malice.
  Consequently, ideal human beings do not emerge; instead, the animal component of consciousness-despite the ways its manifestations are often masked-remains active at every stage of self-consciousness. It manifests as ineradicable egoism (egocentrism)-both personal and corporate-as well as hypocrisy (concealment), suspicion (caution), contempt for those outside one"s own circle (distrust of other communities), animalistic instincts regarding the opposite sex, and so forth.
  As a result of this internal interaction between the two components of the human consciousness-the new one, characteristic only for a person in comparison with other living beings -the most effective driving force of communities of living beings (a force manifesting only in human societies), becomes neither evolution with its natural selection nor the artificial selection practiced within those societies, but the confrontation of both within the personality and within their communities between the animal form of consciousness and the self-aware form of consciousness.
  It is precisely this force that drives an unprecedented acceleration in the development of human communities - and the primary contribution to technological and cultural advancement comes from persons with outstanding abilities, as well as those that support the exercise of these abilities.
  The stimulus behind the development of the human consciousness is interest; the intensity of this interest-fueled by a sense of dissatisfaction with oneself-determines the personality's drive to express the abilities he senses within oneself.
  The thing is 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.
  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 with an initial image, attracting to itself.
  Now we note that the notion of the interest, which in translation from Latin (interest) means "to have value, to participate", in itself, could not but be recognized as the most important for life collisions.
  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" [2, p. 34].
  Thus, interest-defined as a recurring and, to some extent, conscious attraction to what is new to the individual within their current circumstances-inevitably acts as a stimulus driving a person toward the new and the unexplored; it compels a person to identify and utilize their existing abilities to satisfy the interest that has arisen.
  Such diverse interests encompass many purely utilitarian pursuits-ranging from creating personal comfort and traveling to reading engaging literature, achieving success in sports, following fashion, attending spectacles, and engaging in politics. These activities are characteristic of the vast majority of people, providing them with pleasure that is invariably linked to the influx of information that is, to some degree, new.
  However, when people focus primarily on such interests, they are effectively transformed from active agents into objects of external influence, often serving the interests of others-interests that may well be self-serving.
  Thereby the 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.
  These energetic, sensible, unprincipled and ruthless subjects-- parasites, entrenched in the top of power, guided by typical animal values (food, comfort, domination), due to the prevalence the aspirations of the animal component, by all means try to keep themselves in the seized niche of consumption at the expense of strength and/or deception (propaganda), which, as a rule, consists in that, what the imperious elite sincerely takes care of the people benefit, being based on continuous advance to democracy and freedom which, however, cannot be reached immediately, and the people should endure.
  Of course, as the history of development shows, people whose interest lies in eliminating such injustice-by harmonizing society to eradicate inequality-always rise up against this injustice, which is essentially perpetrated by the oppressors of everyone else.
  Yet the ruling elite that parasitizes the rest of society-along with its hangers-on and lackeys-possesses, however surprising it may seem to many, a positive quality: it creates a constant tension in society, which gives an impetus for its development, since the energetic part of these others always seeks to take the "bread" place of power or near power, and the cultural part, which understands the parasitic structure of power and its primitive values, always feels hatred for it and fights, as it can, with these parasites at power and inside power.
  In the process of this struggle, a force is created that moves the community forward, because the working people are being always more or less involved in the struggle of the ruling elite and its critics.
  In addition to the largely parasitic representatives of the power elite and its critics, there are always people in society whose interests are not limited to such utilitarian ones as the desire for power or the establishment of justice.
  They are most interested in the very process of identifying a new, preferably non-obvious for everyone else, that is, they are interested in some kind of unusualness that they do not understand, but would like to unravel, for example, by making a discovery in art, science or technology depending on their abilities.
  Dissatisfaction with self-awareness pushes such people to something transcendental, unrealistic, illogical, that is, what would show him and everyone around him originality, causing, first of all, respect for himself.
