The p

pppplace of Spirit

         in the rationalist world-outlook

A. Voin


   In today's world there is much talk about the spirit, the loss of spirituality of Western civilization as a major cause of global crisis of modern mankind, the need for the revival of spirituality. Representatives of religion claim that the cause of the loss of spirituality is the secularization of Western society, which took place in the Modern Times in connection with the development of rational science. At the same time they identify spirituality as a purely religious spirituality. They are joined by a number of modern philosophers. Take, for example, wrote by the Templeton Prize winner of 2007, Charles Taylor:
   «We have somehow to break down the barriers between our contemporary culture of science and disciplined academic study (what the Germans
gather in the term "Wissenschaft") on one hand, and the domain of spirit, on the other. The divorce of natural science and religion has been damaging to both; but it is equally true that the culture of the humanities and social sciences has often been surprisingly blind and deaf to the spiritual ».
(From his speech when he received his award Templeton.)
     There are calls to establish contact, to build bridges, find common ground between science and religion, between different religions, confessions and ideologies, but on appeal it is not going. However, significant progress in this direction are ascribed to the said Charles Taylor and a group of philosophers, close to
him, such as A. Maklntayer, etc. (This is the progress in this direction Taylor awarded Templeton Prize). But, paying tribute to the good intentions of Taylor and his colleagues, I believe that their work is based on false premise and therefore can not lead them to the desired result.
     In his work «Overcoming Epistemology» (Philosophical Arguments, Harvard University Press, 1995) Charles Taylor writes that the main cause of discord between the modern human
ities, philosophy, in particular, and spirituality is the fact that the secular philosphy of Modern Times is dominated by a epistemology or theory of cognition, based on the achievements of natural science. And the way to a revival of spirituality he sees in overcoming the domination of epistemology in modern philosophy (Overcoming Epistemology).


    I agree with Taylor that real modern epistemology up to the present day as a basis secularized philosophy, across a variety of specific theories and trends in it, helped to expel the spirit of this philosophy and other humanities, and in such a way helped to non-spirituality of contemporary Western society. But I do not agree that the way to a revival of spirituality is through deprivation epistemology of its basic role in philosophy. The sad part of epistemology in exile from spirituality in Western society is not connected with the fact that it is the foundation of secular philosophy, but with the fact that, despite the huge number of directions in it, none of them could not still give the correct answer to the question of how relate our knowledge (scientific, especially) with the reality described by it. That is, there was not  still a correct epistemology. But rejectionion the epistemology of its basic role in the philosophy leads us, as I said, to the result opposite to that sought by Taylor. Because the common language between members of different religions, ideologies, traditions, etc., finally between science and religion, only epistemology can give. Only starting from the correct idea about how our knowledge relate to the reality described by it (including the spiritual reality), we can formulate a method of justifying the true knowledge, whether scientific theory or spiritual teachings. This method and only he can serve the common language that will allow supporters of different natural scientific theories, theories of humanitarian or religious doctrines
agree on which theory or doctrine is true, and which - confusing.
     This method was developed
by natural science in the process of its development and in it he more or less successfully applied. It is through this method representatives of natural sciencis have a common language, and sooner or later agree by the entire international community to accept some hypothesis as true, proven theory, and another hypothesis be rejected. But among scientists of humanities and the representatives of religion this method is still not known. So they have no common language and, despite endless calls to find a common language between different denominations of Christianity and with representatives of another religions (like Islam, Judaism, etc.), the number of denominations and sects multiplied exponentially, and the gap in their understanding of the Christ’s Teaching (despite the fact that all acknowledge that God is one and the truth is one) grows to infinity. The situation is similar in philosophy, psychology and other humanities, but there instead of confessions - the endless and continue to multiply number of schools and directions, between which there is no common language, and there is no real dialogue.
    In this situation, what good is that, Taylor believes that the understanding of the teachings of Jesus Christ
by the Catholic Church is incorrect and opposes to it the understanding of new churches, Methodist, in particular. He does not have a tool to convince the Catholics and representatives of many other denominations. Some mistakes of the past, such as the Inquisition, holy wars, etc. the Catholic Church recognized without the aid of Taylor, just under the pressure of circumstances. But instead, it makes new mistakes today. History of priests pedophiles and Pope's reluctance to condemn them - evidence of this. But among the new churches is the churches specifically for gays and lesbians. Is this the correct understanding of the Bible which directly prohibits the perversion? Is this the revival of spirituality?
     We return to the epistemology and its negative impact so far on spirituality. The question is, why natural science
have developed a general method of substantiation of its theories, have a common language and thus have made significant progress and lead to tangible results, and epistemology, which claims to generalize the experience of natural science and its method, could not endure this method in the humanitarian sphere, has not led to a common language in her, and even assisted in the initial expulsion of the spirit of it? The fact that a general method of substantiation, worked out by the natural sciences, was not yet presented explicitly and existed only at the level of stereotype thinking of scientists naturalists. For them it was enough (and then - for the time being, it is now not). But for the transfer of this method in the humanitarian sphere, it was necessary to provide this method explicitly. This is the task of epistemology, but it it still did not manage. Moreover, in modern epistemology dominated position is seized by schools, of the  post positivists especially (Quine, Kuhn, Feyerabend, Popper, Lakatos and others), relativized scientific cognition, denying, in particular, that it contains, in principle, a general immutable method of justification of theories. In addition to the rejection of a general method of substantiation modern epistemology has given a simplified understanding of rational knowledge, not left a place for spirit. This explains its role in the lack of spirituality of modern Western society and accepted today in it and in the world in general opposition of the spiritual and rational.
     In my philosophy, which I call neorationalism or spiritual rationalism, I
developed my own theory of cognition (epistemology), contrasting it to all pre-existing. (Neorationalism, Kiev, 1992, Part 1). Based on this theory I have described (introduced explicitly) the general method of substantiation of scientific theories, constracted by the natural sciences during their development (Articles in Философские Исследования, 2000-2002, and on the Internet, for example I also showed the possibility of applying this method in the humanitarian field (with appropriate adaptation), in particular in the analysis of Marxism, the current state of bioethics, the Judeo-Christian teachings, etc., and demonstrated that the use of many papers (Побритие бороды Карла Маркса или научен ли научный коммунизм", Kiev, 1997; "Bioethics or the optimal Ethics, the Internet, "От Моисея до постмодернизма. Движение идеи", Kiev, 1999, etc.). In this article I want to present a rational theory of spirit, based on my theory of cognition and general method of substantiation.
    First of all, I must note that the goal of a rational theory of
spirit is not a new method for the creation of the spirit. Its goal - to study existing varieties of spirit, their properties and their influence on various aspects of society and the processes operating in it, in other words goal is the inclusion of the spirit in the rational model, describing people and society.

    Historically, since the undivided domination of religion during long time, there is tradition to accept spirit as something absolutely positive, a priori positive. Such an approach is not a rational science. He does not match the experience and leads to the fact that for members of a particular religion, idelogi, teaching spirit, absolutely positive, and unstained is a devotion, service to their god, their ideology, their teaching. But affection and service another god, ideology, doctrine - this is not the spirit. This is at best misleading and in any case it is only evil.
Such approach to the concept of the spirit engendered religious and ideological conflicts and wars in human history and continues to wait for them today. Only rational theory of spirit can change the situation.
         To build the theory first we must give a definition of spirit appropriate to the task. (As I showed in "Neorationalism" (Part 1), there is no absolute, universal definitions and each definition must match the task for which it is introduced). Spirit and soul, I'll call below emotional attachment to a supra-personal. Determination does not possess undue severity, but that is the subject. For to make it clearer that I have in mind (as well as to "separate" soul and spirit), I will have to embark in a more or less verbose explanations.

    I'll call soul attachment of a man to specific people: his beloved wife, children (his), parents, friends, colleagues and even more distant, but still concrete and visibly, and not abstract people in general, and finally, concrete animals, places and things.

     Spiritual, I'll call attachment to an abstract idea, whose contents can be very different: God, the benefit of all mankind, accordingly understood (for example, socialism or technological progress), the benefit of his people (its freedom, or cultural development, or expansion and the world domination), abstract justice ("Let the world collapse, but the triumph of justice"), truth, science, art, all kinds of fetishes such as individual rules of morality (the family), tradition (Shabbat, pilgrimage to Mecca, the Christian New Year), rules, prohibitions and requirements for the behavior (eg, knightly honor, bushido, rules gentleman, Chinese tea drinking ceremony, and even the thieves 'law'), nature as such (pantheism), a particular type of animal, as such (the sacred cow in India), and even particular object, but as a fetish, holy (sacred stone in Mecca, Jerusalem not just as beloved city, but as a holy city, sacred oak of Slavic tribe Polyan, the sacred idols, icons), etc.
Now it is possible to go on to consider ways to include the concepts of soul and spirit in the rationalistic model. The path to that is shown in the book "Neorationalism" where spirit and soul are included, as the variable parameters, in the function of the quality of life. What is the function of this, as it is built, as you can search for the optimum of this function by methods similar to those used in the natural sciences, but with an appropriate adaptation needed because the lack of quantitative measures of parameters such as spirit, freedom, love, etc.,  all this I have described in "Newrationalism" (part 4) and in the article "Formation of social morality» ( Here I will focus on study of the linkages between the spirit and other parameters appearing in the function of the quality of life. That will help us to understand the effect of the spirit (of various kinds of it) on the social processes on the one hand and on the individual involved in these processes, on the other, and get an idea of what kind of spirit are useful and which are harmful to society.

    Above all, we must to show, that the spiritual and psyhic needs really exist in nature of man, and to compare the potential of these needs with potential physiological and others needs. That will permit us to includ them in function of the quality of life in addition to physiological and other needs. The existence of at least some of the psyhic needs in human nature can easily be illustrated, and even proven (to the extent that in general we can speak about prowing outside of mathematics). For example, such kind of psyhic attachment (ie, the need for such an attachment) as the love of parents to children, is well known and accepted under the name of the maternal and general parental instinct, the more so because it exists not only in humans, but many higher animals.

