Document(s) 5 of 10

THE VITAL FORCES of humans, ethnos, and society consist of physical, spiritual, natural, intellectual, and technological forces. Harmony and balance of vital forces ensures stability within society, completeness of life, and historical, physiological, and social longevity. Should one of these constituents become exhausted, especially the spiritual or natural one, disharmony, degeneration, or even complete extinction of ethnos, society, or Homo sapiens itself may occur. Many outstanding philosophers of antiquity and the present time have sought to achieve harmony of human vital forces.

In the historical past, the relationship between humans and nature was determined to a great extent by the rhythm of processes. The concept of general recurrence of natural and social phenomena, as well as the cyclic evolution of ethnicities, communities, and peoples has been recognised since ancient times. Enlightened people—priests, high priests, and the wise realised it. Oswald Spengler, Arnold Toynbee, Gumilyov, and other famous thinkers recognised the correlation of nature and social phenomena. The vital forces of humanity, ethnos, and community are also cyclic in nature—they die away, only to transform and grow stronger in their new upsurge.

In ancient Greek philosophical schools, such as those of Plato and Pythagoras, youth were primarily taught how to attain harmony between body and soul, how to observe nature, and how to understand its secret forces and rhythm. This philosophy is still practised in Buddhist schools and monasteries today, that is, not as the conquest of nature but the true perception of nature in order to achieve harmonious co-existence.

Christianity has taught us that the implementation of the divine ideal includes the ethics of responsibility. Humans are truly religious and spiritual beings only when they resist the desire to harm living creatures or nature and when they submit to an inner incentive to create good and to love life. Christian ethics, as Albert Schweitzer argued, starts with this "reverence towards life."

Thales from Milet (about 625 or 640 - 547 or 545 B.C.), an ancient Greek philosopher, forefather of ancient philosophy, and founder of the Milet school, one of the first philosophical schools, associated all variety of matters with one initial element—water. He considered water a primal matter. Water, he taught, is the source and origin of everything. At the same time, water and everything that descended from it is not inanimate but alive. According to Thales, nature, both live and inanimate, has an initial driving force, namely the soul and god.

Lao Tzi (Li Er) (born in 604 B.C.), the great Chinese thinker and a founder of Taoism had similar teachings. The main notion of Taoism is Tao, which is metaphorically linked to water (susceptibility and resilience). Lao Tzi said: "The higher good is similar to water. Water enlivens all living creatures and never contests with them. Everything that doesn't comply with Tao (presumably, harmony) dies prematurely." Taoism is the philosophy or the path towards harmony. While one might not achieve absolute harmony, the path towards it will be righteous and a true path of development. According to Lao Tzi, people should not interfere with nature's way of development.

Pythagoras of Samos (circa 570-500 B.C.), the ancient Greek philosopher, also embraced similar teachings. Pythagoreans referred to the world as cosmos, implying its harmony and perfection (the Greek word cosme means "beauty"). Perfection of the cosmos is based on certain numerical correlations which are the basis of the motion of heavenly bodies. They are also the basis of musical harmony and may even be found in the proportions of the human body. Pythagoras was the first to call the discourse on animate life philosophy or love of wisdom.

Heraclites of Ephes (about 544-438 B.C.), another ancient Greek philosopher, extended some of these ideas. He developed the concept of perpetual flux and formation and taught us that "everything is in a state of flux," and "one can not step into the same river twice". According to Heraclites, humanity is part of nature. Nature (cosmos) is a perpetually living, pulsating flame (energy?) which was not created by anyone. It is eternal and immortal ('divine'). We should conform to nature and its "animate" soul—everlasting fire-Logos.

It is interesting how Heraclites sees "the barbarity of the human soul" in its specific corporeal state. He explains that although the soul originates from moisture, it tends to dry up. The difference between a 'wet' and a 'dry' soul determines the difference between a fool and a clever person. The soul of a wise man is the driest and the best. According to Heraclites, in the state of utmost dryness a soul radiates light.