  When abilities and interests align, a resonance-like effect emerges. This leads such individuals to creative breakthroughs, enabling them to discover something truly novel in fields ranging from technology to the arts.
  However, success in realizing this type of interest can only be achieved by such individuals if they combine logical and intuitive approaches-with a distinct emphasis on moments of insight.
  This segment of any community prefers unconventional life situations, as it rejects approaches to life based solely on formal logic-finding such an existence dull and meaningless.
  They dislike abstract reasoning and logical constructs, tending to avoid analytical and synthetic mental work. All this can be used by them only after certain insights.
  Consequently, they find it easier to employ targeted self-awareness programs in conjunction with programs linked to the primal, animalistic aspect of consciousness-provided, of course, that such contradictory modes of consciousness can be reconciled-to rapidly and decisively alter a situation in line with their own vision.
  In other words, they prefer not long reflections, not a systematization of facts and phenomena, but spontaneous actions, or actions in which the set goal can be achieved at once, as if on a whim, although, of course, they have to work first in acquiring craft skills and gaining experience.
  It is from this kind of persons, as a rule, it is spontaneous striving for changes of everything by any means, that those who make discoveries, create masterpieces of poetry, painting, invention, become outstanding commanders are obtained. That is, their activities are mainly confined to creativity, which attracts them by no means from the point of view of consuming some benefits - they are interested in the process itself.
  Alas, the massively results of their activities are very mediocre in relation to the quality of what they sometimes produced, sometimes due to laziness and lack of experience, and often - stupidity and ignorance; but the defeats do not particularly bother them. They are pleased to use their talent or skill, often very mediocre to get a result without exerting much intellectual efforts.
  Nevertheless, it is among them that the creators of the new are found both in the field of technology and culture.
  Thus, for creative persons, one of the main incentives for development emerges - the aspiration to get out of the routine by searching for interesting things that correspond to the existing ideas of this creative person.
  In other words, the creative person is repelled by the status quo; the root of this state is a perpetual dissatisfaction with both self and surroundings within current circumstances.
  Naturally, this drives a quest for the non-existent and the untried-a pursuit of change that might bring something pleasant (or perhaps not), but which is invariably *new*: something that might unveil a mystery, offer an escape from life"s sordid aspects, and-precisely by virtue of differing from the daily grind-perhaps even lead to an understanding of the true essence of things and phenomena.
  It was shown above that dissatisfaction and interest, moreover, the latter is a regularly occurring and, to a certain extent, conscious drive toward the new within one's current circumstances, impel a person to identify and utilize their existing abilities to satisfy that emerging interest. Yet, how are these distributed under the influence of the two components of consciousness, ultimately resulting in an individual"s placement within a specific stratum of society?
  This is particularly pertinent given that it is impossible to explain this phenomenon through innate individual differences in the genome and brain structure, owing to the fact that these remain largely unexplored and lack any direct link to the division of society into distinct major strata.
  This was achieved neither by evolutionary biologist S. V. Savelyev-with his approach to reorganizing society by identifying varying levels of ability through specific research methods (notably brain scanning) that will restore order in society, having assigned people in such a way that it will correspond to their existing abilities [see 1, 3]., nor by B. F. Porshnev, whose theory posits that humanity does not constitute a single biological species but rather comprises several latent species with limited interbreeding potential that emerged during the formative stage of modern humanity [see 4].
  Turning to the views held by evolutionists regarding the identification and utilization of abilities based on brain structure-specifically through the scanning techniques proposed by Savelyev [see 1, 3]-the following points should be noted.
  By implementation of the cerebral sorting, some evolutionary physiologists, in essence, believe that each person should be "attached" to one or another occupation according to the results of previously identified abilities, laid in the structure of the brain, by certain techniques (a cerebral sorting). They consider similar "attachment" to occupation according to discovered potentially enhanced properties of these or those departments of a brain the benefit both for a person, and for society, since this selection will prevent or, at least, will postpone degradation of mankind.