    Likewise, love of children to parents is not merely the result of upbringing. It is well known that early became orphan people who could not have this feeling be brought up, as a rule, sneaked through the entire life of thirst for this love, longing for it, have a feeling of dissatisfaction that psyhic need.

     As for love between man and woman, love, though related to sexual attraction, but does not reduce entirely to
it, there is no need to cite examples that it exists in humans and can reach extraordinary power, surpassing all other potential needs, including the instinct of life . You can refer to examples of selective love (very selectivity of which indicates that it is not reduced to a libido only) also in the animal world, such as swans, who, as we know, the male dies of grief, having lost beloved, and never paired with other. All this, however, is not evidence that love between a man and a woman is mandatory, a normal part of human nature, as there are so many people (at least not without exception) who lived his entire life without love and at least do not complain that it lacked.

    The same and even more can be said about most other types of soul attachments. Namely, we can provide many vivid examples of the existence and power of them, but it turns out that many people, for certain types of attachments - the vast majority, live their lives without experiencing them, and not realizing its deprivation at the same time. For example, there are cases of strong attachment to beloved dog, but those who do not have such an attachment, do not feel deprived.

     To a greater extent it relates to spiritual affections. We know that in the service of truth, the God, homeland, honor code, etc. people rose in the fires, closed by chest at embrasures, and passed through unimaginable torture, torturing himself by hunger, enclosing voluntarily in the cave, fighting duels, and even sacrificed their children. On the other hand, in our unspiritual age it is extremely difficult to convince the average man of the West, that he was something missing, especially if he has a good "Jobe", villa, car, etc. However, you can refer to other periods, such as the Middle Ages, when hardly anyone in Christian Europe would have thought to deny the existence of human spiritual need. Even today the situation is similar to many Muslim countries, for example, humeynistic Iran.

     You can continue to study the issue, whether soul and spiritual needs of human nature exist in the same sense as a need for food and drink, but I will not do that. I personally think that there are, even though they are younger in origin in evolutionary terms than the physiologic needs and according the spirit, I believe that the need for it has not yet completed the process of formation. In addition, these needs exist not in such differentiation, as listed in the the definition. That is, maternal instinct and the need for some other kinds of soul attachments exist as such, but are unlikely to exist in a pure need for affection, for instance, the dog. Likewise, specific spiritual needs do not exist in the differentiated form. Rather, besides the maternal instinct and some other species, there are still undifferentiated soul and spiritual needs, which may manifest itself in the attachment to your friends, animals, specific subjects, places, etc., and in the attachments to the above one or more objects of the spirit .

     But as I said, I will not to prove that, because my model does not matter whether there are soul and spiritual needs in human nature in the same sense that, say, the need for food or are the result of upbringing and life circumstances. I will only note that even if they exist in human nature, then, in any case, their differentiation, ie direction on a particular object, including the idea, is certainly a result of upbringing and circumstances, which is particularly evident for the spiritual attachments. Man is not born with any faith in God, the more so in particular, the Jews, for example, or Christian, or with a love for the country, nor a code of a gentleman.

      What, then, is important to model? It is important that the quality of human life, other things being equal, clearly higher among those who has or is aware of their soul and spiritual needs and satisfy them, compared with those who are aware of, but has not satisfied these needs, or in comparison with those who do not have or do not realize them. Proof of this is the strength of positive emotions to a man with spiritual affection and living a spiritual life, and strength of negative emotions or simply the depth of suffering and grief man, whose attachment ideal, the former object of his spirit for some reason is broken or destroyed. As soon as soul and spiritual needs, regardless of whether they have the same nature as the physiological or not, being satisfied, increase the quality of life, they must be included in the function of the quality of life as well as other needs, and in a such way as it has been described in Parts 3 and 4 of "Neorationalism", ie, in the form of addition with the correction coefficients. This is key to integration of soul and spirit in the rationalistic model.


    As it is in the case with morality (see "Neorationalism, Part 4) I will not continue to operate directly with the function of the quality of life, limiting evidence that, as shown above, the parameters of soul and spirit belong to this function and how they included. For the same, to see just how psyhic and spiritual needs of human impact on the quality of life and to compare these effects with the influence of other parameters, as well as to clarify the relationship of spirit and soul with them, let us consider the properties of soul and spirit that are relevant to the model.  

     First of all, I note that the soul and spiritual needs are more flexible than the physiological (especially such as in food). Flexible means that their satisfaction may be delayed for a longer period, especially if they have not woken up initially. In the latter case, their suppresstion may not be noticed during the life. However, this flexibility does not mean a smaller potential of them. Rather the reverse is true. As mentioned above, motivated by spiritual impulses in the service of spiritual ideals people are able to sacrifice their lives. (With regard to other people's lives, the sacrifice is successfully occers and because of a soul-spiritual reasons and under the influence of physiological and other needs). This is an individual plan. With regard to potential impact on social processes, there the spirit and the stomach, but at the same time and libido and desire for freedom successfully compete, though, as for me, the spirit has a greater impact on human history than the stomach and so on. Of course, not a few large and bloody events of history occurred under the influence of hunger or the oppressed freedom - riots, wars, revolutions, mass migration, etc. But only food riots, and migration can be attributed entirely to non-spiritual needs. Already wars of liberation - a phenomenon more spiritual than any other plan, because the main idea of them - the freedom for all people much more prevalent over the auxiliary goal - individual freedom, which for many was, perhaps, the initial impetus to the fight, but for many others, it not only became bigger, but even decreased in the fight (through military discipline). In the various revolutions the spiritual and non-spiritual elements strongly intertwined and diverse. Of course, almost all of them worked for the potential of a hungry stomach and a thirst for personal freedom, but on top of that certainly was applied and was dominated by the spirit, as worries about not just personal freedom and stomachs, but all the people, and as such ideals as equality, justice, dignity and so on.

    Finally, history tells of a powerful and longer purely spiritual movements, especially religious, including religious war, but even more about domestic than military, but profound and significant changes in human society under the influence of religions, as well as the great non-religious teachings, such as the ideology of the bourgeois revolutions , Marxism, existentialism.

    Speaking about the potential soul-spiritual needs, we must note one of their features. The capacity of most other needs as its satisfaction decreases, or, if increases, then bounded. Therefore, opportunities to improve the quality of human life and society by meeting the needs of the majority, except for the needs of soul and spiritual, are also limited. That is, during the acute dissatisfaction of these needs, their potential could be enormous: in the minus, to the hell of life we can slide infinitely. But when we're in a decent mid-level of satisfaction of physiological needs, say, in modern industrialized countries, the possibility of a substantial further increase the quality of life at the expense of further meet these needs are becoming more limited, although the inertia of the life of the consumer society prevents to understand that (a significant role plays here artificial fanning of consumer passions). Replacing a refrigerator by the best refrigerator, a machine  by more elegant vehicle is relevant only to the very illusive happiness and satisfies mostly relatively weak and only skillfully fanned need to be better than others, with better or no worse - only in the sense of the material level. Unlike other needs the spiritual-soul with their satiafaction not only reduces their capacity, but quite the contrary. And though the spirit often flares up, bumping into obstacles, but it is unclear whether these barriers are unsatiafaction of spirit or they are his food, ie satisfaction. An interesting example of this in St Exupery’s "Night Flight", where he describes the attitude of the Arabs to Lawrence. Lawrence was their sworn and fervently hated enemy and fight with him gave food to their spirit and filled their lives meaning and keen interest. When he left this life immersed in the sleepy hibernation. The main thing is that in many cases the satiafaction of the needs of soul and spirit, and without these deficalties and severity contributes to buildup, enhance and deepen their capacity. This happens in the case of the love of children and in the case of love for a woman (not always), and in the case of love for the motherland and love of art, etc. And the essential point is that this buildup can occur, obviously, in the unbounded scale. So even though the soul and spirit played a significant role in all previous stages of history, but from some point soul-spiritual sphere would be the main and almost the only battleground quest to further improve quality of life of man and society.


     Here we should note that in fact not only the spiritual needs can grow because of their satisfaction, arousing, awakening, upbringing, etc. Even such basic needs, like food, you can develop to gluttony. This applies even more to the needs of not purely physiological, but not a soul - spiritual, for example, such as the need for entertainment, adventure, excitement, risk, success, etc. Furthermore, it should be noted that there needs initially not inherent in human nature, but are the result solely of upbringing, instilling and incitement, and therefore generally occur only in those with whom they caught on. These are the needs of smoking, alcohol, drugs etc. However, the potential of all these needs (except for the needs of freedom) can not be developed to the same extent as the potential spiritual needs. The man, being hungry, can kill another because of the food, but do not sacrifice themselves. People can risk themselves for the sake of risk, as such, the excitement of the struggle for success, in pursuit of a beautiful woman, for drugs, even for a bottle of vodka and cigarettes. But! But do not deliberately sacrifice themselves, as it is done in the name of the soul and spirit (and freedom).

     There is another way of comparison of potential maximum capacity of spiritual and non-spiritual needs. Numerous memoirs, fiction and personal experience confirm that, if in his youth, say, the man had a rich spiritual life with the struggle for ideals, but at the same time with the physical hardships associated with this struggle, and eventually "settle down", etc. e. spirit waned and financial situation has stabilized, then his whole life he will remember the spiritual period, not only as the best part of his life, but in general as the only part that only he can truly call life, unlike contentedly quiet existence .

     It should be noted that any needs under the influence of external circumstances can not only burn, but also suppressed and fading. A classic example is the wilting of sexual needs in old age. For our model it is important that not only the satisfaction of some needs may limit the satisfaction of others, but growth of one needs can suppress others. The extreme examples is the excessive use of drugs or alcohol, which can lead to the destruction of the body and at the same time to wilting of its vital functions and needs.