Socrates (about 469-399 B.C.), another ancient Greek philosopher, was one of the founders of dialectics as a method of the search for truth. He regarded self-realisation as a way to achieve harmony, which was the aim of philosophy.

Democritus (circa 470-360 B.C.), the ancient Greek philosopher, considered the achievement of the highest level of well-being, or harmony, possible by limiting one's desires and by adopting a moderate lifestyle.

Aristotle (384-322 B.C.), the ancient Greek philosopher and universal thinker, conceived of the essentials of many new sciences, namely physics, biology, psychology, logic, and ethics. He considered god the highest instance of natural rather than social order. The roots of European civilisation extend back to ancient Greece, where a continuous, unified culture flourished. The ancient Greeks had a distinctly integral and clear vision of the world, as did Oriental philosophies in general, including Hinduism and Buddhism.

The scientific revolution is usually associated with the names of Copernicus, Galileo, and Newton. The scientific method was developed and we owe our present-day scientific and technical progress to it. Yet it destroyed the wholeness and integrity of the world. We alienated ourselves from nature. Disharmony prevailed in the development of civilisation. We are now facing its consequences and again trying to find a way back to harmony, but we tend to forget that humanity has already passed this way. Moreover, these paths were traversed differently in various countries of the world. There were always countries that were able to maintain the traditions of harmonious coexistence with nature, dynamic equilibrium between spiritual and material forces and between peoples and society for millennia.

Capitalist and communist ways of development, based on dominating materialistic philosophy, have proved to be destructive and a dead-end for humanity and the environment. A famous American economist-iconoclast and ecologist, Hazel Henderson, came to the conclusion that "a global obsession with growth resulted in a remarkable similarity between the capitalist and communist economic systems. A fruitless dispute between capitalism and communism is irrelevant, since both systems are based on materialism...both of them pursue the objectives of industrial growth and the use of technologies with strengthening centralism and bureaucratic control." (cited in 35) She is confident that the main aspect of cultural transformation is that from the Oil Age and industrial era to the new Solar Age. Similarly, Tommazo Campanella comes to mind with his fantastical "city of the Sun", a city of higher harmony which is ruled and guided by the Sun (a high priest), Wisdom, Power, Love, people with a zest for life, who develop their physical and spiritual forces and are free from the power of things. Henderson extends the notion of the Solar Age to her own vision of a future culture.

Material production based on the exploitation of nature and the interaction of society with nature for the overwhelming purpose of societal development to the detriment of nature have always formed the foundation for the vital functioning of society. In this global model of vital functioning, science has existed to 'serve' and 'justify' the aims, directions, methods, models and technologies of development, or, as one may argue, science has provided a pragmatic way towards the enrichment and benefit of humanity and society. As a result, all natural sciences became 'morally' subordinated to the theory of economic growth in the name of production and appropriation from nature. In this process, we accumulate surprisingly little, only 1.5-2% of all natural living substance, while the remainder are the by-products of our vital activities—waste, that is 'inanimate substance'. It is therefore possible to assert that the selected scientific foundation of this extensive societal development was the cause of the 'deadening' of nature and 'dis-ensoulment' of humankind. In addition, it led to a certain intellectual inertia due to the domination of technical education and development of the 'non-ecological' fields of science.

European logic often confuses culture with civilisation or an eternal entity with a temporal and transient one. The great sage, Nikolai K. Rerikh, differentiates between these notions. For him, culture is a broader, comprehensive, refined primordial concept. Culture should justify and animate civilisation as its constituent. Only through culture, but not through civilisation, may people develop harmoniously and reach harmony between themselves and nature.