  In fact, it is obvious that the considerations of the person himself who has undergone a brain scan, about the results of which he may not know, remain unaddressed at best (ignored), and at worst the person can be punished and can be ordered to do, what is told.
  It should be noted at once, that these good wishes of evolutionists that "each person after determining their abilities and the uniqueness of the brain design will be able to choose the most appropriate occupation" [3. Preface] will remain only well-meaning, i.e. the barren in the conditions of modern States, built on the exploitation of some people for the comfortable existence of other people, and not on providing each person with opportunities for the harmonious development.
  Nevertheless, it is assumed that the analysis of the brain structure using high-resolution X-ray tomography will become a method of in vivo analysis for objective selection of talents and geniuses with various types of giftedness, as well as a method of the objective assessment of a person"s innate abilities for planning the authentic fate to a person.
  The inadequacy of such approach to improving a person and betterment his communities from the position of the coverage of everybody and each, ostensibly for their own good, can be seen from the technical impossibility of the coverage more than 8 billion potential clients with expensive brain scanning techniques, that means the inevitable elitism of this process; which, even assuming similar coverage with this scan, also implies further development of the identified abilities, but it is very problematic. Equally problematic is the overcoming of difficulties after the discovery of a variety of "talents" in their "attachment" to job, since the job provided may cause an objection and even rejection from it of the individuals with talents.
  Besides, this approach to "improvement" of a person inevitably leads to artificial dissociation of people on the best and the worst, that is obvious talents and untalented persons. However, exactly the ordinary, but cunning individuals, as we know, mainly "get through" into the power, and they therefore will never allow dominations of talents, who besides and will not want "to flounder" in fetid ooze of only one increased consumption, which is characteristic of the imperious elite.
  This technology also actually assumes in the conditions of capitalism the introduction of their kind of serfdom onto abilities for people with the scanned brain which is inevitable as at all not the wisest and high-moral individuals, but ordinary crooks, who always are "creeping" dexterously into power, will direct this process. They will immediately spread unthinkable corruption in this matter, while they themselves will try to avoid scanning because of their apparent ordinariness, or they will tamper with own data.
  In essence, such approach restricts a person"s freedom, depriving him of his initiative in solving own problems. A person at similar artificial selection, which excludes his right to make mistakes, striving for the unattainable, falls into his own intellectual slavery, hindering the development of his consciousness, which is possible only in overcoming difficulties, regardless of intellectual abilities and professional inclinations.
  If nevertheless to allow emergence of similar technical capability of scanning of a brain, then realization such has to be especially private affair of each person, but, alas, it almost not realizable for all and everyone in the available conditions.
  Many people will not be interested in this procedure for religious reasons or because they are already self-confident and know what they should do; others, on the contrary, feeling lack of talent, do not wish to be completely convinced of this.
  The same people who will want to learn about their potential abilities should be provided with complete anonymity, since many will not wish to make public the findings, for example, because of their own modesty or secrecy, the inability to use them, as well as owing to disgust to the work, to which the increased abilities will be found for them. But such anonymity, as shown by current practice, does not work.
  The same who will wish to develop persistently found potential abilities need to give such opportunity in the form of additional educational courses, olympiads, competitions including competitions on the available jobs that is by all means connected with the corruption.
  In other words, this procedure should be completely separated from the state in the person of its officials, whose goals and objectives very rarely coincide with the goals and objectives of active citizens, which is currently very problematic.
  At last, even if to allow improbable - the coverage of all inhabitants of the planet a cerebral sorting and the choice by each of them of occupation, the most pleasant and perspective for oneself, and, effective for society, then the individual inequality of abilities, so, and opportunities to become famous, rise, etc. or opportunities to fall, in the opinion of surroundings, into the circle of blockheads, bastards, etc. will even more manifests the true (biological) inequality of people, hidden now under a mask of the enmity of the poor persons, who can be in considerable number clever, towards the rich, among which fools enough.