     The growth of spiritual needs may also lead to wilting of other needs, what strongly depends on what the spirit directs at his ideas. Again, as an extreme example, the various monstrous sects, exhausting body and even pushing its members to commit suicide (whips, Seventh Day Adventists, etc.). But even if the idea of spirit is not directed specifically against any human needs, exalted, unbalanced, inharmonic ministry that spirit can lead to wilting of many, so say the normal needs, the fading of interest in life itself.

     Continuing the theme of potential soul-spiritual needs, it should be noted that the above expansion of them, as they meet satisfaction, has a downside, namely, if the satisfaction is terminated, this leads to a decrease in quality of life, the greater the potential, the sharper decline in principle, and to the instability of human life and society and can lead to disasters and tragedies. It depends on what is directed spirit and what the possibilities of its satisfaction at this time in society in general and individual in particular. This is the reason that many centuries for the majority of the population needs such as love of man and woman, love of art and even the thirst for justice and honor were considered and really be luxury, which only aristocrasy (all sorts Nifertiti) can permit to themselves. Moreover, even today in both developed and enlightened countries have a lot of people who voluntarily waive these needs, the development of their capacity, fearing that their dissatisfaction will make life worse, than it is, not wanting to risk instability, not wanting to fight, and dooming themselves to gray existence.

     It should be noted, however, that in cases where circumstances permit satisfaction of some soul-spiritual needs, their availability doing a man's life, but at the same time, and himself, not only richer but also more stable. Not surprising, therefore, not only in the harsh old days, when the family unit was essential to survival of people as the most convenient form of cooperation (the husband chases with the club for the wild beasts and his wife sew clothing from their skins), but also in developed countries family people, on average, more reliable and stable in life. Examples of unusual stability, which gives people the true and high spirit, helping them go through unimaginable trials will not lead: there are too many and they are well known from history and literature.  

     Another property of the spirit, it is the spirit, not soul, distinguishes it from every other human needs is its possible intolerance of another spirit, the spirit directed to another object or idea, often very close to the object or the idea of the spirit. Examples of this without number in history. That - and the age-old enmity between Christianity and Judaism and Protestantism to Catholicism in Christianity, and of the Pharisees and the Sadducees in Judaism and Marxism with bourgeois ideology, and the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks within Marxism, etc., etc., etc . The peculiar spirit (though not necessarily) bigotry and intolerance, as already mentioned, have no place in other human needs such as physiological, creating the illusion of the benefits of the latter and dangers of the spirit to humanity, illusion, widely used by representatives of the "new mentality" of modern society in their struggle with spirituality. I want to emphasize that this is still an illusion, because no matter how many disasters known to mankind from fanatical spirituality, even more disasters occur from such nonspiritual needs, as the thirst for power and the like, which always bloom where weakens the spirit.

     Now let us consider the relationship of spirit and soul with the other needs of human nature, and other parameters of the model, of course from the perspective of how these relationships can affect the quality of life and social processes.

     First of all, it should be noted that the presence of soul-spiritual needs and their satisfaction, usually combined, promotes and reinforces, with meet certain other needs of human nature, such as the need for communication, the need for deep, strong positive emotions (remember, for example, "Trinity"of Rublev), the need for a sense of belonging to some kind of human community. All of this is additional contribution to improving the quality of life, in addition to giving directly to the very needs of the soul and spirit.

    By contrast, the relationship of soul and spiritual attachment to freedom. Both restrict certain freedoms. But limiting by attachment differs from the constraints of the law or morality. The latter are imposed external constraints, even if you understand the need of them. Limitations of affection are self-restrictions, restrictions on voluntary, but still restrictions. Confirmation of this is occurring type of extreme lovers of freedom, deliberately avoiding love, family and other affections of soul and spiritual in the name of maximum freedom. How correctly they understand their own nature - that is another question. Many of them were biterly repented in their chosen path at some stage of life. Another proof of the considered limit the freedom by soul spiritual affection, is a sense of relief and liberation experienced by a man emerged from an unhappy love affair.

Satisfaction of the soul and spiritual needs can to limit also some physiological and certain other selfish needs (entertainment and recreation, for example), but on the other hand may increase. But, generally speaking, we sacrifice something for the sake of our loved ones, the more in the name of ideas which we served. Sacrifice time, which could be spent on making money and in general to personal success, sacrifice and "matter".

     All other relations of soul-spiritual needs, as well as the refinement discussed above, depend on what is their object of the affections. In this sense, there is a significant difference between the soul and spiritual attachments, especially when you take in account that we consider these relations in terms of the extent to which the soul and spirit are reflected in the quality of life of individuals and society. It was shown that other things being equal, they increase the quality of life and obviously can raise it in the highest degree. But essentially, that other things never being equal in life. And they do not just because there is conections of them with soul and spirit. So the difference in this respect between the soul and spirit that satisfaction of soul needs may limit the freedom, material consumption, etc., as a rule, only the individual who has the appropriate attachments, and, of most, those people on whom they are directed , although in the latter case, as a rule, more is given than is taken. Ie, mainly soul attachments are important only in personal terms, raising, as a rule, the quality of life of the individual, their having. As for the quality of life for society as a whole, the impact on personal soul attachment is extremely limited, unless the type of soul attachment becomes the object of spiritual ideas, as it was, say, romantic love in the times of chivalry, as it was and is the veneration of parents or general family ties in some people, etc.

     With regard to the spirit, he is able to enthrall the huge mass in the same direction and therefore exert a strong influence on the quality of life of entire nations and civilizations, both in that and in the other direction.

      Between the spirit and the object on which it is directed, there are forward and backward linkages. Direct - if the spirit is aimed at freedom, he promotes the general increase of freedom in society, if it aimed at justice - is justice, if at the patriotism - the prosperity of the motherland.


     Feedback is that the strength of spirit greater, than more universal need it reflects and the more intense this need at the moment. For example, the idea of redistribution of property in order to equalize when it serves as a basis for a particular robbery, it is no spirit, no supra-personal, it's malicious, criminal intent, etc. If it is extended to the reallocation of assets across all of humanity, it becomes the object of spirit, and as we learn from recent history, even a big and strong spirit. As Rodionov - Nikitin wrotes in his famous at 20-ies of previous age in Russia book "Chocolate": "the highest spirit borns out of the basest needs of the masses." On the other hand the power of the spirit depends on the urgency of that need, for which he directed, and when it comes to material needs, it is weakening under their satisfaction. This is one of the reasons why the spirit of Marxism weakened in general in the Soviet Union, when the material level of life became  relatively tolerable and it still strong enough in third world countries, where, roughly speaking, many are starving. Of course, to weaken the spirit of Marxism in the Soviet Union, there are other reasons, primarily the fact that Marxism has not fulfilled the promise of equality, as in material level so in rights, that the average material level in the former Soviet Union was lower than in Western countries, and that he infringed other urgent needs, which are grumbling, namely freedom, but more on that below.

     The potential of the spirit depends on the credibility of the truth of his ideas. Spirit is always to something directed generally to something desirable in itself, by virtue of our nature. But there is always doubt, supported by experience, that, obey the dictates of the spirit, we can come to negative results. So to spread the spirit, enhance credibility, strengthen faith, in general, to increase capacity is very significant attachment to the spirit of some general and authoritative concept explaining, possible, all in the world, ie, religion, philosophy and at least history and traditions that have at least such convincing, that our ancestors lived in such a way and had something good out of life, so let's not be even worse.


     Now consider the connection of spirit with such an object or a parameter of society as an organization. Spirit, as already mentioned, has always focused on some object, idea, ideal, as a rule, common to many people, often commensurate with the whole community. It is this shared focus of strong attachment of many people makes the spirit of the powerful factor of social processes (as Marx wrote: "The idea took possession of masses, becomes a force).   As a rule, these idea, ideal, etc. has the external obstacles to their implementation. Emotional attachment requires action to overcome these obstacles and such action is, by the way, food of the spirit, welcomed him. For example, the idea of national liberation even occurs as a result of external restrictions on the freedom of people, ie, enslaving it to other people, and the attachment to this ideal requires the overthrow of the yoke. The idea of social justice requires the accomplishment of social revolution or social reform or philanthropic activities.

    Sometimes these obstacles are the result of the above-mentioned fanaticism of spirit, its intolerance to another spirit. This was the case for all religious wars, when the carriers of one spirit sought to force to receive their spirit at the carriers of another spirit, so to speak, to make them happy against their will, because they saw the enemy in the second spirit and thought he was a danger to their one, regardless of whether the objective basis for this premise existed or not.

    As soon as because of the obstacles for the group, mass spirit a common goal and a work to achieve it appears, there is a need in the organization.     That is, whether the need is, it is still a question, but it is clear that the organization that coordinates the actions of many in the same direction, extraordinary increases the effectiveness of these actions under "other things being equal". That's, something to these "other things being equal", which never happens, especially in this case, no one usually pays no attention. Why not other things being equal in this case? Because there is a very significant inverse relationship between the organization and spirit. This relationship in a nutshell is that the organization kills the spirit, replacing a living attachment to the ideal by the imposed obligation. This process is not instantaneous with the emergence of the organization. At first, people are aware of the need for organization and this does not diminish their enthusiasm for the idea. This is the most effective phase of the ideas when the spirit, enthusiasm, dedication, combined with the organization of their guide.