Rerikh, had his own vision of future culture and preached it passionately and with inspiration. His vision was that "culture consists of two roots, the first one is Druidic – 'Cult' – and will always be a homage to the Good Beginning, and the [second] – 'Ure' – reminds us of an old oriental root that means Light, Fire." Thus, on the one hand, Cult-Ure may mean worshipping of light (or the sun). On the other hand, the notion of culture should not be abstract. According to Rerikh, "Culture is closely connected with spirituality. It is primarily expressed in the refined and multiform creation. Quality of life ought to be reflected in the enlightened creation of life, in the harmonisation of life instead of accumulation of material wealth." 67 Rerikh understood that culture should be cleansed through purification and the transformation of human consciousness. This is what he devoted his entire life to. He saw the path to harmonious life in this process. Rerikh was a scientist, a great traveller, an archaeologist, an historian, a philosopher, and an original artist who painted over 7,000 canvases, including portraits of Yaroslav the Wise, Saint Sophia, and other historical paintings. In addition, he was a public figure on a global scale and was a member of many academies around the world. The range of his interests and teachings seemed to personify the connections between the various Indo-European cultures, both oriental and occidental.

As mentioned in the previous chapters, Ukraine, and specifically the Dnipro basin, covering 80% of its territory, is rich in monuments of ancient cultures, such as the Indo-European, Pre-Cimmerian, ancient Greek, Scythian, Trypillia, Chernyahiv, Slavic, and others. V. Grytsenko wrote in the secondary school text-book Man and Culture: "Continuous close relations with eastern and western countries became an indispensable means of conceiving our own spiritual identity as well as tolerance towards foreign cultural manifestations, which is typical for people for whom spirituality is a determining force." 20

In the Poltava Oblast, a monument of ancient Scythian (Scythian-Helenic?) culture was created in the area of Bilske Horodysche where, as historians assume, the capital of Great Scythia, Helon, was located. Today, the Ukrainian government has immortalised Trypillia culture through the establishment of a corresponding centre in the Cherkasy Oblast. This initiative is the first step towards the revival of spiritual centres of societal harmonisation and should be incorporated into the International Programme of Harmonisation of Life of the Dnipro Basin Peoples. Spiritual-ecological centres should be established in the Dnipro estuary and turned into mass pilgrimage sites like those in Mecca and Kyiv Pechersk Lavra, to which people come from far away. As described in E. Marchuk's book Ukraine: New Access Paradigm, these spiritual-ecological centres ought to be established in every oblast in the form of eco-socio-cities, 47 at sites where there are collections of archaeological landmarks. At first, there will be a few of them, just one or two in each oblast, but they should become real centres of noospherogenesis in the Dnipro basin.

In the time of antiquity, the wandering priests from a variety of ancient lands paid regular visits to the Stone Grave on the Molochna River in order to replenish their spiritual powers. Just like modern people who look after the graves of their relatives and cleanse their souls with prayers, those wanderers used to protect and take good care of their forebears' burial places. In our view, they also ought to attend the burial places of their ancestors, regardless of whether these are the Scythian, Sarmatian, Gothic, ancient Greek, or Slavic graves. After all, they are our ancestors, too, buried along the entire length of the Dnipro. This memory, the love and respect for them must be eternally embedded in our restored traditions and rituals. Only then, gradually, step-by-step, will we restore the severed spiritual connection between times and generations. We will then be able to enrich the life-giving forces of the Dnipro, awake our ecological wisdom and rekindle the realisation of our need to live by the laws of nature and harmony and protect our common home—the great Dnipro River.

Contemporary generations ought to realise that the Dnipro basin is not just the water, soil, forests, landscapes, towns, villages, enterprises, and people who live and work there. It represents an enormous wealth of archaeological landmarks and burial grounds and is a storehouse of national spiritual powers. There are about 800 early Palaeolithic monuments, and 300 Mesolithic landmarks, including 88 tombs in the collective necropolis located above the Dnipro rapids. Within the boundaries of Ukraine there are about 600 Neolithic burial places, most of which are located in the areas above the Dnipro rapids, the Sea of Azov, and the Siversky Donets River (Dnipro-Donetsk cultural entity). Landmarks left by the Trypillia, Seredniostohiv, Usativ, and Chornolissya cultures with Indo-European features are found on both sides of the Dnipro basin and along its tributaries. The Kyiv, Chernihiv, Pereyaslav, and Smolensk regions have retained the essence of the ancient peoples, registered in historical chronicles like Polyany, Severyany, Drevlyany, and Polochany. Each and every archaeological landmark represents an ancient nation that used to reside in the Dnipro basin. They must be preserved through the establishment of historical scenic reserves, following the pattern of the Belski and Trypillia ethno-cultural centres.

