Home

Mission

Contents

News

Links

Authors

About Us

Publications

Harmony Forum

Peace from Harmony
What is the second axial time meaning at the wind rose geopolitical crossroad of XXI century world history?




Spheronics: True Peace Megascience

Contents: https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1129



Foreword

What is the second axial time meaning at the wind rose geopolitical crossroad of XXI century world history?

By

Leo Semashko, Ken Leslie, Andrey Smirnov, Rudolf Siebert, Matt Meyer,

Bishnu Pathak, Lucas Pawlic

 

Publication:

In English: https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1130
In Russian: https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=ru_c&key=1029

 

At this critical moment, the humanity is o­n the verge of a collective nuclear demise. Its probability has reached 999 chances out of a thousand, according to American nuclear scientists, who o­n the Doomsday clock of its life left o­nly 90 seconds out of a day, (Mecklin, 2023) makes o­ne think of the "second axial time" according to the hypothesis of Karl Jaspers (1996). If the first axial time in his philosophy of history is determined by the transition / turn from mythological to rational thinking in the period 800-200 BC, then what is the cognitive and social-geopolitical meaning of the second axial time as a new transitive period in the world history? What crossroad of strategic vectors, possibilities of world history have been created by the geopolitical wind/trends rose over the past century, which is forcing humanity to a social and mental turn of the second axial time?

The first, most dangerous and pressing, best prepared and therefore the most sharp, is the trend of the humanitys race towards a nuclear genocide, towards WWIII. Many experts believe that it began a long time ago, but some attribute its beginning to the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki immediately after the victory over Hitler's Third Reich. And others again - by 2014, to the genocide beginning of the Donbass Russian population, the thirds - by the beginning of Russia's special military operation in Ukraine against the collective West, which moved its NATO war machine to western border of Russia.

Hitler began to invent nuclear weapons in order to achieve Germany's revanche for the defeat in the WWI 1914-1918, the baton of which was retained and raised to the highest strategic level by the USA. As a result of the nuclear race which has lasted almost 80 years, nine nuclear powers emerged, whose combined arsenals are more than sufficient for the repeated destruction of all life o­n the planet. Far from slowing down, this process is now rapidly accelerating. Now scientists are left wondering how much time is left before nuclear Armageddon?

Some, nuclear scientists, assume 90 seconds, o­ne chance in a thousand. Others talk about 30 seconds (Tremblay, 2017), the third o­nes limit it by two clicks to midnight (Ken Leslie, 2020), the fourth o­nes claim the complete inevitability of nuclear war within "A Nano-Second to Midnight", (Paul Craig Roberts, 2023), etc. The International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) co-chair, a cardiologist from the United States, Bernard Lown, in his Nobel lecture, determined that nuclear weapon is holding the entire world hostage and threatens everyone with continuously targeted for extinction... we are already living in the rubble of World War III. (Lown, 1985). Another Nobel laureate, the GGHA member and coauthor of spheronics John Avery defines nuclear weapons as "absolute evil, incompatible with the life of humanity" (Avery, 2017). The assessments compendium of world evils nuclear weapons contains the Anti-Nuclear Manifesto (GGHA/ICAN, 2020).

The second geopolitical trend of the last century world history is the high probability of a decades-long war of civilizations o­n various grounds in different global formats. The religious ground of this vector has been defined as a "Clash of Civilizations" (Huntington, 1996). In the context of geopolitical competition for world domination within this trend, many experts defined it as the "Thucydides Trap" by analogy with the almost 30-year Peloponnesian war between Athens and Sparta in ancient Greece (Allison, 2012; Kant, 2020; Brenner, 2023; and others). Many experts deny the validity and relevance of this paradigm for modern geopolitics (Nye, 2017; and others). Nevertheless, the clash of the West and Russia nuclear civilizations in Ukraine, as well as the growing likelihood of a long-term military confrontation between the USA and China for global economic dominance, confirm the acceptability of similar structure for this trend.

The third vector, unlike the first two, is ambivalent. o­n the o­ne hand, this is a hidden, "undercover" and secret war, and o­n the other hand, it is a "false peace" or "lasting, long, durable, extended (etc.) but time-limited peace. It is located at the intersection of peace and war, constituting their symbiosis, the combination of the incompatible. The traditional linguistic terms for its expression: "lasting, durable, stable, strong, persistent (etc.) peace" mask its militaristic essence and contradictory nature, which can be defined in such centauric terms as "military peace" or "peace war" and etc.

Here, under the camouflage of peace, there is an o­ngoing confrontation, enmity, hatred, split, antagonism, arms race, violence substance, secret preparations for new wars, which will certainly, with iron necessity, be revealed by an open bloody war, albeit after a long time. This "peace" filled the world history of the last millennia after the "golden age" of true peace, which excluded all war. If "lasting peace" is not "eternal", "global", "absolute", "authentic", etc. (see the fourth vector below) then it turns out to be false, half-and-half, NOT true and NOT eternal. This is the trend of war under the camouflage of peace. Of course, it is better for society than the open war of the second trend, but it is deceptive and peacemaking hopeless as today. It seems to be peace and defines itself by peace but it cherishes, feeds the war. It cannot be unequivocally characterized either as peace or as war in the full sense of these concepts, which in this trend are distributed within the fifty-fifty frame, fraught with a fall into an open, full, 100% war.

The third geopolitical trend of world history as "lasting peace" was established, according to the ruling minority, after the WWII end. It is recognized by ruling elite as almost the pinnacle of human progress and "the end of history" (Fukuyama, 1992; Pinker, 2011, 2018; and others). This is o­ne of the most persistent delusions of the modern liberal thought, contradicting all the facts of world history after WWII, which is a continuous series of 37 local wars, almost every two years - a war, with a total number of victims of 20-30 million (Lucas, 2015, 2018). The third trend is an endless and growing arms race, especially nuclear o­nes. This is a break between the world wars and preparations for a new world war, the fuse of which has long been kindled in Ukraine since 2014 (Chomsky, 2014, 2016, etc.; Diana Johnstone, 2014, 2022).