     However, the organization means management, and therefore power. Power meet one of the specific needs of the human nature - the instinct of power, which similarly to the spirit and unlike the physiological instincts flaring up as his sutifaction. The instinct that can be called anti-spirit. If the spirit requires serving the general interest, up to donate purely personal, the instinct of power requires to sacrifice at the interests of all to the interest of one. However, at certain periods the interest of one which is in power and interest of many, his subordinates, may coincide, at least formally. This usually happens at the birth of organizations serving the spirit (idea). At the same time, those who are initially headed such organizations, they usually are its creators and they are the greatest exponents of the spirit and his ministers. Therefore, at first, as a rule, there is complete harmony. However, organizations exist for a long time, often - for many generations. The inspired creators of the organizations are replaced by less spiritualized their followers, which due to occupy the vacant seat, in addition to serving the idea were need also to fight for a place with their competitors, ie, to fight for power. Gradually, the degeneracy of the top of the organization occers. On the first stage of ossification of organization the lower classes did not notice the substitution and maintain enthusiasm. However, under increasing the struggle for a power in the organization, the interests of fighting rullers more and more divided with the interests of mass serving at the idea. Then comes the next stage, where the masses realize that they serve not so much the idea of how much the rullers of the organization and then the enthusiasm starts to weaken, although it does not disappear completely.


     At this stage the rullers, whose strength is based on the exploitation of idea and spirit, and therefore they interested in maintaining the enthusiasm, take measures, of course, institutional arrangements (becouse on a purely spiritual effect they are no longer able) to preserve and implement the spirit. These measures are the creation of various institutions for the study, preservation, detalization and extension of the idea, which now becomes official. That is writing countless interpretations of the basic idea and interpretations of interpretations, etc., and the establishment of institutions in which these interpretations are examined, and simultaneously fabricated and evaluated, and the introduction of all kinds of academic degrees and positions associated with the study, interpretation and dissemination of the idea, and the introduction of the idea (theory) in compulsory education, or in worst cases, the reduction of compulsory education to study the subject and, finally, the introduction of infinite detailed standards of conduct for ordinary members of the organization (or society in general), the fulfillment of which should symbolize the spiritual affection of a member to the idea. The introduction of these standards and monitoring them is the logical culmination of the relationship the organization and spirit. The organization creating to share the responsibilities of its members, to exercise control and, therefore, monitoring, wants to control and the spirit of its carriers. But the spirit can not be monitored as such, so it introduce the formal signs of his presence and degree: how many people did good deeds for the year, etc. The introduction of these measures has a dual effect. Some part of the population it returns to the fold of the organization pulled out of a tavern, but the genuine and original carrier of the spirit, it usually repels. And then the true spirit leaves the system, and remains its shell - the organization with its institutions and its aforementioned ersatzes.

    At this stage, the effectiveness of organization is greatly reduced, but it can exist for a long time, using the established mechanisms of governance and, as a rule, suppression (the latter eventually gaining more weight) and ersatzes of  spirit.

    Here it should be noted that the extension of life of these shells of departed spirit promoted by the fact that the alternative to them is usually not a new, ripe, powerful spirit, but a total lack of spirituality and the negation of spirit which leads all other things being equal to an even lower level of quality life than the ersatz and the shells of practically dead, but the great in the past spirit.

     More should be noted that if these shells have striking forms of ceremonies and rites and existing over periods commensurate with the lives of several generations, they receive, so to speak, a secondary spirituality, spirituality of traditions, attachment to which is not based on the sense of tradition, but on the fact that so did the ancestors and so does the entire nation. This, of course, is also supra personal and therefore spirit.

    Further development of the plot may have many options depending on external circumstances and the subjective human factor. It is possible reformation with dropping unproductive shells of cult and filling with fresh blood of original ideas. Possible the emergence of new great ideas and buildup of a new spirit and a repetition of the history first. Possible loss of just society and creating on its ruins the new formations.

    By the way, the process discussed above coherent evolution of the spirit and organization combined also with the evolution of morality. Namely, the process of nucleation ideas and ignition of the spirit is accompanied by crystallization of the new morality and take-off of its authority. The process of decay of the spirit takes place simultaneously with the entropy process of demoralization.

     A few more comments about the spirit and organization. Spirit does not necessarily require the emergence of the organization and not necessarily cause it. For example, the gentlemanly code, the consecration of morality or just family and so forth do not require the organization. On the other hand, an organization is not the direct child of spirit. It is a direct product of the need to conduct common affairs that existed and exists independently of the spirit, and which, incidentally, much more than spirit restricts freedom. On the other hand, the need for managing of common affairs contributes to buildup of spirituality, acknowledge and satisfaction of it, because when a person participates in the common affairs, he, wants it or not, works not only for himself but for others, and this obstacle is the satisfaction of spirit which, as already mentioned above, fueling the very need for it. Thus, the spirit does not always couse, and not always preceded the emergence of the organization. It is possible as well their simultanious development and preliminary of organization, and in the latter case, the organization itself can, so to speak, to form spirit, to give him an idea.  


     Such was the case with the monarchical spirit, ie, the emotional attachment to the monarch, sovereign, and so forth and devoted to him. At the core of this spirit, as well as any other, is, of course, the very need in the service to supra personal, but the direction of this spirit, the idea has given by a specific organization, called the monarchical state, which has historically occurred not to serve this particular spirit, that did not exist before its occurrence, nor the spiritual needs, as such. It emerged as the best and most efficient form of human cooperation in a certain historical period.

     By the way, the organizations emerged not because of the great spiritual ideas, but for reasons of co-operation as such, are also evolving and this evolution is similar to the above, although there are features. The main feature is that such an organization does not begin with the highest ascent of the spirit and during the initial period the spirit flared up relatively slow, and largely by itself, ie, simply as a result of joint action by all parts of the organization towards a common goal . As a rule, those who are headed in this period at organization, relatively honestly work for common goal (otherwise, the organization suffers a failure). Buildup in the spirit of this period is also carried out as a result of direct (organizational) impact in power, whose purpose - strengthening of organization and power. Beginning with a period-maximum point, begins the above described process of immobilizing and ossification of the spirit, accompanied by the process of decrepitude of organization. More precisely, this process is slipping from the very beginning, but the first prevails process of buildup.

    Another observation. Above-mentioned fanaticism of spirit, often is a consequence of killing and the curvature of the spirit by the organization and appears at the appropriate stage. This happens because those in positions of power and exploiting the idea, seeing the extinction of enthusiasm and wanting to ignite it again, put false obstacles to the spirit and come up with false risk of another spirit (as we know, the obstacles kindle the spirit).

     Examples of the above are again without number, but especially striking - a war of conquest carried out by the rulers of peoples with a view to kindle of the dying patriotism in a situation where the power of authority within the country undermined. An example is the Russian-Japanese war in 1905, and many others.

     Another property of the spirit that characterizes its relationship with the organization, is its ability to divide itself, to create branches into close directions, each with its organization and with the hostility between them. Examples of this have already been given above, when I spoke about the possible fanaticism of spirit. Namely: Christianity - an offshoot of Judaism, Catholicism and Protestantism are the result of the splitting of Christianity (as well as Orthodox and a number of smaller branches), the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks - the splitting of Marxism, etc., etc. The basis of these splittings are variations the spirit itself, its object, idea (Judaism and Christianity), or variations of the ways to achieve the declared goals (the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks). In this and in another case, the splitting occurs usually at a time when there is organization (accompanied and organizational same a split), and as there is some degree of decay of spirit. Examples will be given in the future.

    Now I shall try, starting from the model proposed above, to review the general history of the human spirit and an associated history of society, by analyzing how one or another direction of the spirit has changed above discussed quality of life and influence on social processes and the fate of mankind.

    In primitive tribes, the attachment to the members of the tribe was psychic, to the specific visible people, to the same family. It also was supported by the need for cooperation and mutual protection (today I helped or saved you, tomorrow you me), but not reduced, of course, only to cooperation. The power of psyhic affections, as we know, even in animals may exceed the instinct of life, the more this should have been found in primitive tribes (Gorky’s Danko - though it is not scientific proof, but bright). With the growth of the tribes this atachment more spiritualized. It was no longer the atachment to specific and familiar people, but to the abstract concept of "tribal people. That is the spirit.

     Another way of developing spirituality - through religion. Initially, fear forced people to worship the forces of nature to appease them to avoid punishment and beg a better fate. That was selfish adoration, even when in the name of the collective gain was sacrificed to the gods people. However, thanks to the gods for the allegedly rendered their benefit borns affection, which, becouse it was directed on the abstract object, was already the rudiment of spirituality.

     Let us consider what this early spirituality (in the tribal stage) gave people and how it affected the social processes. There is no doubt that it increases the quality of life of the tribes not only by themselves, meeting the soul - spiritual needs of people and improving communication but also through improving so vital then cooperation members of the tribe, its reliability. And it was important for the very survival, not to mention the physiological needs. As of early religious spirituality, the belief in pagan gods, in addition to making life more colorful and contribution to the development of art, which, in turn, enriches the spirit, it did people mentally more stable, since helping to carry misfortune, through faith in help of the gods.

     Infringement of individual freedom, which is certainly called by spirituality, from an early non religious spirituality were negligible. In fact, appropriate freedom and so were greatly impaired at the time by harsh external conditions: the struggle for life with the elements, wild animals, with other tribes. In order to survive, man had to take tribal way of life, together with all its limitations and what he felt for the members of his tribe soul or spiritual affection, not only restricts his freedom additionly, it is only the psychologically easier for him to conciliation with the lack of freedom, which so or else he had to endure.


      Another thing are restrictions on freedom caused by the early religious spirituality. They always have been additional to the constraints imposed by the tribal way of life and external circumstances. Their degree dependent on the nature of worship. If gods demanded to sacrify food, it was a victim of stomach, if - a living person, then it was the last victim and the freedom and the life. In addition to sacrifices there have been all other religious restrictions, the famous taboo. And yet it must be assumed that in those hard times, even such additions to the restrictions on freedom were insignificant in comparison to the objective restrictions by nature (death of an individual has been had not yet "Big Deal" and taboos have been a trifle compared with the constraints of external threat). So it can be assumed that in the balance of quality of life this early religious spirituality yielding positive results.

   Regarding the impact on social processes, then the tribes with greater
soul and spiritual atachments, all other things being equal, were a more vigorous, victorious and survive. Survival was the same in those days the content of social process.