It is appropriate to mention here as examples the landscapes that have personified the Motherland for Ukrainians. As V. Krysachenko, a Ukrainian scientist, wrote, the Velyky Luh ("Large Meadow"), the steppe itself, and the Dyke Pole ("Wild Field") were the predominating landscapes for the Zaporizhzhian Cossacks. 41 The capitalisation of these words reflects people's respect towards these creations, which bring people outside and beyond the bounds of their trivial frame of existence.

Nikolai Gogol wrote a wonderful description of the steppe in his novel Taras Bulba. Nothing could be more perfect in nature, notes the writer: the entire surface of this untilled land looked like a green-golden ocean with millions of flowers splashed everywhere; only wild horses could trample down even a little bit of these riches. "Damn you, Steppes, how beautiful you are!" exclaims Gogol. As for a more austere or a more rationalistic description of the steppe, there is no better expert than Academician D. I. Yavornytsky.

The Zaporizhzhian steppe, despite local peculiarities, was an open space with natural hills, ravines, and valleys. Gullies and ravines, which usually represent other landscapes, were also found in the steppe, providing it not only with a distinctive ecological and geographical uniqueness, but also with significance in terms of military strategy, economy, and colonization. 86

According to Yavornytsky, Dnipro water-meadows had a tremendous importance for the Cossacks, providing them with timber, hay, game birds, and animals: "These water-meadows were lowlands covered with grassy and woody vegetation, intersected by rivers flowing in different directions, bays, estuaries, channels, numerous major and minor lakes, overgrown with tall impassable reeds." Velyky Luh is also a marsh-meadow, the biggest and the most famous, which stretches from the Island of Khortytsia left of the Dnipro down to the Mykytyn Rih. 86

Today, the landscapes of the steppe, Dyke Pole and Dnipro marsh-meadows no longer exist. The land was ploughed and flooded and the wholeness of the eco-ethnic environment of the lower Dnipro was irreversibly damaged. Whatever is left should be protected and transformed into monuments of the landscape, the steppe, or the water-meadow culture, borrowing and building upon the experience of the Askania-Nova museum-reserve.

Towards the end of the 20th century, humanity embarked once again upon a path towards the harmony of vital forces, but only after it realised the profoundness of its folly and became concerned with the vital need to conserve the environment. 19 The year 1992 became a turning point in the formation of a 'new' ecological vision based upon the concept and strategy of sustainable development. However, despite the principles of balanced, sustainable development, proclaimed in 1992, the suffocating inertia of traditional economic thought still dominates.

The challenges and threats of the 20th century are new for humanity. These include 'nuclear winter', ozone holes, anthropogenic global warming, the Chernobyl accident, water, air and land pollution, desertification, demographic problems, fundamentalism, terrorism, and more. They have initiated the realisation of the need for a new world vision, new science, a new economy, new education, a new way of life and interaction with nature. This is how the concept and model of global sustainable development as 'a cure-all for all mischief' came about. However, the ten years coinciding with the decade following the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 have shown how 'unsustainable' the concept of sustainable development itself is. And it is still an open question whether we will gain much from this sustainable development or whether we will incur irreparable environmental losses. Nowadays, scientist-philosophers have began to realise that societal sustainability is not only impossible but also inconceivable—unless humanity begins to consider itself as part of a synergetic process and enters a mode of co-evolution or conjugation or harmony with the biosphere.

