The open letter to the Secretary General United Nations Ban Ki-moon A. Voin Dear Mr. Ban Ki-moon! I am philosopher and believe that my philosophy is necessary for humanity to overcome the deep crisis in which it remains today and that could lead it to demise. Challenges facing humanity today require primarily philosophical solution. In particular, the numerous conflicts tearing apart the planet today require philosophical definition of justice in each case. But modern philosophy, broken into many schools of thought , between which there is no common language and who are unable to reach agreements among themselves, can not accomplish this task. Events in Ukraine and around it especially clearly show the critical state of modern humanity and the inability of modern philosophy to define his way out of the global crisis. No sooner had the ink dried on the Geneva agreement on Ukraine, as all parties and signatories to the agreement began to break them. Everyone is screaming that he cares about the welfare of humanity and justice , but what is good for humanity and what is justice each side understood in a different way. And what is more important, the faith in the existence of a common justice for all is abandoned and as a consequence , hypocritically screaming for justice, each party pursues its geopolitical interests. And this applies not only to the situation with Ukraine , but also all other conflicts ravaging the planet today. We can say that it has always been . But first, there was not always atomic and other weapons of mass destruction and , therefore, “it has always been” can not serve as a consolation today. And secondly, it was not always and not everywhere . In ancient times and until modern times there was no talk about universal justice , fairness in relations between countries and peoples and in these respects there was a law of force as in the wild. Starting with the so-called New Age Western civilization arose belief in common to all truth and justice and the principles of justice have been developed in international relations. This principles democratic Western countries held between themselves and with other countries. That helped to change the situation in the world as a whole to better. This belief in the overall fairness and principles of international relations , its reinforcement , based on the rationalistic worldview evolved in Western philosophy of the New Age . And it is this worldview, which ensured the rapid flowering of the West , its science , industry and the economy in general and its dominant position in the world, which it still holds , although losing it gradually. Loses due to the crisis of the rationalistic worldview itself and due to the consequent from this crisis loss of confidence in common to all truth and justice , the distortion of the original right system of values based on the rationalistic outlook , slow technological progress and economic crisis. Cause of the crisis rationalistic worldview were some erroneous postulates of classical rationalism , whose ancestors were Descartes , Bacon , Pascal, and others. These errors become apparent with the advent of the theory of relativity , when it became clear that, contrary to notions of classical rationalism , science changes its concepts and conclusions in the transition to new paradigms (fundamental theories). That led to the emergence and dominance today in Western philosophy teachings relativizing scientific knowledge , ie essentially denying the ability of science to give us a reliable , objective , common to all truth. As a result, common to all justice and morality in general lost their objective basis. This is reflected in all aspects of life in the modern West and the whole world and all the processes occurring in it. Inside the Western countries this has led to a change in the system of values , most vividly reflected in the so -called sexual revolution that gave birth to a powerful surge of prostitution , pornography, sexual perversion and the breakdown of the family institution, which served as a basic unit of society in the era before the sexual revolution . Indirectly, it also influenced the spread of drug addiction , corruption and other anti-social phenomena . The crisis of rationalistic worldoutlook is also the main cause of the permanent deepening economic crisis of West today. First, an important component of the economic crisis is changing the system of values and morals , corruption in particular. And secondly , the rationalistic crisis has led to inefficiencies even in the natural sciences . And in the humanities and social sciences, in particular macroeconomics, it led if not to a complete standstill, as to falling behind the needs of life, in particular behind the rapidly changing economic reality. Discrepancy applied macroeconomic models to changed economic situation is the main cause of the crisis 2008-2009 period , from which the Western economy is still not out . Meanwhile, a new more powerful crisis is brewing. Loss of faith in universal justice, using by the West the contradictions in the principles of international relations (such as the inviolability of territorial integrity and the right of nations to self-determination , non-interference in the internal affairs of other states and human rights, etc. ) for the hypocritical justification of promotion of its geopolitical interests, the imposition worldwide of its not an optimal system of values ( contrary to the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries ), all contributed to the growth in the rest of the world fanatical religiosity and nationalism and setbacks to the primitive law of force in international relations. What is my philosophy and what does it give? My first and basic philosophical book ("Neorationalism” , Kiev , 1992, and in the re-edition of "Neorationalism - spiritual rationalism ", M. Direct Media, University Library Series Online, 2014 ) includes a new theory of knowledge , theory of determinism , freedom, the theory of optimal morality and rational theory of spirit. In this book I laid the foundations of a new rationalism , which called neorationalism or spiritual rationalism, and which corects shortcomings of classical rationalism , maintaining its main essence . This direction of my philosophy , I continued , developing on the basis of my theory of cognition the