  This biological inequality will excite unquenchable envy and hatred of untalented persons to talents as the first will precisely know that they will never show talents that do not exist at all at them. At least therefore, the hopes of physiologists-evolutionists as well as hopes of Marxists for "berthing" civilization at certain efforts to the honey shores of the harmonious society and will remain unrealizable, whereas the lowest (animal) consciousness and the highest consciousness (self-consciousness) do not get to anywhere and, irrespective of existence and quality of abilities, will continue the fight in the case of existence of a human civilization, providing the accelerated development of the last for the time being.
  Non-recognition by biologists of a true picture of Creation, in which the main actor is consciousness, leads them to two senseless statements, one of which assumes destruction of the only force (consciousness) providing functioning and development of Creation in interaction of its warring parties, and another assumes the establishment of world harmony which is impossible owing to denial of any development by it.
  The mistake of the evolutionary biologists is the categorical assertion of the same Savelyev about the primacy in the process of development of mankind of solving biological problems: "The development of the social instincts and the artificial selection are aimed at solving biological problems, and not at the intellectual development of mankind. Progress, of course, is, but its purposes absolutely same, as well as at any soil worm. The main goal of a live organism consists in search of an infinite source of food, boundless reproduction and dominance at universal resettlement. In the solution of such tasks a brain - only the auxiliary tool which can be thrown out easily after successful use. For this reason, constantly arising encumbrances by excess of intelligence automatically are removed from community ... [3. Chapter 2] ... Objects of the biological evolution use the social revolution only for the solution of the food and reproductive interests, the world cataclysms are only ways of selection of a brain, and basic instincts and their derivative motivations always remain invariable" [3. Preface].
  The actual substitution of consciousness by its tool - a brain - leads the evolutionists, apparently from the fragment given above, to exaggeration of value of action of animal (lowest) consciousness in a person which is directed only to getting of food, ensuring reproduction and acquisition of advantages before the others, on the one hand.
  On the other hand, evolutionists do not wish to understand that the accelerated development of living beings began with the advent of self-consciousness at them (the highest consciousness) which began to compete with animal (lowest) consciousness both in the environment, and in the social relations creating the permanent antagonism of these consciousness forms, having, as a rule, contradictory interests, and, therefore, - a new driving force for their development, specific only to human communities, since human beings have two components of consciousness - the lowest, often called the unconscious or subconscious, and the highest consciousness, or self-consciousness, the level of which can vary significantly depending on the degree development of a person or his communities - take, for example, a Stone Age person and the current Nobel laureate, - the level of self-consciousness in both cases is significantly different, but self-awareness is present here and there, not disappearing anywhere, while the lowest consciousness, which is mainly responsible for the functioning of the organism (body) to keep it in a living state and by the adequate in relation to the body"s stay in environment, as well as for its fastening and expansion in it, remains virtually unchanged, that is, weakly dependent on time.
  Both these components of consciousness exist and act in the body and through the body in an inextricable connection, and the highest consciousness is unable to exist without the lowest, since the latter is responsible for the preservation of the living being in the environment, without what a life is impossible, and the highest consciousness - first of all, for consciously-project activity of a being both individually and in human communities in a certain environment, at this, without self-consciousness other natural beings are coped completely.
  It is these deep-seated entities in the form of the lowest consciousness and highest consciousness, are hidden and intertwined in each human consciousness, and, consequently, in the public consciousness, with all their antagonism because of the need to solve various problems, for the most part contradicting each other, and pursuing different predilections and interests, really determine the development of human communities at any stage.
  Along with that, the assertion that a person will turn into a monkey, if he will be presented to oneself as a community of similar beings, as an inevitable result of his biological development, looks even more awkward due to the fact, that self-consciousness, acquired the monkey-like creature, making this being already by the personality, that is, who understands own stay in time and, therefore, is aware on own mortality, cannot disappear even with the death of a person.