    The next stage of development of spirituality has been linked to the influence of an organization. In the tribal struggle and struggle with the nature a decisive factor in those days was not soul-spiritual, which, of course, also played a role in other things being equal,  but a factor of the organization. The most effective organization for the emerging nations in those conditions and for many centuries has been a monarchy, and in general totalitarian system. They also formalized the development of appropriate spirituality. Monarchies and other tipes of despotism severely limited the most essential human freedoms and for the vast number of people meant and lower material level compared with the tribal way of life. On matters such as dignity, honor, justice, equality, and say no. What is the monarchy but improved the quality of life compared to the tribal order - this is, to put a cloth modern language, in life insurance. That is, the safety of life has increased immeasurably, of course. Primitive tribes far too successfully exterminating each other (that we know from the history of American Indians and African tribes), and in the struggle with nature was not too strong. Despotism finished with tribal feuds, not to mention the wild animals. Did the despotism improved the quality of life in general compared to the primitive communal system, the question is not so much difficult as unimportant for today, so I will not consider it. As a monarchist spirituality, it certainly improved the quality of life ... other things being equal. If you really had to endure a monarchy, so it was better to believe that it is the best system and love of the monarch. About what is appropriate monarchical spiritual fulfillment can be judged from the fact that even in the overthrow of the monarchy were their true supporters not only among the ruling classes, who fought for them a life and death. Regarding the impact of this spirit on the public process, he strengthened the monarchy.

    By the end of the era of the spirit, which can be called monarchical or despotic, there is such an interesting and important for human civilization, its spirit and organization phenomenon, as the Hellenic democracy and its associated culture. Specify that, under the end of an era of monarchical spirit, I do not mean the end of the monarchies and despotisms of the world (they are even today not run out). I mean the end of the exclusive rule of the dominant monarchical spirit and appearance comparable to him in the power spirit and ideas, which, moreover, since its inception determined to a large extent the development of human civilization. First and foremost the embodiment of that spirit and those ideas was the Grees democracy.

Whether the ancient democracy has appeared as a result of natural development of a form of social organization to compete with others and to hold out, and then it spawned an appropriate spirit, or the emergence of democracy preceded the idea and the buildup of the spirit, I can not say. Both are basically possible. Democratic form ofrulling, though not of the States and peoples, so tribes have historically been preceded totalitarianism and despotism, and the primitive tribes ruled by elected chiefs and elders. The historical process has not proceeded with equal speed across the globe, and while in Egypt for thousands years there was empire, blue-eyed pelazgs ran through their Pelopones peninsula still in the primitive communal state, ie the primitive democratic governance. When they began to merge or grow in people and build their state, then, of course, that a democratic form of organization would have to be tested by them in the first place. However, if we consider that among the Greek states were not only democracy but also of the kingdom, and in surrounding there were entire kingdoms, the earliest democracies undoubtedly had to withstand the fight against despotism. Despotism rests on the fact that it forces by power at all to work for a common purpose (and the spirit there has a secondary role). Democracy can be strong only due to voluntary desire of citizens to serve the common interest. Voluntary, conscious and emotionally experiencing. But this is, of course, - the spirit. So do not clarify issues what were before: the chicken or the egg, we can say that from the very beginning the Greek democracy was carrying the high spirit, aiming at freedom, equality, dignity and responsibility of each of the common destiny -  things which still deeply worry many people. How strong were these ideals can be judged from the fact that in antiquity, particularly in Athenian democracy was the custom to expel from the country people, avoided participation in national disputes and quarrels, and to deprive them of citizenship.

      In addition to the ideals of democracy, the ancient Greeks and Romans appreciated the harmonious development of personality, which was also one of the elements of their spirituality. Another part of it was religion, more exactly religions, which were pagan, as in primitive peoples, but among the Greeks and Romans, they were much richer in imagination and colorful for the rites. This wealth of fantasy cult, along with the desire for beauty and harmony gave impetus to the great art of antiquity, unrivaled in the sense of harmony to this day. This, in turn, was the subject of admiration, ie, the spirit. If we add to this the ancient philosophy, we see that ancient society was extraordinarily rich in spirit. It woke up spirit in its sitizens in different directions and sutisfacted these different kinds of spirit, although the thrust, as I said, was democracy itself, as forms of social organization, with its ideals of liberty, equality and dignity. This spiritual treasure impact on the lives of every citizen, improving its quality, both through direct development and meet the spiritual needs and because the focus of ancient spirituality that will ensure a democratic form of government, and it, in turn, - higher supply of the needs for freedom, dignity and even material needs in comparison with the life of the average citizen of neighboring despotisms. We have no instruments to measure quality of life, but and without them, hardly anyone would dispute that the life of the average Athenian was incomparably better life of the average Egyptian, the same time.

    Regarding the impact on social processes, it is the high spirit ensured a long life to the ancient democracies in the sea of despotisms. Without it, they would have perished at the dawn. They both died after the spirit wilted in the above-described process of interaction of spirit and organization. But thanks to an unusually high initial take-off and a number of his reformation and revival (for example, transfer of development center in another place and to another people - Rome), ancient democracy has existed for so long, and gave such excellent results, both for those who lived with her, so , and for all humanity through generations.

    Essentials, a grand leap in the development of religious spirituality, but at the same time, and spirituality in general, was the emergence of monotheistic religions - Judaism and its further development, in particular the transition to Christianity. Monotheistic religion, particularly Judaism, delivered powers of all the gods to one omnipotent God and so unusually enhance its credibility. It also gave a unified and coherent picture of structure of the world, including its origins and man's place in it, which contributed to credibility of the conception in the eyes of believers, and hence stability, strength of spirit. Then this religion demanded the unconditional love of God, not waiting remuneration (Iov, and then all of Christianity as a whole). And finally, by the authority of God, it demanded " to love your neighbor," ie, closed ranks with the spirituality , which is developed on the basis of the transformation of tribes into nations and awareness of belonging each one to the universal fate of all mankind, sanctified its and raised to unparalleled heights in human values .

     Monotheism in the face of Judaism for the first time reacted to the spirit, as to the needs of human nature: Six days a week, thou take care of daily bread, and one day - Saturday, take care of the soul and spirit.

     Generally initialy Judaism was a highly harmonious religion perfectly proper to human nature and society. Incidentally, he also formulated very close to optimum morale and highlighted it by authority of God. At this stage the influence of Judaism on the quality of life has been extremely positive. First of all it was due to the great development and deepening of the spiritual needs, which monotheistic religion has carried out and that it also meets for deep and sincere believers to an extent, obviously, has not yet been surpassed. On the depth and power of these spiritual affections evidenced the incredible persecution and torture that have voluntarily adopted and imposed zealots of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, in the name of their faith, as well as great art, inspired by this spirit, and above all the spirit of Christianity: symphony music of Bach and Vivaldi, gothic, architecture of Orthodox churches, painting with all the Madonnas of Raphael and others, icons of Rublev and Dionysius, etc., etc.

     Exceptional role played
also the introduction and the consecration of morality, which is close to the optimum, the part of function quality of life, determined by physiology and freedom, improved the quality of communication and so on.

     But this idyllic harmony lasted in Judaism, apparently not for long and soon the high and harmonic spirit became to die off, overgrowing with shells of interpretations, restrictions, regulations, rituals, traditions, instances and so on. The reason of such transformation was the above described process of interaction between organizations and spirit. External circumstances also contributed to this process. First of all, it was fighting of Judaism with spirit of the ancient pagan culture begining virtually from the onset of Judaism, and later the fight against Christianity. In both cases Judaism was in defense and in both cases it was accompanied by a physical struggle for territory and survival. The latter greatly accelerated the process of mortifiing and fanaticism of Judaism: it was much easier to prists to set people against another spirit in a situation, where its carriers were at war with Jews (or pursues them). That why the harmony of Judaism broke down almost from the begining  by establishing of bans, restricting some important freedoms to which external circumstances then the validity of these restrictions did not impose: free love, freedom to paint, sports, etc. These restrictions, to some extent, were the result of the desire to fence itself off from the opposing spirit perceived as hostile, the Hellenic spirit that these liberties highly valued and cultivated.


Then quickly flowed process of immobilizing of spirit by the organization and at the time of the advent of Christianity the spirit of Judaism experienced the strongest decline. This decline beautifully described in the Christian Gospels, which are, of course, one-sided source. But history, including history, filed in the Tanakh (Old Testament), confirm this: the reason for the fall of the Second Temple happened shortly after the birth of Christianity, was "Sinat Achim ', ie, the mutual hatred of the Jews in the camp, based on religious strife, the very existence of which indicates a considerable degree of subordination of the spirit to the organization and fanatism of it, as a consequence of this subordination.

     Comparing the influence on quality of life of the spirit of Judaism and the Hellenic on, it should be noted that on the one hand, the spirit of Judaism developed the spiritual needs of its believers and satisfied them even more than the Hellenic did the same to Greeks and Romans. Further, Judaism sanctified morality in general and its components such as justice, in particular, with a thirst for justice, the spirit of Judaism without equal among any preceding or among the next. (Jewish prophets, among them Jeremiah, rebelled against God himself in defense of justice). But on the other hand, Judaism did not have the focus on democracy, freedom and equality, which was carrying the Hellenic spirit, and which, as already stated, contributed to the raising of the qualityof life, not only by meeting the spiritual, but practicaly all other needs. In addition, the spirit of Judaism, quickly become fanatical, restricted a number of substantive freedoms of believing Jew in comparison with, say, an Athenian citizen.