unified method of justification of scientific theories. The unified method of justification distinguishes science from non- science and pseudoscience. The importance of this method to modern society is commensurate with the importance of the science itself. It is further enhanced by the dominating in modern philosophy directions ( chief among them - post- positivism , existentialism , but there are many others) , relativizing scientific knowledge , asserting the unreliability of knowledge produced by science , absence unified method of justification in science studies , etc. What was the result of that I briefly described above. Here I will add that in science , especially in humanities, where does not work or nearly does not work the criterion of practice , this has led to the entry into science the huge amount of mediocrity, which using the absence of objective criteria of scientificness , just flood scientific journals by pseudoscientific chatter . In this flood drown really valuable scientific work. Yet it leads to subjective judgment by scientific officialdom of important works in new directions, as was the case in the Soviet Union with genetics and cybernetics . With regard to society and mankind as a whole, the absence or non-recognition of a unified method of justification led primarily to the phenomenon of pluralism, understanding not as the right of each to defend his conception of truth , but as the presence of many equal truths - truths of each person , nation, country , etc. But because the truth is important for us not only in abstract questions like how many devils can fit on the end of the needle , but also in vital and often conflicting ones, in practice it turns out that it is considered right not the one who really right , but the one who is stronger or who have powerful media propaganda. Non-recognition of the unified method of justification also leads to a lack of a common language in the negotiations on the peaceful settlement of international conflicts of all kinds. This in turn leads to the fact that either we can not agree, or the decision imposed by force on a party and dissatisfaction, associated with a sense of injustice solutions, accumulate eventually leading to a new explosion. Non recognition of the unified method of justification is also hampered resolution of problems such as finding a common language and reconciliation between different religions and faiths and many others. Finally, the non-recognition of the unified method of justification and the associated depreciation of the value of basic science , the theory as such is reflected in the political life of the western countries. It leads to the substitution of a policy based on ideology , in turn based on the fundamental theory , by politicking , political technologies , bombast prescription psychologists on TV screens for impress the electorate , etc. In my works on the unified method ( "Единый метод обоснования научных теорий", Aletheia, St. Petersburg , 2012 and a series of articles in philosophical journals and collections ) I refuted the arguments of the post positivists and other relyativizatorov of science and showed that science still has a unified method of justification of its theories and that is what distinguishes it from pseudoscience. This method was developed in the most rational science during its development , but so far it existed only at the level of stereotype of natural scientific thinking and theories of reference - samples of a type of Newtonian mechanics. I summarized this method , modify it and introduced explicitly . Based on the method I made preciser the concept of scientific theory , gave way to determine the limits of its applicability and explained the difference between theory and hypothesis , which has now become blurred even in physics . Furthermore , this method still exist even at the level of stereotype natural scientific thinking only in themselves natural sciences. Humanities still did not know it at all. Natural science evolved progressively, taking some hypotheses by the entire scientific community as proven theories , and some, also by the entire community, discarding . Humanities, especially philosophy, likened religion. As a religion divided into many denominations, between which there is no common language, so the humanities are divided into many schools, between which there is no any meaningful dialogue . Therefore, in them, especially in philosophy, there is no sustainable development and they are not able to solve the problems facing society , while society , humanity , today more than ever in need of philosophical resolution of arisen before him global problems. I showed the possibility of using the unified method of justification in the humanitarian sphere , and even in religion ( in the interpretation of the scriptures ) , as well as in the economy and a number of other areas. In the book «От Моисея до постмодернизма. Движение идеи» ("From Moses to postmodernism . Movement of ideas", Kiev, Феникс, 1999 and reprinted : «Эвоюция духа. От Моисея до постмодернизма» ("The Evolution of the spirit. From Moses to postmodernism " M. Direct Media, University Library Series Online, 2013 ), I developed my theory of spirit. Religion, as we know, is a powerful source of spirit. But it is associated with some problem. Scriptural texts , the Bible in particular , allow different interpretations and even contain many apparent contradictions . And it sets the basis for distortion teachings of the Bible (similar of the Koran ), by different denominatios, sects and preachers. In the past this has led to the fanaticism of the Inquisition and Domostroi, to holy wars, etc. Today is a serious threat of religious fanaticism , Islamic primarily, but not exclusively. In connection with this the question appears, what is actually the taught of the Bible or the Koran contain, whether each of these books contains consistent teaching on how to live, and whether it is possible to extract singlemeaningly this teaching and justify it, proceeding from the text of the Bible ( Koran ), in such a way that it will accepted by all believers of that religion as a proven scientific theory in the natural sciences . I have shown that this can be done and done using a unified method justifying as a tool to study. I showed that in the doctrine of God the Father and Jesus