  Though the prevalence in general at mankind of the goals of the animal consciousness, especially in power structures, is obvious and cannot but threaten with grave consequences for its existence, all the more so since, it is paradoxically, all greater realization of these goals is supported by the advent of the technological novelties, especially Internet belittling self-consciousness and narrowing the scope of its action by the spread of artificial intelligence, that practically deprives the human community of the driving forces of development in the form of fight of the lowest and highest forms of consciousness.
  Be that as it may, the way out of this process of falling self-consciousness with the acceleration of the technological progress, - but without self-consciousness the emergence of civilization would not have been possible, - becomes more and more problematic because of the difficulties in "slowing down" of actions of basic (animal) consciousness, if such significant decrease in creativity occurs, substituted by the formal and logical approach, peculiar to artificial intelligence.
  However, an exit from this falling of creativity - the main property of consciousness - cannot be reduced to a cerebral sorting, on which is indicated By S. Saveliev, whose limitation and practical inapplicability in the developed public relations is obvious, but this exit consists in the process of updating, general for all mankind, with the reduction of all achievements of technical progress to zero. Especially, as S. Savelyev specifies, even "... the selection directed to identification and strengthening of the best qualities can with the equal probability lead both to progress, and to regress" [3, Chapter 2].
  If we turn to the theory of B.F. Porshnev [4].in this context, then in accordance with this theory, the difference in the types of people was laid down by collisions associated with cannibalism practiced in primitive times, which ultimately led to the manifestation of the essence of the consciousness of these ancient cannibals in the representatives of the ruling elite; as well as in imitators of their behavior in the form of all their more or less effective servants; in addition to them, there are people in modern society who showed themselves capable of resisting the pressure of these quasi-cannibals; whereas the victims of these quasi-cannibals are, for various reasons, the overwhelming majority of the population, therefore qualified by ordinary people (philistines), that is, by those sheep that are sheared by predators.
  Before identifying the source, necessary for the realization of natural abilities-and how these abilities influence becoming the structure of society, which is basically represented by the power elite and its associated personnel, the elite critics, the creative persons and the philistines, it is worth examining Porshnev"s theory in greater detail, which posits, that a person emerged from the animal world through a radical break with biological instincts, driven by "suggestion" and the transformation of ancient troglodytes essentially into an "anti-animal" being, for comparison for our own approach to the subject.
  According to Porshnev, the break with biological instincts has occurred through the suggestion, thanks to which paleoanthropes (human ancestors) opposed themselves to nature, denying the animal principle, and then people arose as a denial of their aggressive ancestors.
  However, in principle, a break with biological instincts is impossible due to their presence for the normal functioning of any living organism, and it did not occur, since the natural (animal) consciousness in a person has been completely preserved. This is indicated by the design of his brain, in the depths of which is his limbic part, which formed the basis of the brain of ancient lizards.
  Porshnev argued that necrophage was the basis of the hominid nutrition.
  But cannibalism, still present in backward tribes, points to it not as the basis for feeding these tribes, but as a consequence of the destruction of rivals in the struggle for limited resources, and these rivals, so that good does not disappear, as a result of victory simply disappear into the stomachs of the winners.
  Porshnev believed that the emergence of speech is not associated with thinking, but with suggestion and prohibitions, with the help of which one part of the population suppressed and used the other.
  The fact that this is not so is evidenced by the fact of the presence of developed thinking in animals and insects, helping them communicate on the basis of various kinds of signals, in particular, for obtaining food and reproduction (dolphins, ants, bees), which in a person was transferred to a higher level due to his awareness of the fact that through speech it is easier and more effective to work collectively already in the expanded development of his own environment, consciously changing it for his own purposes, and not only adapting to it.
  That is, the self-consciousness inherent in a person and requiring his participation in the conscious transformation of own surrounding could not be limited only signals in the process of collective labor, which was based already no only on instincts and reflexes.
  Therefore, the wordless, imaginative reflection of objects, phenomena and relationships in the course of collective efforts to change their own environment was gradually transformed into images in the form of words in the mind by the appropriate encoding,
  the combination of which gave not only the concept of specific objects and phenomena, but also generalized them, supplementing a person's thinking with abstract concepts, which in itself led him in the end to technology, art and science.