Therefore, similar lasting peace can be defined differently as false, temporary, deceptive and illusory, with a global suicide agenda (Engdahl, 2022) and with globalization of war in long war against humanity (Chossudovsky, 2009, 2011, 2016, etc.) it is impossible. Its perverted, pathological essence was recognized long ago and brilliantly expressed by George Orwell (1949) by the following well-known aphorism: in it "war became peace, falsehood became truth, freedom became slavery, and ignorance became strength." This trend of world geopolitics over the past almost 80 years has revealed its militaristic, pathological identity to the first two vectors, fatal to humanity, which are widely reproduced o­nly by the third geopolitical trend of the false, lasting peace (Semashko, 2005, 2017, 2023, etc.).



The history law of false, lasting peace since the beginning of the 20th century is: any similar peace ends in the world wars, at least in Europe. A long peace until 1914 led to the WWI. The Treaty of Versailles, following its results in 1919-1937, led to the WWII 1939-1945. The Yalta Peace concluded in February 1945, legally formalized in Potsdam in July 1945, already in August of this year proved its falsity with the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In 2014 within it actually was ignited the WWIII in Ukraine with the highest probability of nuclear Armageddon. (Helga Zepp-LaRouche, 2023).

The fourth geopolitical trend of world history, which has not had any geopolitical manifestation to this day in global politics but having expression in people's expectations and dreams "so that there is no war", as well as in ingenious conjectures and intuitions of the prominent thinkers and political leaders throughout past history, is true, perpetual, absolute, divine, genuine, etc. peace". It is represented by such geniuses as Buddha, Numa Pompilius, Ashoka the Great, Pythagoras, Confucius, Jesus Christ, Daniel of Moscow, Erasmus Roterodamus, Gottfried Leibniz, Immanuel Kant, Benjamin Rush, Feodor Dostoyevsky, Leo Tolstoy, Maxim Kovalevsky, Emile Durkheim, Mahatma Gandhi, Albert Einstein, John Kennedy, Martin L. King, Nelson Mandela, Nicolai and Helena Roerich and many others. Their ideas will be presented in our textbook, which is dedicated to the first and o­nly, the Gandhian, true peace science - spheronics.

Although the true peace trend is absent today in geopolitical practice and theory our goal is to fundamentally substantiate it as o­nly survival of humanity and its way out of the nuclear impasse based o­n the innovative peacemaking science of spheronics, presented at the elementary level in our primer. There is no other way for humanity to survive. (Semashko. The History and UN Bifurcation Point: Death in False Peace or Life in True Peace? IPRA, 2023, Volume 13, Issue 1: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vRMjAF5ooAe3p1fGTItMFHbekKf6uwyhEmpgDATqk6u4gApjKUf1VqH-swsjbj4p64PpPF6pAk0_V_d/pub)

Four different trends of the geopolitical "wind rose" are shown in Figure 1.


(If you can't see the text of the picture well, then increase its size.)


In the world history geopolitical trends spectrum since the XX century beginning, the third is the most powerful, controversial and insidious, bringing humanity as close as possible to its nuclear end. The o­nly from them that ensures the survival and sustainable development of humanity is the fourth, embryonic trend of true peace, which lived o­n an intuitive level throughout world history with the most prominent thinkers, which will be presented in our textbook below.

The first three geopolitical trends of world history demonstrate the exhaustion of the non-holistic, disciplinary, positivist thinking and the corresponding historical vector since the first axial time and have led humanity to a dead end of nuclear suicide. None of these three vectors contains or offers any way out of it, which is o­nly in the turn towards the trend of the deep, sociogenetic true peace at the modern crossroads of world history, prepared since the 20th century beginning.

Many philosophers and scientists have predicted the need for similar axial turn in both thinking and history since this time. Obviously, Albert Einstein realized it most clearly and briefly more than 70 years ago. We can say that he formulated two laws, social and cognitive, for the new axial time. The social law says: "Peace cannot be achieved through violence [war], it can o­nly be attained through understanding", i.e. through true peace science, which does not yet exist, but which is existentially necessary for humanity and which began to be created in the GGHA spheronics for the past 18 years (Semashko and GGHA, 2002, 2017, 2023, etc.). o­nly spheronics makes true peace, the fourth geopolitical trend of world history by the subject of its widest scientific, sociological and philosophical research, which reveals the o­nly reasonable and acceptable to all peoples non-violent overcoming and displacement of all three world history militaristic trends.

Einstein's cognitive law states: The significant problem we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created it. [Therefore] we shall request a fundamentally new manner of thinking if humanity is to survive. In fact, Einstein defines here the natural necessity of the second axial time, i.e. turn / transition from traditional rational, partial, positivist and disciplinary broken thinking to a substantially new, integrated and holistic thinking by new categories of social integrity, which are determined by spheronics and will be disclosed in the subsequent paragraphs of our primer. Vernadsky also confirms this cognitive law, emphasizing that the new, holistic thinking in categories similar to his category "noosphere" is "not a crisis disturbing weak souls but the greatest turning point [Rubicon] of human thought making o­nly o­nce a millennium".

Only the fourth geopolitical vector of world history corresponds to this law and the historical requirement of the second axial time relevant to true peace and its scientific understanding in spheronics, to which our primer-dialogue to overcome the total peacemaking ignorance in it.

The fundamental significance and highest intellectual meaning of this first textbook in history is determined by the fundamental significance of true peace for the survival and sustainable development of humanity.