The primary condition for a sustainable development of any system is its operation according to the laws of the whole, in other words, the principle of integrity, which is itself an attribute of the cosmic level functioning in each entity, be it an atom, an organism, or the universe. The integrity of action shows the necessary interrelationship of all forms and all levels of existence or the harmonious correlation of humans and nature and the harmonisation of human activity. At this level, it demonstrates our capability to feel a social spirit, to perceive social interests, and to realise our role in environment protection. This integrity of action is our ability to feel the situation emphatically and to support the primary law of life and nature—the principle of sustainable balance. It is a harmonious attitude with the vast entirety, in this case, with the society where we function as a personality, on the one hand, and on the other hand, as a biocoenotic species together with our 'lesser siblings', the dumb animals, who may be 'lesser' in intellect but not in terms of spirituality. At the level of society, it implies an increasing significance of ethics, morality, spirituality, and social and natural integrity, which struggles to overcome our egoism towards the rest of the biosphere. It also implies a capability of the society to fully harmonise its relationship with nature and to co-exist reasonably with it.

It is obvious today that we need to transform our philosophical world vision from anthropocentrism to cosmo-centrism, the nucleus of which will be the recognition of the cosmic meaning, spiritual substance, expressed in the form of a moral law and culture of behaviour. At the same time, keeping in mind our negative and unstable experience of vital functioning, we must recognise that moral law is not a human invention but an a?atus and a cosmic justice. Inherently, we should recognise the advantage of the eastern eco-humane world vision over the individualistic model of western civilisation with its philosophy of anthropocentrism, egoism, and unrestrained enrichment.

Western, or better yet, American-European, civilisation, still prefers a technologised world vision. This notion was most vividly expressed in one of the reports of the Club of Rome, by E. Weizsekker, Armory B. Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins, Factor Four: Doubling Wealth, Halving Resource Use. 15 In this book, the authors attempt to reconcile the aspiration for a high standard of living with the need for the diligent use of natural resources. The main idea of their work is the justification of the concept of "resources productivity", which, as the authors understand it, is the possibility to live twice as well using half as much of the resources necessary to achieve sustainable development. The authors provide specific recipes for success, systematised according to the resources type and based on the use of the existing experience of "resources productivity" improvements in different countries. The Factor Four effect is the systemic integration of minor innovations (technical, technological, economic, managerial) in any area of application, be it a home, an office, equipment, a parcel of land, etc.

Since the time of the industrial revolution, the meaning of progress has incorporated an increase in labour productivity. Factor Four offered a 'new' approach to progress based on the improvement of resource productivity. Indeed, due to the refocusing of production and the reorientation of vital functions to Factor Four—saving, efficient use of resources and energy, more extensive waste recycling and refining, responsibility towards customers—for the first time the economic cycle has been 'completed'. In planning our social and economic development, we already take into consideration the effects of disturbance of the natural cycle of matter or introduction of unnatural compounds into it ('chemicalisation'). For many developing countries, only a revolution in efficiency will enable them to achieve a higher standard of living. The authors of the new report to the Club of Rome (a group of chosen politicians, scientists), besides predicting further increase in consumption in the developed countries, also foresee this objective for the rest of the world. The authors themselves realise and warn that an insatiable consumption devoid of any ethic and spiritual norms may outrun the 'efficiency revolution'.

The authors of 'neo-generosity' do not introduce anything fundamentally new into their strategies, plans, and programmes of sustainable development. Moreover, 'neo-generosity' only leads them along the usual way, creating an illusion of the possibility of resolving ecological problems, which are underestimated. Besides, the authors address the problem of biodiversity in a very superficial manner, and avoid any mention of the problem of destruction of natural ecosystems.

Technological approaches should not be denied in principle, but they should be considered a condition of transition to sustainable development, and as one of the mechanisms for harmonisation of human existence.

Among Ukrainian scientists, there are also adherents to a 'technological approach' and 'technological breakthroughs'. Thus, in the article "Technological Forecasting as an Instrument for Strategic Decision-Making" by M. Zgurovsky, Academician of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, ecological aspects are not considered at all in the strategic decision-making process of the general societal development model. He presents only new technologies, business, science, and education as the key factors. It is clear that the author would like to bring Ukraine's production and economy to world and European standards as fast as possible by means of technological breakthroughs. However, according to those world and European standards, any technological innovations must be ecologically justified. Otherwise, further resource imbalance and life disharmony are inevitable.