  In the future, the transfer of words to one or another storage medium made it possible to preserve the past and see even the distant future.
  And the information itself for us is basically a word, manifesting itself not only as a symbol of an object, that is, in the form of diverse and numerous sound reflections of images of certain objects (phenomena) or a certain set of objects (tree - forest), but also as a living image of a changing reality, removing a person from the monotonous animal well-fed life in which nothing significant happens.
  Therefore, the meaningful pronunciation of articulate sounds, concretely or abstractly reflecting the objective world with all its relationships, had transferred the living world, represented by beings who possess words, from being in the space of unconscious connections of objects and phenomena to the world of meaningful actions to change this world for their own purposes [5].
  Porshnev tried to prove argued that Homo sapiens and Neanderthals coexisted in the same communities, and the part of Homo sapiens served as food for the Neanderthals who created Homo sapiens, and this was reflected later, in particular, in the existence of a culture of sacrifices, but then, at a certain level of development, Homo sapiens (a person) destroyed Neanderthals. A relic of this stratification leads to the fact that in society some people consider others nonhumans.
  Of course, there was a struggle between individual populations to devour the vanquished, but this cannot be only one basis for progress, the appearance of speech and all that, although, of course, as indicated above, one part of people who own the egocentrism of animal consciousness, in essence, behaves like predators in relation to the rest.
  In other words, despite individual cases of devouring by some others, a person did not appear to feed anyone, as it happens in an animal world, divided into predators and a herd, but a person appeared for the transition of the delayed development of living beings within the framework of adaptation to the environment to the stage of accelerated development, which is characterized by going beyond the limits of only one adaptive strategy to the scope of conscious development of the environment, giving the basis for the emergence of the desire to know the world and its reflection in art, that in itself not only expands the cognitive abilities of the human consciousness.. but also makes its sensitivity thinner and unlike the richer in volume and deeper in penetration of experiences.
  The stratification of human communities into distinct layers-some of which were clearly antagonistic-did not arise from the emergence of *Homo sapiens* (neoanthropes) from Neanderthals; but it stemmed from fundamental differences in the individual consciousness. In some individuals, the animal component-rooted in the limbic system and its inherent egocentrism-dominated consciousness, whereas in others, self-consciousness-with its associated altruism, grounded in specific regions of the cerebral cortex-prevailed.
  Furthermore, Porshnev overlooked the primary engine of progress, characterizing the population merely as a predatory ruling elite and a "herd" that, to some extent, opposed those predators.
  This instrument of progress is the creative part of the population, which discovers and seeks out a new that-constantly and with accelerating speed-steer human life into a course of continuous change, affecting both interpersonal connections and the cultural-technological landscape.
  Nevertheless, Porshnev quite adequately noted humanity"s persistent aspiration to move away from its partly animal nature-a trend reflected in the progress of human history-yet he failed to observe that this internal struggle stems from the interaction between the animal component of consciousness (characterized by egocentrism) and self-consciousness (characterized by altruism), during which not only the self-consciousness of man develops, but also the accelerated development of mankind takes place.
  At the same time, however, Porshnev failed to notice that the stratum of the power elite naturally emerges from society through the segregation of individuals in whom the "animal" component of consciousness, characterized by egocentrism, predominates over altruistic self-consciousness; nor did he observe that people dominated by altruistic self-consciousness-who loathe this predatory elite-are simultaneously and automatically set apart from the rest of society, resulting in a perpetual struggle between these strata that drives societal development; furthermore, he overlooked the presence, in any reasonably developed society, of creative individuals who drive scientific, technological, and cultural progress.
  The considerations outlined above-along with the failure of Savelyev and Porshnev to successfully account for the distribution of the population into strata based on brain structure (which Savelyev insists is the sole determinant of ability) or the collisions associated with cannibalism practiced in primitive times, as the basis that determined the entire development of mankind, as Porshnev is trying to prove, imply that this problem can currently be resolved only by acknowledging a person acquisition of a dual consciousness, with dissatisfaction lying at the core of both its components.