       Dr. Leo Semashko, Russia,

Dr. Ken Leslie, Britain,

Dr. Andrey Smirnov, Russia,

Dr. Rudolf Siebert, USA,

Dr. Matt Meyer, USA,

Dr. Bishnu Pathak, Nepal, 
        Dr. Lukas Pawlik, Austria

12-05-23

------------------------------

Our Primer-Peace Dialogue (PPD) needs the most effective, open and solidary format of the DIALOGUE "PRO AND CONTRA" of Socratic cognitive maieutics in Durkheims "collective consciousness" in order to jointly seek and "give birth" SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING OF TRUE PEACE in the XXI century axial time to survive humanity through its peaceful exit from the nuclear suicide impasse. Therefore, the section Dialogue: Pro and Contra should become a priority part of our PPD in each of its paragraphs.

 

Dialogue: Pro and Contra

 

1.Ken Leslie, London, Britain: https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1128

Figure 1 might be misleading because there are no four independent vectors pointing away from each other but two, pointing AT each other.

Leo Semashko, St-Petersburg, Russia: https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=253

- This conclusion is devoid of ground and arguments, and therefore it is not clear what two vectors/trends pointing at each other are we talking about? To peace or to war? Or where else?

 

2. Ken Leslie.

The lasting peace paradigm is considered imperfect and false. I feel you need to explain why this is the case. o­ne could argue that this kind of peace is realistic and the best we can aim for. Hinduism (one of the most spiritually developed and peaceful religions) teaches us that epochs of peace are succeeded by eras of strife and destruction. How can o­ne negate one of the most obvious laws of nature?One could point out the horrors of nuclear warbut this is an old argument and much less general than your thesis.

Leo Semashko.

- There are several objections or counterarguments here.

1. There is no explanation for the trend or the false, lasting peace paradigm.

True, it was not in the Foreword first edition but after your remark, it appeared in its second edition, read it. We are very grateful to you for this counter-argument.

2. "False, lasting peace" - real, "the best we can aim for."

- Yes, this is real peace for the entire past history of immature humanity after its forgotten "golden age" without wars. But this does not mean that it is the best, because it was rightly criticized by many geniuses of humanity and because we still do not know WHICH peace is the best? Without similar knowledge, everything can be declared to be the best: walking when we do NOT know other ways to move in space; herbal treatment when we do NOT know other ways of treatment; Ptolemy's geocentrism is recognized as the best for 1800 years, when humanity does NOT know Copernicus' heliocentrism, and so o­n. o­nly the peace scientific theory is able to prove WHICH peace is better in comparison of all its possible paradigms and trends. But there is still NO such science in humanity. It has been trying to develop, with general resistance from all sides, by the GGHA during 18 years, since 2005 in the Spherons Global/True Peace Megascience, briefly in Spheronics. To do this, it created a classification of geopolitical trends or peace paradigms in connection with the inseparable opposite of war, presented in the Foreword Figure 1. Could you suggest an alternative classification of peace in relation to war to argue for the "best peace" possible?

3. Philosophical counter-argument of Hinduism with its teaching of the change of eras of peace and discord/destruction.

- The first ancient Greek philosopher-pluralist Empedocles developed a similar natural philosophy of changing the eras of love, connection and harmony of four equally necessary arches, i.e. four natural elements/spheres (earth, water, air, fire/sun) and their hatred, enmity and separation. As in Hinduism, the pluralism of Empedocles concerns the entire divine universe, the universe as a whole and is not limited to society, which is always full of all kinds of connections and separations in religion, culture, politics, economics, in human, especially personal and family relationships, etc. This is a private conflict, and not a general o­ne that has the attribute of necessity, without which the society life is impossible. Therefore, the change of war and peace in society is by no means one of the most obvious laws of nature but just a special and temporary case of an immature, ignorant society that has not grown up to scientific, true knowledge that answers the question: how to exclude and prevent the social partial pathology of war? It is capable in our time to destroy humanity as a whole by a partial but massive destruction of nuclear weapons. When humanity masters the relevant science (spheronics), then the prevention and exclusion of war from the society life will not be a problem for it. Therefore, this argument does not work "contra".

 

3. Ken Leslie.

How can we know that perfect [true] peace is even possible since it has never been achieved and conflict represents a sine qua non of the human nature. The notion of peace would not exist (and could not be named) without its opposite. This is a fundamental dialectic that seems unavoidable. In this sense, I would view perfect [true] peace in the same way that I would view any noble utopian idea that strives for perfection. All utopias are about this ideal state of permanent peace.

Leo Semashko.

- Different levels of thinking are again erroneously mixed up: private, disciplinary, broken and holistic, transdisciplinary and connected. It has already been said above: if humanity DOES NOT KNOW true peace, then it cannot be achieved and is IMPOSSIBLE for humanity. The exceptions are its rare, intuitive and spontaneous incarnations in some civilizations of the "golden age", like ancient India (Gandhi) or the Minoan civilization of ancient Crete (Eisler). Recognize war as the eternal, necessary conflict and driving opposite of society it is to elevate its particular evil and pathology to universal source of its life. Can we recognize partial diseases of the human body organs as an eternal and necessary source of its health? Is this an absurdity identical to the recognition of war as an eternal and necessary source of peace and society? A rhetorical question. This is not a real social dialectic of society but a limited, disciplinary dialectic of ignorance of its holistic, transdisciplinary and structurally fundamental dialectics of spheres/spherons, revealed in spheronics megascience in the subsequent paragraphs of our primer.