An alternative biotic mechanism for regulating sustainable development, based on the limits of economic capacity of the biosphere, is presented in Ecological Challenge and Sustainable Development by V. I. Danilov-Danilyan and K. S. Losev. 23 The authors focus their attention on the co-existence of nature and society—co-evolution—as their "idea of salvation" and consider technological aspects in terms of scientific and technical support of sustainable development or noospherogenesis. Technology cannot substitute biota in regulating the environment. That is why our main task is to stop the destruction of biota and allow it to regain its self-regulating potential, i.e., to subside "technologically" and free as much space for the biota as it requires. This is feasible if the biotic regulating mechanism becomes the determining force on the path towards sustainable society, based on "new ecological thinking" and legally accepted norms of economic capacity of natural entities (river basins, landscapes, etc.).

The economic capacity of the Dnipro has long ago exceeded all reasonable limits of growth. How can one consider, then, sustainable development of the Dnipro basin as a life supporting natural entity? The only way one may look at it is from the perspective of harmonisation of vital activities in the basin, modelling and implementing a basin system of socio-natural centres of noospherogenesis.

In the book Noospherogenesis and Harmonious Development, 80 Ukrainian scientists V. Ya. Shevchuk, G. A. Bilyavsky, Yu. N. Satalkin, and V. M. Navrotsky integrated modern theoretical, methodological, and philosophical approaches to noospherogenesis and sustainable development. The authors concluded that there is a need for a symbiotic theory and methodology of harmonious development, and harmonisation from within the bounds of a habitat.

Harmonious development, unlike sustainable development, is considered as a strictly balanced development, in which nature predominates over our activities and is not a resource for economic growth. This is a multi-factor process consisting of structuring society according to the laws of nature; achieving a harmonious sustainability of society, with cultural and spiritual development as priorities; and applying the technological and biotic regulating mechanisms of the life harmonisation process in a balanced manner.

The authors presume that in the definition 'sustainable development' itself there is a methodological contradiction, since according to the "Law of System Development Using Environmental Resources," development can occur only with the use of natural resources. 65 There is, however, another document on nature, the "Law of Exhaustibility of Natural Resources," 65 which stipulates that all the natural resources (including natural conditions) of the earth are exhausted. This exhaustion occurs either due to the direct exhaustibility (oil, gas) or due to the perturbation of the environment, which becomes unusable for the existing economy and human life, as, for instance, the flooded areas in the Dnipro basin due to the creation of artificial water reservoirs.

That is why, according to the authors, harmonious development with nature as the dominant force better conforms to the aims of socio-ecological and economical balance in accordance with the laws of nature and universal harmony. Inherently, the theory of noospherogenesis acquires a systematising significance in the modern interpretation of the problem of achieving societal sustainability rather than sustainable development. There is no other means for further development: there is a critical gap between humanity and nature and it is necessary to harmonise the remaining potential of our spiritual, physical, intellectual, technological, and natural forces before they are completely exhausted. There are hardly enough vital forces, even for the development of the illusory 'new (Internet or virtual) economy', 'post-industrial', or 'information' society. Would it not be better to return a 'natural society' with a natural environment to our grandchildren?

Harmonious development is indeed a multi-factor process, the rates and quality of which are predetermined by different combinations of social, cultural, economic, military, technological, environmental, ethic, and other factors of instability. Which of these factors has a greater or lesser impact? How can a system of priorities be created, based primarily on the scale of impact? How can we plan a multi-factor process with various groupings of indicators of life harmonisation and quality? These and many other questions transgress the bounds of any single system, be it theoretical or technological, social or ecological. They refer to the theory of vast systems of development, i.e., "a system of systems," which is well described in the fundamental work by the distinguished environmental scientist N. F. Reimers. 65

In our opinion, the theoretical principles of harmonious development themselves should be presented as a "system of systems", i.e., "a large theoretical-methodological system", in which the theory of noospherogenesis and biotic regulation of the environment can play a leading role at the strategic phase of the life harmonisation process. However, the position of each theoretical element of the system (dynamic balance, biosphere evolution, development process, etc.) of theoretical-methodological principles of harmonisation must be defined. That is, an integrated theory of harmonisation of life, a fundamental theory of harmonisation of development, should encompass the interests of all the theories and methodologies (theory and methodology symbiosis) associated with the process of harmonisation.