  In particular, the difference between creative people and all others is that their actions are based on the most intense dissatisfaction of the animal (lowest) component of consciousness, which requires dominating among their own kind, since there are certain abilities, interest and opportunities, and self-consciousness (highest consciousness) in this case agrees with the lowest, supporting it in this aspiration for the duration of insight.
  At the same time, the dissatisfaction of the highest consciousness (self-consciousness) of a creative person by the imbalance in this sphere of creativity, although inferior the palm to the other component of the human consciousness, is expressed with the greatest possible completeness in its demand for the most harmonious structure of elements of this sphere and, therefore, - to the most adequate at this stage the explanation of their functioning for the benefit of society.
  If similar ratio of the animal component of consciousness and self-consciousness is not achieved, then the presence of any degree of natural talent is not able to move this person to creative activity. At best, this personality will be an excellent assistant to a creative person in a particular field of activity.
  If such balance between the animal component of consciousness and self-consciousness is achieved, yet no exceptional giftedness is evident, the individual will still strive for creative activity. However, their creative success will be quite modest, or their achievements will amount to little more than combinatorics, rationalization, or the organization of various processes.
  In cases where the intense dissatisfaction stemming from the animal component of consciousness-with its inherent egocentrism and drive to dominate the surrounding-combines with a low level of altruism in self-consciousness, and provided these individuals possess 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 which is 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.
  In other words, whatever abilities these power-seekers may possess are directed entirely toward acquiring and retaining power by any means necessary. They care about nothing else, regardless of whether they are brilliant or foolish. Napoleon stands out as the prime example of such "geniuses," while King Louis XIII-famously depicted in Dumas"s *The Three Musketeers*-serves as the quintessential foolish ruler.
  With rare exceptions, it is precisely these types of people who make up the ruling elite of any state. Their frequent lack of intelligence, sense of impunity, and refusal to acknowledge their own mistakes hinder social progress and can even lead to regression.
  Nevertheless, the fact that these figures in power and administration are all but impossible to dislodge-owing to the reality that virtually only such vile individuals manage to break into the structures of authority-also has a positive aspect: their actions generate societal tension and foster a critical public mood, compelling those in power to enact reforms to avoid losing their grip, or else precipitating unrest, coups, riots, and even revolution.
  In fact, a critical stance is fostered by another distinct group of individuals, characterized by a specific form of dual consciousness.
  In these persons, a relatively low level of dissatisfaction of the "animal" component of their consciousness-and a correspondingly reduced drive for dominance-is combined with a high level of altruism in their self-consciousness. In addition, these individuals possess sufficient 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.
  Thus, they are characterized by a profound dissatisfaction with the status quo-a state of mind that fosters a high degree of altruism. Consequently, they inevitably take issue with the injustices of a society dominated by unworthy figures, and they naturally desire to resolve societal contradictions and bring about social harmony.
  Such opposition figures and critics of the authorities are typically engaged in intellectual work-comprising various types of intellectuals as well as a relatively small number of individuals from the general population who have managed to elevate their consciousness to a level that compels them to loathe the immoral and self-serving behavior of the ruling elite.
  They are convinced of the righteousness of their struggle for the public good, yet they are not always critical of their own ideas, which are largely utopian.
  Consequently, these altruistic oppositionists channel all their abilities-which, judging by historical examples, can be considerable-into the fight for justice, dividing themselves into revolutionary practitioners and theorists who underpin this struggle with a variety of theories, ranging from Plato and his ideal state to Karl Marx-the ideologue of a communist paradise-and Prince P. A. Kropotkin, the principal ideologue of anarchism, who advocated for equality within a framework of self-government (see, for instance, his work *Anarchy: Its Philosophy, Its Ideal*).