It is utopian o­nly to that level of undeveloped (false) knowledge, to which the integral true dialectics knowledge of society is still inaccessible, just as the heliocentrism truth seemed by utopia to the geocentrism delusion. The social cognition is still at the level of false consciousness and repeats a similar delusion of geocentric astronomy, from which it will be freed o­nly with the knowledge of the necessary, "Newtonian", according to Gandhi, fundamental law of the true peace without war and violence as a social pathology. But in its pre-scientific era, such questions and counterarguments are fully justified stimulating the true peace knowledge as the necessary and o­nly reality of a mature society and its mature, holistic science, its humanitarian, "second culture" according to Charles Snow. You can't get rid of them by their easy and simple qualification as "utopian". With them, a long and persistent cognitive work of all scientists of the social science pool in our century is ahead, in order to prevent the human nuclear suicide o­n its last edge by the true peace scientific knowledge acceptable to all nations as any scientific truth.

 

4. Ken Leslie.

In his book The better angels of our nature, Steven Pinker argues that the things have been getting better in the sense that proportionally fewer people have died in modern wars relative to the past o­nes. I disagree with him o­n several grounds but his statistics are there to be inspected. It might be a good idea to substantiate your argument that things are getting worse using some solid data and/or arguments (and I believe you are correct of course).

Leo Semashko.

- Pinker is a well-known liberal American ideologist who justifies and embellishes the USA aggressive militaristic policy. Therefore, his conclusion that the world has become better because the number of military casualties has decreased is biased, contrary to historical post-war facts and his statistics are clearly false when compared with statistics of honest scientists: Lucas, Chossudovsky and others. Spheronics has been developing for a long time, since 1980, created own, integral "global statistics", which statistically verifies this science truth o­n any social object, arguing the possibility and necessity of true peace with reliable, unbiased statistical data. To the spheronics global statistics, presented in the corresponding GGHA book "Gandhica" (2019) in four languages, will be devoted a special paragraph of our peacemaking primer-dialogue. The key argument that "things/peace" is extremely bad, ignored by Pinker, is the impending total nuclear genocide of humanity in 90 seconds away, according to the nuclear scientists. Some perverse apologists of false peace like Pinker are even inclined to recognize the absolute evil of nuclear weapons as a strategic factor that ensures peace, prevents war ... Everything, as in Orwell, war becomes peace, there is nothing more to say here ...

 

5. Ken Leslie.

The axial time analogy is good but needs some discussion. Jaspers called it the Axial Age and according to Wikipedia, he described it as an interregnum between two ages of great empire, a pause for liberty, a deep breath bringing the most lucid consciousness. In other words, the Axial Age is a key period, an underground cognitive revolution, within which the historical stasis of the current framework is challenged by an uncoordinated flowering of novel ideas, which presage a new paradigm.

Leo Semashko.

- You are absolutely correct in defining Jaspers' Axial Age as "a key period, an underground cognitive revolution, within which the historical stasis of the current framework is challenged by an uncoordinated flowering of novel ideas, which presage a new paradigm." The second axial time, which in our opinion began at the last century beginning is essentially identical to the first, but differs from it in fundamentally new attributes of the transition from disciplinary, partial thinking to transdisciplinary and holistic thinking with substantially new concepts. Naturally, since the last century beginning, according to your brilliant definition, it has been uncoordinated flowering of novel ideas, which presage a new paradigm" in the form of spheronics, integrating and coordinating in synergy the ideas of true peace, heralding a new paradigm. o­nly similar thinking provides a social transition from a militaristic, corporatist (Atkinson) civilization to a peaceful, nonviolent civilization. So here your remark turns into a strong contribution to it, which deserves high appreciation and sincere gratitude. The idea of the second axial time has something in common with many modern ideas of social and political "reset" of different societies, which we will not touch o­n here.

 

6. Ken Leslie.

I look forward to seeing your arguments that present a practical case for achieving a perfect [true] peace What kind of political/social system is amenable to achieving a permanent [true] peace?... Thank you for giving me the opportunity to think o­n these important issues. For me, a lot depends o­n your theory of Spheronics. Ill wait to read about it before I can pass judgment o­n the scholarly merits of your proposal. At the same time, I admire and fully support your lofty aims, your passion for peace and your concern for the future of humanity

Leo Semashko.

- We are sincerely grateful to you for the honest attitude of a true scientist to our theory of Spheronics, for your deep interest in its development, for your new paradigm premonitions of the new axial time in it. Your numerous remarks and counterarguments, far from being exhausted in this dialogue, are permeated with openness and goodwill and are associated with large-scale cognitive and social expectations from this fundamental scientific theory. To the answer to your question: "What kind of political/social system is amenable to achieving a permanent [true] peace?" you will find in several paragraphs of our peacemaking primer, so I won't get ahead of myself. Your dialogue with the ideas of this theory illustrates its enormous benefit and effect for it, as well as for everyone, especially for you, as you emphasized. Thank you so much for this brilliant intellectual dialogue!

 

Andrey Smirnov. Novgorod, Russia, https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=813

Sharing the Forewords author values and vision we cannot fail to note the absence of o­ne of the most important conditions for the positive resolution of contradictions, the so-called. "second axial time" of human development. The author concludes that the "second axial time" is "the transition from traditional, positivist and disciplinary broken thinking to a substantially new, integral and holistic thinking with the categories of social integrity of spheres, spherons and the noosphere of humanity." Here, the main attention is paid to the new content of thinking, but qualitative changes in the mechanism of thinking, in its technologization and in the levels of its culture are overlooked. But Karl Jaspers in his work (1953) The Origins and Goal of History, characterizing the first axial time, noted that then there was a transition from traditional mythological thinking to rational thinking, which means that the very mechanism of thinking changed. What's the point of pumping up people with an undeveloped machine of thinking with fundamentally new knowledge, they still wont be able to adequately assimilate it, and most importantly, put it into practice. But even Aristotle warned: "Mind consists not o­nly in knowledge, but also in the ability to apply knowledge in practice."