The development of a symbiotic theory of harmonisation of life should not be a prerogative of only one group of scientists—it should be developed on a competitive basis. Systemic analysts from various branches of science should play a leading role in this process, including people with an environmental outlook, who have a global understanding of the problem of harmonious development and the ecological paradigm, albeit with actions of a national character.

Today, Ukraine has a great enough scientific potential to form a task force for the development of a symbiotic theory of harmonisation of life and its theoretical-methodological principles. Ukrainian scientists are capable of developing theoretical-methodological proposals for harmonious development with a philosophy of noospherogenesis in a competitive process across Ukraine. In order to identify qualitative and quantitative characteristics (indicators) of a complex multi-level and multi-functional harmonisation process, it should be modelled first.

Only by means of multi-factor national and regional modelling is it possible to identify alternative maximum permissible levels of economic capacity of certain natural entities, ecosystems, and regions of the biosphere and optimal technogenic load during certain periods of time. Only by relying on the scientific theoretical definition of the initial state of natural, economic, technological, social, and other systems is it possible to apply the theoretical principles of biotic regulation of the environment or the management system of the life harmonisation process with biotic priorities rather than 'technological' ones. Thus, certain fundamental initial regulations should be established for strategic planning of the life harmonisation process, oriented towards the final result, specifically, a harmonious sustainable society with maximum permissible norms of economic capacity of the biosphere and natural ecosystems.

With this approach (which is known as a system or system-process approach) each local theory (i.e. theoretical principles of addressing local issues within a larger process) finds its place in the symbiotic theory of harmonious development on the philosophical basis of noospherogenesis or the fundamental theory of societal harmonisation.

All theoretical-methodological works should be systematised, beginning with the legacy of the internationally recognized Ukrainian noosphere theorist Vernadsky; Reimers's ecological theories, laws, and rules; the theories of the solar nature of added value of Podolynsky and M. Rudenko; and modern theoretical-methodological works on historical, cultural, geographical, natural, social, economic, technological, and other aspects of the symbiotic theory of the harmonisation of life.

In selecting theoretical-methodological principles of harmonious development negative lessons of global development using market mechanisms of unlimited consumption of natural resources should be taken into account. Market reform may not in itself be the goal of societal development. Developed countries have come to understand the devastating character of an 'unregulated market' through trial and error. It is globally recognised that only development that is socially compatible, is oriented towards conservation of resources, and contains regulating mechanisms is safe. Many market theories of development faced a fiasco and went bankrupt.

One of the most urgent tasks today is the formation of a noospheric, environmental outlook among statesman, politicians, and social activists, as well as the business community, of Ukraine.

On a system-wide scale, any system requires the following elements for its harmonious development:

• Efficient and reasonable (noospheric) organisation in terms of time and space;

• Provision of balance and dynamic equilibrium of its constituents;

• Clear objectives of the harmonisation processes (biotic, cultural, economic, social, technological, etc.);

• Availability (presence) of initiating forces (biotic, cultural, economic, social, technological, etc.)

Each of these system constituents should have its basic model, formed on the basis of a unified methodological-systemic approach to societal and life harmonisation. At the same time, one shouldn't forget that a sustainable society is one in which there is a harmony between life values and a continuously changing reality.

Another global 'synthetic' approach is described by Alice Bailey in her book Education in the New Age. 8 She concludes:

Our main hope of survival in this highly polarised world lies in the prodigious effort to synthesise the two cultures while there is still time. Should the East deny us that time and decide to meet us merely on our own grounds, then this might be the end of time for us all, East and West.