    Regarding the impact on social processes, it should be noted here two additional directions of spirit of Judaism: one on the Jewish people as such, the other on its national liberation. The first direction led to the fact that Judaism having a high, in general, degree of fanatism in most of its history, it has never had the slightest expansionist tendencies, spiritual, above all, but as a consequence physical also, unlike, say, Christianity or Islam. That is, fanatically struggling with Hellenic and Christian spirituality for influence over the souls of Jews, Judaism was tolerated, even simply indifferent, to what gods worshiped by non-Jews. The second focus, on national liberation, has played a significant role in the history of the Jewish people, leading first to the final dissemination of Jews throughout the world after the doomed to defeat uprising for independence under the leadership of Bar Kochba against the powerful at the time Rome, and then to the revival of the Jewish state in 2000 years after the dissemination. And together they have identified in the highest degree of isolation and non solubility of Jewish people with others in a period of two thousand scattering.

    Christianity originated in the period of decay of the spirit of Judaism in its asphyxiating shells, and which was in essence the reaction to this decay, was the Reformation of Judaism, preserving basicaly its original orientation, but emphasising a spirituality as such. Therefore, Christianity has provided an even higher rise of spirit, and as for me, the highest in the history of the human spirit rise, but this spirituality from the beginning has been deprived of harmony, was ecstatic, not controlled by reason (religion of revelation) and not caring about compliance with all other human needs.

     In its relation to liberty, equality, dignity and democracy as a form of governance which provides them, Christianity is even more contemptuous than Judaism: the man is "God's servant", "Blessed are the poor in spirit", "All power is from God," etc. e. And in relation to justice Christianity less zealous than Judaism, preferring to it mercy and forgiveness.

    In general, Christianity, even appeared as a reaction to the decline of the spirit of Judaism, but does not spread among the Jews but in the Roman empire and its possessions in the period of empire decline, with the spread initially among the slaves after the suppression of several desperate attempts to escape through the rebellion. For slaves, who before appearing of Christianity have been deprived of freedom and dignity, and justice, and equality and hope for them in this world, Christian spirituality gave unequivocal improvement in quality of life. However, it was not so unequivocally in relatios to Jews, who were thirsting and justice and national freedom and have not lost faith in the possibility of achieving them. Therefore, despite the decline of spirituality in this period, the Jewish people for the most part did not accept Christianity, but went for the former spiritual leaders, even though they have poisoned his life by immoderate regulation and fanatical strife between the various branches of the spirit of Judaism (such as the Pharisees and the Sadducees), and their organizations.

     Christianity following the spread among the slaves of Rome, spread among its free citizens and then among the peoples of Europe, then conquered by Rome. Over time, Christianity has given rise to his organization, which as expantion of Christianity was becoming more force and more and more puts to death and fanaticism spirit. This, coupled with the fact that Christianity unlike Judaism did not have focus on one nation, not only led to a strong intolerance of the Christian spirit to any other, but also to its expansionist tendencies, first as a missionary, then in the form of numerous and bloody religious wars, as with the heterodoxes, especially the Muslims (Crusades), so, the extent of branching of religion, whether as a result of its geographic spread (the Byzantine and Orthodox), or splits on the basis of the Reformation (Protestantism) - between Christian nations.

     In addition to the religious wars immobilization and fanaticism of spirit of Christianity led to such phenomena as the Inquisition, the enrichment of the church hierarchy and robbing by it of the masses of believers, and the unconditional support by church of the most barbaric and cruel forms of power.

     Regarding the impact on quality of life, Christianity, highly developed spirituality and gave it a very rich food, including through art, inspired by its spirit, and through ritual, on the other hand greatly reduced the liberty, even in comparison with Judaism (not including the freedom to engage in painting, but also greatly curtailed until the Renaissance), not to mention the ancient democracy. As already mentioned, Christianity was once a spirit of non-harmonic, exalted. It is not only neglected the aforementioned democratic freedoms and such concepts as equality, dignity, honor, and even justice, it is neglected and physiological needs. Moreover, unlike Judaism, Christianity was originally contrasted the spirit to the body, declaring all of the normal human physiological needs of sinfulness, and their satisfaction, at best, a sad necessity that can really only tolerate (although not always). As a result, Christianity not only gave rise to forms of life, infringing the physiological needs, such as monasteries, voluntary confinement in a cave and even the mass self-burning (in some Christian sects), but in general (along with the monarchy, which it supported), unusually restricted meet of all human needs other than spiritual, in the period of its maximum rule, ie, in the Middle Ages. Of course, as always, we have not instrument for the accurate measurement of quality of life, but it seems almost obvious that the life of ordinary resident of the European Middle Ages, despite the high development and meeting the spiritual needs, was pretty grim, and sometimes unbearable, as compared with life of the average Athenian at age of Pericles, or the life of the Jewish shepherd or husbandman at the time of King Solomon or the Hasmonean period.

     Regarding the impact on social processes, Christianity, who believe all authority from God, was the very substantial and reliable support of the autocracy in medieval Europe, though not Christianity gave rise to it. Any rebellion against the authority it considered displeasing to God, even if the government was cruel and unbearable (nonviolent resistance to evil "). Furthermore, Christianity because of its extreme fanaticism, strongly inhibits the development of science and in this sense throw back medieval Europe compared with the Hellenic world.

     As a reaction to the immobilization of Christianity and its initial disharmony happened reformations, main among them - Protestantism. There were appeared also other kinds of the spirit, not denied at Christianity and combined with it at first, but eventually greatly limit the areas of its influence.

     The first was the Renaissance. As can be seen from the title, the spirit of it was the revival of the Hellenic spirit, naturally not in its full extent and with other accents. Interestingly, the emergence of this spirit, like his ancient predecessor, is associated with a democratic form of government, which was this time among the Mediterranean trading republics of Venice, Genoa, etc. As in the previous case, it is hard to tell exactly what was there before, a spirit or organization, but when it comes to the main content of this spirit, as we imagine it today, it has developed considerably later than were born Italian Republic, the more so that this spirit has spread and influenced the whole of European civilization, but without changing the monarchical form of government most European countries. Accordingly, the main thrust of this spirit was no longer a democracy as a form of government, but on the harmonious development of human personality. The Renaissance opposed primarily not a monarchical form of governance, but the spirit of Christianity, though not all and not rebelled against him directly. Against what the spirit of the Renaissance really revolting - it is against neglect of not spiritual needs of human nature, what medieval Christianity does, particularly in the love between a man and a woman and freedoms, particularly freedom of art and science. "I believe" of the Renaissance was Human Being harmonious with all his needs, both spiritual and physiological and freedom.

     This harmony of Renaissance helped mitigate Christianity in his bigotry, and served as the foundation of powerful new flourishing of art and science development. The influence of the Renaissance to the quality of life has been extremely positive. Spirit of the Renaissance raised no specific organization and is therefore not undergone a process of immobilization and fanatism. Thanks to this spirit Christianity in the epoch of the Renaissance, and under his influence, not only did not wilted, but reached their peaks, especially in the arts (Vivaldi and Bach, Raphael, Dante, and so forth). But in parallel with the religious spirit a purely human spirit bloomed and glorify the beauty of man, his actions and feelings, but especially love to a woman. (Same as Dante, Petrarch, Botticelli).

     Construction of the Renaissance to the pedestal of love for a woman, but at the same time and generally human love, for example, the parent’s love (all these Madonna, in which earthly love for his earthly son competed with the love of the Son of Heaven), played a crucial role in enriching the spiritual and soul life of as the contemporaries of Renaissance so all subsequent generations, until our days. The atmosphere of the Renaissance helped to revive  souls, frozen by Christianity, which all strong soul attachment, even husband to his wife and mother to son, tends to be regarded as a sin, deprive affection for God. In this atmosphere it was easy to bloom ordinary earthly human love, and she blossomed. The friendship and affection to own home and town also bloomed. It was so warm and rich of the human sense era. The Renaissance influenced positively and social processes, greater liberty, moderating fanaticism and paving the way for the future of the bourgeois revolutions. Let me remind you that although the spirit of the Renaissance was not so accentuated on democracy as the Hellenic one, but, of course, gravitated to her. In general, the Renaissance created a beautiful living environment for those who lived in this era and left an indelible mark on the entire future of human civilization.

     Next for the Renaissance of a major spiritual phenomenon (as adopted by me here scale) was the ideology of bourgeois revolutions and its spirit. As mentioned bourgeois revolutions were largely prepared by the Renaissance and therefore their ideology in many ways was the successor to the ideas of the Renaissance. However, you should not take the matter as if the bourgeois revolution were simply a means of meeting of the spirit at a certain stage of its buildup. As mentioned above, there are possible and there have been phenomena of human history, which was driving only by force of spirit (referred to the Crusades, for example) have been phenomena, where the main propulsion was the stomach (food riots), were phenomena in which various spiritual and non-spiritual factors are mixed in varying proportions. In the case of the bourgeois revolutions, a significant and perhaps primary role played purely material process, called technological revolution. Although whether it was purely material process, is still question, because at the basis of this process lay of scientific discoveries and the development of Science had a duty to its ability to the spirit of the Renaissance. In any case, there is no doubt that the bourgeois revolutions would have been inconceivable without the technological revolution that spawned the bourgeoisie, which has become the main driving force behind them. But it has become this force not only because of the power of money which it received thanks to the technological revolution. This was a substantial factor, but not so essential to political power fell into the hands of the bourgeoisie as a ripe pear, and the bourgeoisie have to compete for this power struggle, risking lives and wallets and donating them. The reason for the willingness and ability of the bourgeoisie to fight and sacrifice and not willingness of other groups, that the need for freedom of the bourgeoisie was the highest compared to other sectors of society at that time. We know that the need for freedom has a powerful potential, but also great flexibility and satisfaction may be delayed for long periods and even for life. We also know that this need can oppress to such an extent that it is not even perceived, not understood by man. Finally, we know that the quality of life the best, if needs are developed and satisfied, but if they are not developed, depressed, not recognized and are not satisfied, then this is not the worst quality of life. Worse is when they are developed, recognized, but not satisfied. So, in the era of bourgeois revolutions freedom of the vast majority of the population were severely restricted, but for the majority - peasants need for freedom was not developed and did not realized by them at this time, as in the earlier Middle Ages. They had no freedom, but do not feel it necessary. By means of long depression this need was as if atrophied.