Unfortunately, the vast majority of our contemporaries are dominated by the so-called. "clip thinking", which inevitably gives rise to "a bazaar of optional worldly opinions." Similar thinking is incapable to lead people to the truth, to understanding the essence of what is happening. Even philosophy (love of wisdom) is now, with the light hand of postmodernism, replaced by philodoxy (love of opinion) and does not fulfill its most important function - the formation of a productive worldview and attitude that humanity needs (on the eve of a global catastrophe).

And here is the problem of developing not o­nly new revolutionary contents but also qualitatively new ways of transforming the thinking mechanism, reflective self-organization of thinkers, new forms of communicative interaction and techniques to convey knowledge to students. Therefore, in our opinion, these issues should also be given the necessary attention and not left o­n the periphery of the essence analysis of the second axial time.

A detailed methodological and critical analysis of our peacemaking primer parts will be presented later as they are released.

Andrey A. Smirnov (b. 1953), teacher at the Novgorod Thought School of O.S. Anisimov, PhD, member of the scientific and methodological council of the Analytics Association. Methodologist game technician with thirty years of experience.

 

Leo Semashko.

We fully agree with the extremely important critical remark of Andrey Smirnov that modern thinking lacks methodological self-reflection and a culture of thinking. It makes its inaccessible to the knowledge of the truth, primarily truth global, integral peace of humanity.

However, the determining factor in thinking, nevertheless, is its content, its substantial manner of thinking, as Einstein wrote, which is determined by the quality and level of its categories as thought carriers. Therefore, spheronics, as the true peace science, focuses precisely o­n the substance, o­n the spherons of its thinking. Nevertheless, this does not at all exclude its higher technology and methodology of self-reflection, which, indeed, is lacking in our science today. However, it is open to all innovative seeds and tools, integrating them. It is ready to enrich this technology with the help of its professional who will show us how to do it. This integration will be mutually beneficial in synergy, requiring a certain transformation in the technology of thinking, in what we are ready to work together, maybe in o­ne of our primer paragraphs.

 

Rudolf Siebert, Michigan, USA,https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=51

Our Critical Theory of Religion and Society or Dialectical Religiology fully shares the four global geopolitical trends/vectors of modern world history in the Foreword, among which the trend of the humanity nuclear genocide clearly dominates, brought to the extreme probability of 999 chances out of a thousand. We fully agree that o­nly the true peace trend, which develops in the GGHA spheronics and in our theory, has a truly saving mission for humanity, liberating it from nuclear genocide and any war.

But in the Preface there is no explanation of the deep reason for the humanity age-old slide towards nuclear suicide, which lies in the antagonism of the sacred and the profane/ordinary consciousness. This antagonism, which lies at the heart of all conflicts, has become a social priority, the dominant worldview of our time. It suppresses and destroys with its permissiveness all restraining moral norms and sacred, religious values that oppose war, violence and modern nuclear suicide.

Only the inclusion in the Foreword and integration into our primer of this fundamental advantage of our critical tradition will raise spheronics as a science of global, true peace to the highest spiritual level of progressive values of world religions in postmodern civilizations: i.e. values of religious freedom, equality, brotherhood and sisterhood, love for o­ne's neighbor and even for the enemy in secular solidarity. Without the preservation and development of the spiritual thousand-year-old values of world religions in world history, there can be no true science, true peace and a true worldview that unites all peoples excluding the eternal ideological confrontation of nations.

The most recent books o­n the Dialectical Religiology are:

Hegel and the Critical Theory of Religion, by Rudolf J. Siebert - Paperback

Hegel and the Critical Theory of Religion, by Rudolf J. Siebert - Hardcover.

 

Leo Semashko.

Your criticisms are fair and very important for our peacemaking primer-dialogue, so it will be included but not in the Foreword, but in its subsequent sections. The main advantage of your critical addition, which is fully shared by spheronics, is that without religious, thousands of years of recognized spiritual and moral values the true peace science, as well as the true peace itself cannot exist. Atheism and all its profane, postmodern consciousness is false, excluding the highest spiritual and moral values,

which, together with them, excludes the scientific understanding true peace and its moral embodiment. The true peace science can exist o­nly in the dialectical unity and harmony with the spiritual and moral values of world religions and in no other way. It will be revealed in the following paragraphs.

 

Professor Matt Meyer, Secretary-General, International Peace Research Association, historian: https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1034

 It is clear that for the International Peace Research Association, our concerns in alliance with the co-authors of this work regarding Nuclear Genocide are paramount.

Therefore, as we peace scientists reflect o­n the assertion of our founders, Johan Galtung and others, that we must work together for more than simply the negative peace indicated by the temporary ceasefires of a few direct conflagrations and seek the lasting peace rooted in justice for all, we understand this moment as o­ne of vital importance All of these require greater connections towards a science of true peace, which this work together envisions.

Professor Matt Meyer, Secretary-General, International Peace Research Association, historian

 

Leo Semashko.

Yes, for us, peacemakers, there is no more dangerous than the threat of nuclear genocide of humanity in a new world war, which is being ignited in Ukraine. But we must think scientifically and not mix up a long-term false peace, filled with the arms race, primarily a nuclear o­ne. Similar peace is devoid of justice. The o­nly peace that is fair for all is true peace. This is obviously the most important point and requires, as you rightly point out, "greater connection towards a science of the true peace."

 

Bishnu Pathak, Kathmandu, Nepal, https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=910

It would be interesting and useful to compare in the Foreword the peacemaking difference between Western and Eastern philosophies that is discussed in our book Eastern Philosophy, 2023. If Western philosophy raised the problem of true, eternal peace o­nly in the works of the most prominent thinkers and usually associated peace with war, its inevitability, then Eastern philosophy, o­n the contrary, more often and more deeply thought of it by truly, free from war.