During our industrial and expansionist age there is increasing evidences of the great power of Eastern thought which permeates the fields of science, philosophy and the arts of the West. Psychosomatic medicine, parapsychology, Jung's analytical psychology are only a few indications of contemporary research oriented at our inner world. The appearance of the spiritual factor in life and science is somewhat more than the recrudescence of earlier forms of Christian ideology.

This idea was supported by a document prepared by the Department of Cultural Affairs of UNESCO, called: "The Concept of Man and the Philosophy of Education in East and West." It states:

UNESCO can not remain impartial to this problem (of East and West). It is bound to address the problem face to face in current global conditions, stipulated by the increasingly rapid process of unification, the reduction in distances, the growing importance of technology, the gradual attainment of political independence by all peoples, the feeling of international responsibility and, above all, the uneasiness and perplexity tormenting the two great civilisations of yesterday, ready to conceive one civilisation of the tomorrow, but wilting from the threat of a global crisis which is far beyond their control.

It continues further about the role of science:

Researchers acquainted with the data of scientific research ought to gather our knowledge about nature and synthesise a body of integrated principles, in order to establish a Pythagorean-Platonic-Bruno cosmogony, a picture of the world similar to the pantheism of Eastern thought, wherein man could respect nature because nature is worthy of awe and reverence. Humanism, which became excessively anthropocentric is too stagnant and is in need of a world philosophy in which the infinite and eternal cosmos would serve as another pivot point around which the new synthesis (symbiosis—auth. note) could grow and spread.

The spiritual and moral principles of humankind's coexistence with nature have gained a new meaning for humanity today in terms of cognition and perception of life. Beyond the realm of these principles lies ecological collapse. Any social, scientific, or technical innovations should be morally and ecologically pure. Let us remember that sooner or later we will have to pay for all the misdeeds that we have committed. For the damage afflicted upon nature, we will have to pay the price of life itself, if not our own, then those of our children or grandchildren. We do not need a more vivid example than Chernobyl.

The Dnipro basin, the territory of modern Ukraine, was historically the place of symbiosis of western and eastern cultures. Indo-Europeanism, most pronounced in Rerikh's teachings and philosophy of World Culture, arose in the Dnipro basin back in the geological era. Here, the cultures of Ancient Greece and Great Scythia (Byelske Horodysche, Olvia) crossed. It is therefore reasonable to pose a question: Doesn't Ukraine have a special role in uniting East and West, in bringing together scientists, politicians, and priests, who stand divided today in their ambitious confrontation?

Only a Great National Idea of Future Harmony may reconcile and unite Ukrainian (and not only Ukrainian) clerical, political, and scientific elites. A world spiritual-ecological cultural coalition can become such an idea. 'Think globally, act locally!' The idea of a spiritual-ecological coalition is closer to the Ukrainian people than to any other nation in the world. Its implementation will not require great spiritual power. Historically, the peoples of Ukraine have been disposed toward the perception of an east-west life philosophy. Orthodoxy has never been an aggressive religion. Moreover, it is a religion of martyrdom, a religion of social and human patience. Patience, which is in such short supply, is one of the virtues of wisdom. Patience is that fertile ground on which the philosophy of harmonious continuity of human life and environment may grow. This is a case when a 'shortcoming' (as apologists of aggressive western civilisation think) of the Ukrainian nation can become an advantage! The peoples of the Dnipro basin, the political, scientific, and religious elites of Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus still have time to choose the right way of life—a path to harmonise vital forces on the philosophic-theoretical basis of noospherogenesis and the traditional spiritual values of life.

It is some kind of a powerful, great, natural force, and,
at the same time, it is a wonderful, fascinating, overwhelming
and attracting force. No matter, what stage of development
a person is at, he cannot help being delighted with what
he sees in front of himself, he cannot help stopping and
say to himself: what could be more beautiful in this land?

D. I. Yavornytsky

Document(s) 5 of 10