The Comment to P. Nicolopoulos’s article “Multilevel crisis of the contemporary society” (http://philprob.narod.ru/philosophy/Nicolopolus2.htm)
I read your article and again saw that our positions are close. But your works, even though they belong to the best of those that were presented at last year's World Philosophical Forum, have some shortcoming connected with fact, that you like other philosophers do not have possession of the unified method of justification of scientific theories, which I had developed and about which I spoke a lot in my speeches at the Forum. And without of this method any philosophy is, at best, wishful thinking. For example, you call for politicians and all other citizens to be moral. You do not specify what kind of morals you speak about. But some can understand under moral sexual permissiveness, and other - medieval asceticism. But even you should articulate what moral you have in mind, why one would have to accept your moral norms, not those offered by another philosopher. Consent can be achieved only through using the unified method of justifying by all philosophers. Read my article “The formation of public morals” placed on website of the Forum (wpf.unesko-tlee.org) and you will see how futile were all the talk about morality, since the time of Socrates and Plato to the present day in the absence of this same method of justifying. One system of morality was replaced by another in the history and this led to the relativity of moral today. Norms of moral become almost like a fashion in clothes.
But not only moral, but all the things you write about in your article (as well as other philosophers writing in their works) needs to be substantiated by a unified method of justifying. For example, you write about the need to recognize the authority of intellectuals in society and the community must be led by the intellectuals, not politicians. But how do you know who is really an intellectual? Indeed, today there are many people pretending to be intellectuals and they have prestigious diplomas and enjoying the fame, but in fact are charlatans.
Only by using the unified method for assessing the validity of study scriptures of intellectuals can determine which of them are really intelligent, and who is pseudo one. In a word, without using a unified method of justifying the whole philosophy became a drawing-room conversations that may lead to nothing. And this is what we have today. Politicians have long ceased to follow the doctrines of the philosophers, and refer to them only to decorate their speeches.