 

Leo Semashko.

You correctly noticed o­ne of the shortcomings of our Preface. You rightly raise the very important question of supplementing it with a comparison of the peacemaking difference between the philosophies of the West and the East. But this is a very broad topic. If you, relying o­n your wonderful book, could make a brief conclusion o­n this topic in 10-15 lines, we would be happy to supplement our Preface with them.

 

Lucas Pawlik, Vienna, Austria, https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=887

We are dying right now from not understanding that we live in a sphere that we share responsibility for preserving, the biosphere.

Every theory would be unnecessary if we would intuitively understand that there is o­nly o­ne sphere of life, which stretches like a thin band around our planet. If our lives expressed this, nothing would have to be said. Under the earth the mycelium of the mushrooms runs around the whole planet. Above the earth the atmosphere rises. We will notice it, too, o­nly when we run out of oxygen. Spheres determine our life. If humanity wants to survive, now would be the point to notice this.

 

Leo Semashko.

You are absolutely right. People have long understood, up to industrial civilization, that the spheres determine our life and its peaceful nature, excluding war. This was brilliantly reflected in the whole philosophy of ancient Greece. Our spheronics, created in the GGHA over 18 years with your participation, revives this great worldview idea o­n a scientific basis, proving it statistically. We hope that our peacemaking primer will awaken a new interest in the spheral pillars of life and true peace o­n our planet.

Igor Kondrashin, WPF President, Athens, Greece

From the "World Philosophical Forum (WPF) Appeal, The LAST WPF Warning to Humanity" under the slogan "To be or not to be."

Humanity has come too much close to the red line of its own complete self-destruction and all the Life o­n our planet. Now it can happen at any day, at any hour. Both the Pope and the US President have officially recognized that the 3-rd World War has begun and is going o­n already for many months, getting into increasingly dangerous for Humanity stages. Until now it goes in a conventional mode, even under which thousands of people are being killed every day. However, there are more and more prerequisites, and with them the real probability that at any moment the war can develop into a thermonuclear phase, which, according to experts, will last no more than 3 days, as a result of which all Life o­n Earth, including Humanity itself, will disappear forever.."

Leo Semashko.

We, the GGHA, fully share this position. Your quote well illustrates three militaristic geopolitical trends in the world history of our century in our model, their fatal danger to humanity and complete disregard for true peace. o­nly this paradigm is able to constitute a fundamental alternative to all militaristic trends of our time. But it is unknown to anyone, expressing total peacemaking ignorance, which is best illustrated by the Pope and John Biden, powerless to offer any scientific alternative to the WWIII. They are able to state it, but they are not able to oppose it with anything like the true world. Is your philosophical forum able to understand and develop it?

------------------------------

Launching the peacemaking primer


 

Dear friends, co-authors,
         After a long preparation and discussion of our peacemaking primer contents and its dialogic form, published here (https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1124) (this is already our prehistory), I am pleased to send you the Foreword draft in 2 + pages for your discussion within a week, no more. Anyone who wants can write his own co-authored version of the preface with mine, as promised by Rodney Atkinson (http://freenations.net/who-we-are/), London, and Matt Meyer (https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1034), New York.

But the discussion quintessence is your brief dialogue lines in the CONTRA-judgments section of it. The shorter, deeper in content and more reasoned they are, the more likely they will be published in our textbook under your name and become a model of dialogic thinking for students who will read and study this first peacemaking textbook. Please write your "contra" o­n the corresponding (3rd) page of my text and send it to me with your corrections, additions and in your edition, if you like.

Our first pancake should not be lumpy, as in the Russian proverb. Naturally, everyone can express contra not o­nly against my text, but also against any other counter. This will be an ideal dialogue and polyphony of peacemaking intelligence, which today is extinct at all levels of society, but which it urgently needs to learn at all levels in order to survive, in order to get out of the silent nuclear/genocidal impasse in which we all have fallen, like chickens in cabbage soup, unwillingly.

If you have detailed responses of 1-2 pages, no more, then it is better to offer them as an independent paragraph in the primer as part of its updated "Contents" here: https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=ru_c&key=1028.

All responses, both "pro" and "contra", will be published along with the preliminary texts of the paragraphs o­n the corresponding separate pages of our site. For the Foreword, where it was published, its first page is open here: https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=ru_c&key=1029, where all your responses o­n its topic will be published.

All our subsequent work will be organized in this order: every week I send you short drafts of 1-2 paragraphs of our textbook based o­n a summary of our, GGHA, more than 1500 publications o­n our website for 18 years by 750 coauthors of spheronics. We discuss them during week. The received materials are finalized in the dialogue by two editors-in-chief: Rodney Atkinson (Britain) and me (Russia). Any of the coauthors, from any side, can become a coeditor if they publicly announce it and communicate the zest of their editorial approach/contribution.

When all paragraphs pass through the process of democratic discussion at two levels, then they will be presented as a completed book manuscript for final discussion and approval by all co-authors in its end. We plan to complete this work in October-December this year. The primer subsequent stages will be discussed later, towards the end.

Best wishes for true peace,

Dr. Leo Semashko

29-04-23


------------------------------ 

Brother Leo,

I was just thinking that I hadn't heard from you for a bit, and indeed things have been busy at my end. I'm just back from Chile, and en route tomorrow to the USA southeast Jackson, Mississippi and New Orleans, for May Day activities centered in the Black liberation movement. Then o­n to Trinidad!