Another thing bourgeoisie. Its business awakened thirst for freedom and, though this need was satisfied by the bourgeoisie more than the peasantry, but the pent-up potential still remained much higher. This potential pave the way for igniting the spirit of the bourgeois revolutions, the essence of which was freedom for the bourgeoisie.

     Merging the unmet needs of individual freedom with the need of a spiritual freedom for all, as the ideal social order, was the main driver of the bourgeois revolutions.

     What was the spirit of these revolutions in more detail? As already mentioned, its main thrust was freedom and democracy as the political system which is providing it. (Not coincidentally, so part of our contemporaries, in general, equate democracy with freedom, in what does, of course, a mistake). Above all the freedom to install, of course, free enterprise, the one whose potential was highest among the bourgeoisie. But also political freedoms: press, speech, demonstrations were highly exalted and sanctified. In contrast to the Renaissance, the ideologists of the bourgeois revolutions openly rebelled against the dominance of religion, proclaiming and hallowed freedom of conscience and separating religion from state. At the higher level, at least initially, rose up the ideal of universal equality before the law. Another one of the ideals that rivals in importance above, was the inviolability of private property.

     As with other ideals of the Renaissance and Hellenism, such as the harmonious development of human personality, the ideal of love and beauty, they are inherited only just as…so and in the future greatly transformed. However, before they are significantly degenerated, they could serve as a basis for the richest of European art XVIII-XIX centuries, especially of literature and poetry. At least in Literature and Poetry ideal of love for woman received further development. (Note, incidentally, that it absorbed and the tradition of the medieval chivalry and partly Code gentleman (areas in which due to the brevity of this essay in the history of the spirit I do not stop).

    As for the influence of the spirit of the bourgeois revolutions on the quality of life, first of all it should be separated from the influence of the revolutions themselves, which, as already stated, were not a consequence of mere realization of this spirit, but the impact of scientific and technological progress.  


    The latter led, ultimately, a significant change in the material standard of living and other external circumstances that will certainly impact on meeting the physiological and other non-spiritual needs. Immediately the spirit of the bourgeois revolutions significantly contributed to meet the needs for freedom, for dignity, equality before the law, partly justice, but not material. With regard to the spiritual life, it was rich enough at first due to burning themselves the ideals and in connection with the strong development of the arts and the possibility of access to them to a large population through universal education, for example. After all the same spirituality as a whole was significantly lower from the purely Christian (medieval, say), and the Renaissance, and, what is significantly, it rather quickly abated.

    The point is that unlike the Renaissance spirit of the bourgeois revolutions spawned its organization, firstly a class, then the state governments and government agencies. As a result, the process of immobilization of spirit has begun, with all ensuing consequences. In the outside it is reflected in an aggressive war for the occupation and redistribution of colonies. Inside is reflected in the fact that the ideals not only of love and beauty, but also the dignity, equality, justice and even democracy itself began to fade, giving way to the ideal of gain. This, coupled with a strong exploitation and economic inequality has created fertile ground for the emergence of a new ideology and its spirit – Marxist’s socialism.

    The spirit of Marxism began with ideology, more precisely, with the theory, with philosophy. This would seem, was to give him an advantage in the sense of not too rapid immobilization and fanaticism. However, it did not happen because of the specificity of the theory itself, which only took an initial push from some ideals and immediately transferred and devoted herself to the ways of their realization, which led to the creation of the organization and determine how it must act. This is the organization - the Communist Party was created by the founders of the spirit even before, then the philosophy was completely accomplished. This organization, directed by the theory not only to certain ideals, but also to quite specific in the sense of the social process goals (the proletarian revolution), was in highest degree successful, as in the spread of Marxism and the achievement ofproclamed goals, so in the death-grip of the spirit giving birth to her. In the latter – with such success that if fathers of Marxism would rised again and will appear in the "country of victorious socialism", they would be there, obviously, locked up behind bars.

     What is the basic, original spirit of the Marxist orientation and whether such spirit existed ever? The latter question is relevant because the presence of spirituality in Marxism was denied initially, and up to today is denied by his political opponents, as Russian monarchists as well as by such thinkers as Solzhenitsyn.

Let me use it to illustrate that spirit was, and that, at least for a short time, it was a powerful and pure spirit of the poet's words:

"And where would I did not get to fight,

Whatever I may do battle on

I anyway will fall on the other,

At the distant, the civil

And the commissars in dusty helmets

Bow silently at me. "

    So wrote Okudzhava, Soviet poet of the era in which this spirit, three times crucified by Stalin, was numb and numb "under the leadership of the Communist Party", a great poet, the poet in disgrace, and certainly in the opposition to power. Without this spirit, and if it would not be so strong, the Revolution of 1917 could not win in Russia, despite the presence of all other aspects that contribute to it: the weakness of the regime, the war, devastation, frustration of the masses, propaganda and demagoguery.Without this spirit the newborn Soviet power could not stand in the brutal civil war, failed to achieve success in the economic (it's at all the economic disadvantages of a constrained system) and do not even have survived in the Second World War. Those best known "for motherland, for Stalin" were an expression of the same, though rebirth and weakened, but still mighty spirit that will enable the Union to stand against the Germans. 

     As referred to Okudzhava "commissars in dusty helmets", the strength and purity of their spirit and willingness to make sacrifices and suffering for the sake of social ideal commensurate with the same of the greatest zealots of spirit of all times, such as the defenders of Masada, the early Christians, the Italian carbonari Garibaldi.   


    What is same spirit of Marxism aim? Originally there were various values: all the democratic freedoms gained by Bourgeois Revolution and the harmonious development of human personality and dignity and the ideal of love (the last two, as already mentioned, have been the spit-covered fairly in bourgeois society at the moment of the appearance of Marxism). But the main ideal of the spirit was economic justice ("from each according to his ability, to each according to work").

    Economical justice , as we know, is not one of the ideals of bourgeois revolutions, and never was so much emphasised in the past, except in the exercise of utopian socialism, that Marxism, in this sense, succeeded. But those, because of their blatant utopian, were not subjected to the great spirit, the authority of the same Marxist based on his alleged scientific. Even Judaism, above all exalting justice in general, not stressed so much attention to economic justice. That did not stop, incidentally, the opponents of Marxism among Russian reactionaries called Marxism - the Jews' teachings, seeing, obviously, the continuity in attachment to justice. The continuity, however, was very conditional, not only because from all the justice Marxism emphasized the economic one, but also because all other justice, in accordance with its philosophy, Marxism has announced a relative, replacing justice in general by proletarian justice, which led to basis for the "red terror" and Stalin's camps. Neither one nor the other phenomena Judaism did not know and could not rise through distinct from the Marxist understanding of justice.

      Lack of economic justice and economic inequality, Marxism interpreted as the source of all evils of all times, including as a source of evils of contemporary bourgeois society: callousness, corruption, hypocrisy, actual infringement of a number of freedoms by the power of money, etc.

     History has shown fallacy of this concept of Marxism, especially in relation to freedom, dignity and hypocrisy. In the country of victorious socialism, where according to Marx just automatically should have been democracy of the highest order, established one of the most brutal dictatorships in the world, trampled on the freedom and dignity, and gave birth to hypocrisy, surpassed only by communist China.

     This emphasis on economic justice, and in general on economic factors inevitably led Marxism to downgrade the importance of the spirituality in human nature and social processes. The latter is the cause of false accusations of Marxism in absent of spirituality. But spirit, as we know, was, and at some point rose to the top of human being’s spirit. The reason is that, as already mentioned, the highest flights of the spirit can grow from the lowest masses needs. Marxist spirit was directed although on material needs, but not by Marx and Engels personally, but on all those in need, which at that time there were very many (and still not missing) and a need that has been under high dissatisfaction. Let me remind you also that this need is not faded by dissatisfaction, but only grows. This fully explains why Marxism, being oriented like anti spirit, spawned such a powerful (at least temporarily) spirituality. But first of all, Marxism, although downplayed the importance of spirit, is not anti-spirit on the contents of his teachings. As mentioned above, Marx originally wanted and freedoms and dignity, and so on, although he had seen it all, as a product of economic justice. And in terms of influence on social processes, Marx did not deny completely the spirit. I recall his famous "the idea, shared by the masses." But, as in man so in the society, spirit according to Marx, is subordinated, is secondary to the material needs, the stomach, the economy, the mode of production. The notorious Marxist "the primacy of matter and the secondary of spirit," "base and superstructure," etc. In this sense, Marxism and in its theory, represents a step to further reduce the spirituality of the society in comparison even with the ideology of bourgeois revolutions, not to mention the Renaissance, and Christianity.

     Regarding the impact on quality of life and social processes, that are known, that referred errors of Marxism led to the creation of a totalitarian regime that threatens freedom in the world, and even adored economic justice in this case was not achieved. The reducing of the spirit importance in Marxist theory with the immobilization of it by organization have led for fairly low level of spirituality in Soviet society in less than 50 years after the implementation of Marxist ideas in it. The extraordinary growth of crime and alcoholism is evidence of this. Even more profound degradation was prevented by great tradition of Russian culture, which is not dead even under the authority of the Soviet regime, and by the dissident movement, which, however, lacked a theoretical framework.

     On the other hand, a spirit of Marxism, nevertheless facilitated the implementation of economic justice, greater than in any previous time. And not only, and may even be not so much in a "country of victorious socialism", but throughout the world, where under the influence of this spirit there was increased influence of trade unions, and laws have been enacted to protect economic rights of workers, were significantly increased taxes on the capitalists and the social provision was developed. So, ultimately, in some capitalist countries was more socialism in this sense than in the Soviet Union.