Christ are no internal contradictions, and it can be regarded as a system of axioms of the Bible. But the statements of Jewish chroniclers , kings and prophets in the Old Testament , and similarly , the apostles in the New ( except where they pass the direct speech of God the Father or Jesus Christ ), and the more all kinds of church fathers, Popes and decrees of oecumenical councils in no case must be regarded as " sacred " as undeniable truth . They can and should be checked for compliance with the mentioned axioms . And this is the only way to extract from Scripture a uniied and consistent teaching that can take all believers because of its validity. It is, of course, the teaching about how to live, a moral doctrine, rather than purely theological questions , such as: God is one or three persons. In my work on macroeconomics «Начала овой макроэкономической теории» (" Begining of new macroeconomic theory" , M. Direct Media, University Library Series Online, 2013 ) , I showed that the main problem of modern macroeconomics is that it does not know the limits of applicability of its theories . This problem exists in all other disciplines and, as I said, the solutionof it gives only a unified method of justification, but in the economy it costs a lot sharper. This is due to the fact that the economic reality in which we live and which we also create and change (in the sense changing of its laws) changes much faster than , say , physical one. The latter can be taken as almost immutable : gases such as expanded in past, so extend today by the laws of Boyle - Marriott and Gay lusakite and even instructions of the Communist Party could not change that. But in the economy all the time there are new forms of relationships , new institutions , new legal laws regulating economic activities, new financial instruments and all that changes the economic reality , changes laws of its functioning, changes the behavior of the players. As a result macroeconomic theories , which have worked at one time (Smith and Ricardo , Keynes , Friedman), and which therefore remain faithful to their circumstances , in the new conditions become unsuitable , beyond their applicability . And it is the use of such theories outside their applicability was the main reason of all previous economic crises . As I said, only a unified method of justification gives solution to this problem/ I also showed the difference between a modern oligarchy from the past oligarchy and what was its role in the recent global financial and economic crisis. ( "Modern oligarchy" and others). I showed the growing role of morality in the economy. ( "Economics and morality"). If, at the early stage capitalist economy is virtually independent of the morality of its participants - players and Adam Smith was right ( for its time ) , claiming that the market will regulate everything , but today it is not so. For example, greed of bankers played a significant role in the last crisis. Finally, basing on my other works ( "The Evolution of crises" , etc.) I have formulated the formula - a necessary condition for economic development without crises . In my work on the global crisis of humanity, I found that one of the main causes of this crisis is the lack of uniform today for all peoples, justified, accepted by all optimal system of values. ( "The problem of values as the problem of survival of mankind ", " Bifurcation point of mankind ", "Bifurcation point . Continued ", etc.) . I have shown that such a system can be created and laid the beginning of it. In addition, I have shown that scientific and technological progress creates conditions that pervert the system of values really accepted by the community. (" Global crisis of humanity and scientific and technical progress .") This has far -reaching consequences , in particular leads to the degradation of modern democracy. (" Modern Democracy "). Way out is to plan the development of scientific and technological progress , to limit development in some areas and to increase in others. ( I pointed out in which ones , exactly) . And in shifting the center of gravity from the scientific and technological development on the spiritual one. Primarily on the development and adoption of optimal values. My philosophy already is seen in the world. In 2010 I was personally invited to the World Philosophical Forum under the auspices of UNESCO , was a member of the program committee of the Forum and made it five reports (more than any other participant) . But despite this, the resistance of the recognition of my philosophy on the part a philosophical and political establishment as Russia and Ukraine, so the West, so great that even the above UN support can not overcome it. Every year I get a personal invitation to take part in the World Philosophical Forum and the World Congress of Philosophy, but I do not have the opportunity to participate in them, as there is no money to go. And I have no money, because in Ukraine and in Russia I do not get any compensation for my philosophical work. Fees for philosophical books negligible, from teaching philosophy at the two Universities of Kiev I was removed under false pretenses, and to work in the Institute of Philosophy of Kiev or Moscow they did not permit me any. And the reason for this is that the revival of rationalistic worldoutlook with its recognition of the one truth and the ensuing from that obligations for everyone do not need and burdensome for both philosophical and political authorities, as to prevent them from catching fish in troubled waters. Only hope is that the growing threat to the very existence of mankind, which, without the revival of rationalistic worldoutlook, inevitably realized, will overcome rampant selfishness authorities of all stripes. But whether this will happen in a timely manner, it is a question. I therefore appeal to you to provide additional assistance to promote my philosophy. I do not know what you can do, but I think that the UN can contribute to the publication of my books in English and to allow my participation in the World Congress of Philosophy. In particular, through the financial support to led by me International Institute of Philosophy and problems of society (NGO). Sincerely Alexander Voin Marina Tsvetaeva, 5/143 Kyiv, 02232 Ukraine T. 068-120-74-35 (Mobile); 038 - (44) -535-25-99 e-mail: alexvoin@yahoo.com