I'm wondering whether you are officially and formally o­n the IPRA email list. I'll try to check o­n that in the next few days. In any case, the latest Newsletter went out last Thursday and indeed your piece was/is featured. I think you can access it (and send the link for others to do so too), here: http://bit.ly/IPRA-Newsletter

As far as co-authoring the Foreword to the primer with you, i hope a previous email to you didn't get lost in the mix, because I thought I had responded a VERY BIG YES....I'd be honored to co-author that piece. Send me the current version please, and any thoughts o­n where you'd like me to add, and I'll turn it around and have it back to you quickly.

I'll look for and re-send my previous email to you; it also had a question to you about setting a date in the future for me/us to apply the spheron approach in USA/NYC data.

All the best 

Matt Meyer,

IPRA President, USA,

 https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1034

29-04-23

 

Brother Matt,

Thank you very much for your publication in the IPRO of my essay o­n the Bifurcation of History to the True Peace (http://bit.ly/IPRA-Newsletter), which makes up the rod of the next paragraph of our Textbook-Dialogue of the World (UDM). Yes, my email is in IPRA, the editor of the IPRA Newsletter. He will probably inform me about this later.

I am also grateful to you for the readiness to become a co -author of the preface, the updated version of which I will send in a few days.

As for the date of verification of the spheres of the US spheres and New York, which we have long agreed, you asked to appoint it at the beginning of June, what we will discuss after your IPRA conference o­n May 17-21.

Best wishes,

Leo

29-04-23

-------------------------------

 

Dear Leo:

I fully agree with your Foreword draft,

Please, chose which ever pages from my essay you consider to be most important for your coming up, most wonderful textbook. May it help to establish peace and cooperation between East and West! 'In Solidarity, your Rudi from the House of Mir,

Rudolf Siebert,

USA, https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=51

29-04-23

----------------------------------

 

Dear Leo,

Thank you for sending me your preface. I read it with pleasure and enjoyed commenting. I have made a number of corrections and comments, which I leave to your discretion. You decide whether you want to include them or not.

I shall try to comment o­n all coming section but due to other tasks this might require more time. I'll let you know in good time. 

I hope you will find these useful and wish you all the very best.

Ken Leslie,

Britain, https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1128

30-04-23

----------------------------------------------

Foreword update and first responses

 

Dear friends, coauthors,

The discussion first day brought five individual responses to the launch of our peacemaking Primer-Peace Dialogue (PPD), each of which makes an interesting and valuable contribution to it and deserves sincere gratitude. Many thanks to all of you.

But their individual format compels me to emphasize the intellectual importance of our textbook dialogic, open and solidarity format. Therefore, I propose the following organizational update and addition to our order and rules of cooperation for your consideration.

Our PPD needs the most effective, open and solidary format of the DIALOGUE "PRO AND CONTRA" of Socratic cognitive maieutics in Durkheims "collective consciousness" in order to jointly seek and "give birth" SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING OF TRUE PEACE in the XXI century axial time to survive humanity through its peaceful exit from the nuclear suicide impasse. Therefore, the section Pro and Contra Dialogue should become a priority part of our PPD in each of its paragraphs. See updated Foreword in attachment.

It seems to me that this rule obviously and logically follows from our ultimate goal of a primer-dialogue, which can o­nly be created in a dialogue. Or am I doing something wrong? But until no o­ne dissuaded me, I will start a public dialogue with everyone who answered.

The first response I received from Philosophy Professor Matt Meyer from New York (https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1034), President of the International Peace Researchers Association (IPRA) below.

Brother Matt,

Thank you very much for your publication in the IPRA my essay o­n the Bifurcation of History to True Peace, which makes up the rod of the next paragraph of our TDP. Yes, my email is in IPRA, at the IPRA Newsletter editor. He will probably inform me about this later.

I am also grateful to you for the readiness to become the Foreword coauthor, the updated version of which I will send in a few days.

As for date of the US and New York spherons verification, which we have long agreed, you asked to appoint it at June beginning. Therefore, we will discuss it after your IPRA conference o­n May 17-21.

The second response I received from Rudolf Siebert, Professor of Religion at the University of Michigan USA (https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=51), with full support for the PPD Foreword. He sent his part to it a long time ago, the discussion of which will take place in due time.

The third response was from University of London Geopolitics Professor (I'm not wrong?) Ken Leslie (https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1128), who edited the Foreword, added to it and sent many valuable criticisms, most of which I agree with. Some of them will be included in the Foreword dialogical part. This makes Ken its coauthor. I'll finalize the Foreword with his input and send it to Matt for our threesome coauthor discussion. The Foreword final version will be published o­n the website. I am very grateful to Ken for the great, painstaking work, the details of which we will discuss personally.

The fourth response-invitation to the peacemaking discussion I received from the Schiller Institute President, Helga Zepp-LaRouche from Berlin (https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1077), in which, unfortunately, I could not take part today.

The fifth surprise update came from our second designer, who sent the new Geopolitical wind rosé drawing version. It is published along with the first o­ne in the attachment and starts a design dialogue about which version is better? Which o­ne do you prefer?

Once again, many thanks to everyone for the responses, which will be published in full o­n the site o­n the Foreword page (https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1130) tomorrow.

However, as you can see, it is better for us to switch to the public format of our discussion, to a direct, transparent dialogue between everyone and other coauthors without my mediation. I think that no more than 3-6 co-authors from approximately 15-17 actual coauthors will participate in it for each part of our PPD, to which 2-3 more can join, no more.

So that we know each other better, please, accompany your name with brief data: your profession, employment, country, city and personal page that each coauthor has o­n our site or other. Thank you.

Best wishes for true peace,

Leo, 30-04-23

------------------------------------------------


 

 


https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1130

 

Who can demur by own alternative?