     But the peaks of unspirituality grabbed all the same is not Marxism, but the spirit, or rather anti-spirit, the so-called "new mentality", spread and dominant in Western society, and partly in the world after the Marxist mentality, which is based on Freudianism, ekzistentializm and several cloused to them directions of philosophy.

    The reason for the spread of the "new mentality" was the first of all, the weakening and withering of all those great directions of the spirit, who preceded him: the monotheistic religion, the Renaissance, the ideology of the bourgeois wrevolution and Marxism. This weakening was certainly a consequence of above process of immobilization of spirit by organisation, but not only him (remember that this process does not necessarily develop in one direction but permits reformation, revival and so on). Vital role in this weakening played by the erosion of those general conceptions of the world, theories, which strengthened the authority of the truth of the appropriate spirit. First of all, it happened with the monotheistic religions, as the development of science cast doubt on the picture of world given by the religion (although, we note, it did not apply the very spirit of religion,) and contrasted it natural science Newton - Darwinian picture. Secular trends of the spirit, to some extent since the Renaissance, an even greater extent the ideology of bourgeois revolutions, and especially Marxism, relied on the authority of science, scientific picture of the world, given by the modern science. The success of natural sciences contributed to the spread of these directions of spirit.

     The crisis of the rationalist outlook, prompted by the change of the physical picture of the world of Newton by corresponding Einstein’s one (see “Neorationalism”, Kiev,1992, Introduction andThe crisis of rationalist outlook and neorationalism,, undermine the credibility of the general concepts, which was base of listed directions of the spirit. Moreover, since these directions of spirit, except for the Renaissance, were constructive and have led to certain political and social systems, but those were not nearly as ideal as would have to be on the theory, it further undermined the credibility of them. And finally, two world wars, in scale and number of victims of disasters (absolute) surpassed all that human history knew before, also highly contributed to undermining the credibility of those outloks.

     So by the time a "new mentality", the authority of all previous directions of the spirit and outlook on which they relied, has been undermined and sacred place is never empty. A new direction of the spirit, or rather the anti-spirit were based on above crisis of rationalist outlook and engendered in large part from it existentialists concept of knowledge, as well as on the representation of human nature and society, emanating from Freud and from the wrong lessons learned from 1-st and 2-nd World War.

     With regard to the theory of knowledge of existentialism and conclusions from it relating to freedom and morality, it is just focusing in "Newrationalism. Here I will focus on the relationship of existentialism to the spirit. Replacing feels by sensations, existentialism does not have any place for spiritually. Furthermore, by definition of our model, the spirit is supra-personal emotional attachment. Rejecting in his theory of knowledge the existence of something else outside of the individual, existentialism has heaped a pile of stones at the place where previously grown spirit.

     Another theoretical basis of "new mentality" is Freudianism. Note, incidentally, that existentialism in a strong degree perceived ideas of Freud and many of the pillars of existentialist’s literature, Kafka, first of all, considered themselves as disciples of Freud. This is not the place to analyse Freudianism as a doctrine, in general, since this should be a separate paper. I will only remark briefly: where Freudianism more - less prevailed and was accepted, he did not resolve the global problems of society, which it pretend to resolve, and even those more specific issues to resolve which it was intended originally. With the proliferation of sexual freedom in Europe and America, the aggressiveness of the population, including even  sexual aggressiveness, ie rape, not decreased, but, conversely, increased. The number of mental disorders, including the famous Freudian sexual neuroses, with the removal of sexual taboos, again not decreased, but grew and grew terribly.

    What I intend to examine here in more detail, this is the impact of Freud on the "new mentality" in terms of the relationship of last to spirit. Freudianism is not itself absolutely unspiritual doctrine, the more Freud was not unspiritual man. He cared for the welfare of all humanity, regardless of how he understood it. His impact on a "new mentality" in the direction of lack of spirituality, connected with how he understood and represented the nature of man.

     He represented it, as it is known, so that the libido is the principal, dominant and subjugates all other requirements of human nature. As for spiritual and soul needs and inclinations, these are no more than a sublimation of sexual desire unsatisfied. I do not know whether Freud was aware that with such an interpretation his own philosophy, aimed at the good of humanity (in his thinking) and therefore being the fruit of spirit, was nothing more than sublimation of repressed sexual hunger. In any case, with the light hand of Freud, not only for his theory but also by his example, all modern Western art history, examining some chef d’oeuvre of art, rises especially the question: at whom would like to fuck the author of  masterpiece at the time of its creation, and why not could do it, ie, what was the source of sublimation, which led to a creative act.

    At this approach a person with developed spiritual needs are not considered to be normal, and two-dimensional spiritless creatures, satisfying their sexual desires, even if only for the money or using accessories, bought in a store sex accessories (the appearance of which - direct consequence of the spread of Freudianism), but regularly - samples of normality. It is understandable, as facilitated Freudianism "spiritualisation" of new mentality.

     Freudianism and Existentialism laid the theoretical, philosophical basis for a "new mentality" by giving it the authority of the scientific approach. With regard to potential unmet needs, to which the "new mentality" appeals, to meet which it was sent, and the existence of which serves as the basis of its expantion and power (just as, say, a potential basis of Marxism is the existence of a large number of ekonomically disadvantaged people) that was in this case the need for freedom and sexual. Nuances here is that by the time of "new mentality" no the need for freedom, nor sex had been suppressed or limited in Europe and America, where this mentality has spread, more than, say, in other countries or in the same Europe and America in the previous era. On the contrary, the development of the spirit and the law, since the Middle Ages, went only towards greater freedoms, including sexual.

     However, as I have shown (see "Neorationalism", part 2) the development of society is not completely deterministic, and deterministic least part of it is the movement of the spirit and ideas. That is, the emergence of a spirit is not completely determined by the field of social forces (potencials) and contains irreducible subjective element. The presence of the potential only contributes to the perception of the ideas and buildup of the spirit. With regard to the capacity needs in freedom, then it fundamentally can not be satisfied entirely within the human society (see "Neorationalism, part 3) and therefore always exists. Potential sexual needs also practically can not be satisfied in full. In addition, we know that the potential of need for freedom with a strong limitation may be lower (due to the oppression itself needs) than in the case of smaller restriction (the bourgeoisie and the peasantry at the bourgeois revolutions period). Finally, the potential of sexual needs can be artificially burn in excess of its natural norm, which was done, carried out by "new mentality".     


      Thus, the potential of unmet needs, which is basis of "new mentality" existed and will exist forever. Another question: had the "new mentality " led to their best satisfaction, to what extent and at what price? But more about that later. Now I want to note that the expantion and power of "new mentality " based on another, so to speak, potential. Potential of laziness, cowardice, in general, on the celebration of mediocrity and insignificance. The fact is that, as already mentioned, the existence of spiritual needs and awareness of them require from man effort to supra-personal service (of God or of the people), self-restraint, and sometimes even risk and sacrifice. But the recognition of their lack in normal human nature frees the individual from all this. Furthermore, the service of God, or whether, say, the ideal of harmonious personality, even the ideal of love demands from human self-improvement. In the outlook of the new mentality" the very notion of improving lost all meaning. Improved where? Where the top, where the bottom? By the fulfilment of natural needs and digging into own sensations notion of improvement is not applicable.

     Now consider, as influenced by "new" quality of life and social processes.

    With regard to spiritual needs, they were spit-covered to the impossibility to breathe. With regard to soul needs, I already wrote that in an atmosphere of "new mentality" very hard to blossom normal human love, friendship and so on.

     Freedom - the main argument of the "new mentality", its main achievement. But, as I showed in "Newrationalism (part 3), it is impossible to increase it indefinitely, and an exaggerated release in some areas has led not only to restrict other freedoms, but also to reduce the integral measure of freedom of society as a whole, not to mention the damage to morale and through it to lower satisfaction of other needs.

     In general, the "new mentality" is anti-social from beginning to end, and led almost exclusively to a decrease in quality of life. Even in those areas where the quality of life, of course, grew up during the rule of the "new mentality", such as the material level, this was not because of it, but by technological and social progress, and contrary to the "new" that led only to increased corruption, alienation and indifference, retarding the progress.

     In terms of impact on the social processes the "new mentality" severely weakened democracy in Western Europe, America and Israel, as the latter, as already mentioned, is in need of a spirit of citizenship much more than the totalitarian regimes. This statement for many today is not evident, because the recent collapse of the totalitarian socialist system, opposed democracy. This collapse emphasized the superiority of democracy and free-market economic system over totalitarianism with a socialist economy. Representatives of the new mentality" are trying to speculate on this, introducing the collapse of the Soviet system, which is actually self – destroying, not even as a victory of democracy over socialism, but as a victory the rock and roll over it. From the foregoing it is clear that in reality the "new mentality" has just not had time to destroy the democratic system, but the potential for this, she maintains.

      Finally, some general conclusions. We have seen that the orientation of the spirit can lead to lower quality of life directly, due to its direction, goal (some religion sects) and through necrosis and fanaticism of spirit by an organization. In this sense, the direction ofspirit, which does not require and does not gravitate to organizations, such as the desire for harmonious personality, dignity, justice (in general) and love are preferable. However, we can not ignore the kinds of spirit directed on a certain idea about the best arrangement of society, requiring the organization. Here is essential, of course, what one consider as the best system and form of governance, but this topic is beyond the scope of this work. It is only necessary to understand that no matter how good is order of society, it is not in itself can solve all problems. Just as the not solve all the problems separately taken the law whether the morality, whether the spirit or technical progress. We need all these components with the links between them in account and even then it would not mean the solving of all problems, satisfaction of all the needs for everyone. There is, however, no doubt that the life is a beautiful thing, if not too much to spoil it and to give good food for soul and spirit, without depressing physiological needs and freedom. And although there is the danger of bigotry and immobilizing in the spirit, but you must remember that the lack of spirituality does not relieve the society from this danger, but only adds new ones, and most importantly, that, other things being equal, loss of spirit- loss of the greatest value.


Hosted by uCoz