  Alas, the vast majority of the world's population-particularly in the Third World-has essentially lacked the conditions necessary to develop self-consciousness over the last few millennia. Moreover, the needs stemming from the animalistic aspect of their consciousness find little satisfaction in the wretched, hunger-stricken existence from which they cannot get out.
  Due to this sad state, which aggravates the practical lack of access to education, the level of their self-Alas, the vast majority of the world's population-particularly in the Third World-has essentially lacked the conditions necessary to develop self-consciousness over the last few millennia.
  Consequently, their dreams are limited to simply feeding themselves and their children to satiety. Even if they possess certain talents, they lack the opportunities to realize them.
  Due to this weakness of consciousness, they can be classified as philistines.
  This group also includes the philistines of developed nations, who, of course, enjoy a better standard of living. Yet, they lack the desire and the drive to break into a truly cultured stratum-one determined by interests that go beyond the purely consumerist.
  The reason for this is the weak development of self-consciousness and the low level of the animal component of consciousness, provoking a lack of determination, strong will and mood for a radical change in their existence.
  In conclusion, it should be noted that the aforementioned distribution of abilities across four primary population strata-based on the duality of consciousness-reveals that the most exceptional abilities (extending to genius-level intellect), which drive humanity"s scientific, technological, and cultural advancement, belong to a relatively small number of creative individuals. A fundamental characteristic of these individuals-and the source of their creativity-is an innate quality of consciousness: the ability to combine a high level of logical reasoning with an even greater potential for intuitive insight depending on the appropriate combination of the level of dissatisfaction of self-consciousness and dissatisfaction of the animal component of consciousness.
  It follows that speculations positing that creativity in all its manifestations is driven solely by a brain structure developed in specific ways are unfounded; for a person lacking the combination of a high level of dissatisfaction of self-consciousness and an even greater degree of dissatisfaction of the animal component of consciousness-even if possessed of a unique brain structure seemingly conducive to successful creation in a particular sphere of existence-will show no desire to create, but will instead limit themselves, at best, to processing and utilizing the achievements of truly creative personalities.
  Therefore, the search for talent and genius based on an analysis of brain structure-which, according to the renowned evolutionary biologist S. A. Savelyev, would identify a cohort of geniuses and sort individuals according to their innate abilities-will yield nothing on its own; that is, it will in no way "produce" geniuses. Like talented individuals, geniuses emerge spontaneously, driven by a dominant and unquenchable interest in creative activity-an interest stemming from a profound dissatisfaction of their self-consciousness and an even deeper dissatisfaction of the animal component of their consciousness.
  Such persons reveal themselves only through their actions; and their success, of course, depends on a specific configuration of brain structures that grants them an advantage over everyone else in a particular field of endeavor.
  In other words, without the aforementioned combination of dissatisfaction of both forms of consciousness, a truly unique brain structure will not drive its possessor to work intensely and demonstrate extraordinary abilities in a field as demanding and complex as high-level creative activity; conversely, individuals with unremarkable brain structures-but who possess that same combination of dissatisfaction in both forms of consciousness-are invariably drawn to creative pursuits, distinguishing themselves as organizers and innovators in technology and everyday life, and while they do not attempt to fundamentally alter the foundations of science, technology, or art, they nonetheless make significant contributions to the creation and improvement of living conveniences.
  
  Bibliography
  
  1. Savelyev S. V. Variability and genius. Moscow. VEDI. 2018.
  2. Helvetius A. De I'Esprit, or Essays on the Mind and its Several Faculties by Helvetius. 1807. Google Books.
  3. С. В. Савельев. Церебральный сортинг. Издательство: ВЕДИ. 2016.
  4. Porshnev B. F. (2003-11-08). On the Biginning of Human History (Problems of Paleopsychology. Moscow. Mysl. Main Editorial Office of Socio-Economic Literature. 1974.
  5. Nizovtsev Yu. M. Word and Deed (collection of the most unusual). Part 1. Why is there no a matter without a word? 2025. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Amazon. (C) Yury Nizovtsev.
  
 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"