 

Dear friends peacemakers,

The attachment contains the holistic structural tetra-model (above) of geopolitical trends in the world history of our century. It is deployed in two languages o­n 2+ pages of the Foreword for the primer-dialogue of the peacemaking "True Peace Science". This universal science, as you know, was created and verified by world statistics in the international GGHA by its coauthors from more than 50 countries during 18 years, since 2005.

Our peacemaking primer is designed to overcome the total peacemaking ignorance, in the nutrient broth of which the militaristic geopolitical wind rose with three world wars flourishes and dominates for more than a century. This "rose from the ignorance broth" brings nuclear death to humanity in the complete absence of any positive alternative of scientific, true peace acceptable to all nations. The GGHA has created similar alternative in the first approximation during 18 years, which is presented in the attached Foreword and in the figure. However, maybe the proposed model is false and there is another scientific alternative and better?

WHO from social scientists is able to object to our model, write and send us at least 10-20 critical lines of any peacemaking alternative from any ideological or scientific position so that we can publish it in our peacemaking primer in the section Dialogue: pro and contra? The absence of objections and alternatives will prove the inviolability of our model, and the publication of its alternatives generates a peacemaking dialogue that overcomes the dominant suicidal militaristic narrative in the nutrient broth of peacemaking silent ignorance. Humanity can o­nly without alternative and silently perish in it. Therefore, any reasonable contra-alternative will be preserved, compared with others and discussed in our primer-dialogue. This will be an example of peacemaking dialogue for the future youth in order to survive in true and not die in silence, as it is now ignoring all its condemnations..

Best wishes for true peace,

Dr. Leo Semashko,

Philosopher and sociologist,

GGHA Founder (2005) and Honorary President,

Russia, SaintPetersburg,

03-05-23

---------------------------------------------

 

Constructive criticism by Andrey Smirnov

 

Dear peacemakers,

We received a wonderful constructive criticism of the Foreword from Andrey Smirnov, Russia. Please, see his attached file with my English translation and the answer in dialogue with him. This text will be added to our Foreword.

We also received still four more critical additions to the Foreword dialogue from different countries: Britain, USA, Canada and Nepal, which we are translating into Russian and preparing answers to them in the dialogue. Them we will present later and publish o­n our website o­n the Foreword page here: https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1130.

We are waiting for new alternative additions to Foreword. Thanks to all the authors who submitted them.

Best wishes for true peace,

Dr. Leo Semashko

03-05-23
-------------------------------------


Criticism of the preface to the GGHA primer-dialogue

"Spheronics: True Peace MegaScience"

 

Dialogue: contra.

Sharing the Forewords author values and vision we cannot fail to note the absence of o­ne of the most important conditions for the positive resolution of contradictions, the so-called. "second axial time" of human development. The author concludes that the "second axial time" is "the transition from traditional, positivist and disciplinary broken thinking to a substantially new, integral and holistic thinking with the categories of social integrity of spheres, spherons and the noosphere of humanity." Here, the main attention is paid to the new content of thinking, but qualitative changes in the mechanism of thinking, in its technologization and in the levels of its culture are overlooked. But Karl Jaspers in his work (1953) The Origins and Goal of History, characterizing the first axial time, noted that then there was a transition from traditional mythological thinking to rational thinking, which means that the very mechanism of thinking changed. What's the point of pumping up people with an undeveloped machine of thinking with fundamentally new knowledge, they still wont be able to adequately assimilate it, and most importantly, put it into practice. But even Aristotle warned: "Mind consists not o­nly in knowledge, but also in the ability to apply knowledge in practice."

Unfortunately, the vast majority of our contemporaries are dominated by the so-called. "clip thinking", which inevitably gives rise to "a bazaar of optional worldly opinions." Similar thinking is incapable to lead people to the truth, to understanding the essence of what is happening. Even philosophy (love of wisdom) is now, with the light hand of postmodernism, replaced by philodoxy (love of opinion) and does not fulfill its most important function - the formation of a productive worldview and attitude that humanity needs (on the eve of a global catastrophe).

And here is the problem of developing not o­nly new revolutionary contents but also qualitatively new ways of transforming the thinking mechanism, reflective self-organization of thinkers, new forms of communicative interaction and techniques to convey knowledge to students. Therefore, in our opinion, these issues should also be given the necessary attention and not left o­n the periphery of the essence analysis of the second axial time.

A detailed methodological and critical analysis of our peacemaking primer parts will be presented later as they are released.

 

Andrey A. Smirnov (b. 1953), teacher at the Novgorod Thought School of O.S. Anisimov, PhD, member of the scientific and methodological council of the Analytics Association. Methodologist game technician with thirty years of experience.

Webpage: https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=813

Russia, Great Novgorod,

May 3, 2023.

 

Dialogue: pro.

We fully agree with the extremely important critical remark of Andrey Smirnov that modern thinking lacks methodological self-reflection and a culture of thinking. It makes its inaccessible to the knowledge of the truth, primarily truth global, integral peace of humanity.

However, the determining factor in thinking, nevertheless, is its content, its substantial manner of thinking, as Einstein wrote, which is determined by the quality and level of its categories as thought carriers. Therefore, spheronics, as the true peace science, focuses precisely o­n the substance, o­n the spherons of its thinking. Nevertheless, this does not at all exclude its higher technology and methodology of self-reflection, which, indeed, is lacking in our science today. However, it is open to all innovative seeds and tools, integrating them. It is ready to enrich this technology with the help of its professional who will show us how to do it. This integration will be mutually beneficial in synergy, requiring a certain transformation in the technology of thinking, in what we are ready to work together, maybe in o­ne of our primer paragraphs.

Dr. Leo Semashko

03-05-23

---------------------------------

 










Up
© Website author: Leo Semashko, 2005; © designed by Roman Snitko, 2005