Why the future needs us

Technologies of 21-century (robotics, genetic engineering, and nanotechnology) provide opportunity knowledge alone without significant material resources to destroy humanity. In his influential essay "Why the future doesn't need us", Bill Joy has introduced conception of “Knowledge-enabled mass destruction” (KMD), as equivalent to existing “Weapons of mass destruction” (WMD) based on 20^th century technologies (nuclear, chemical and biological).^[1] No doubt accelerating increase of knowledge increases the vulnerability of the society and could destroy the world. This possibility has been realized with invention of atomic bomb and become more obvious with developing of chemical and biological WMD. Emerging 21-century high technologies make it almost inevitable.

Unfortunately each scientific achievement is applicable as a weapon, much easer rather than constructive factor. Developing nuclear weapons requests national resources. Chemical and biological weapons need resources available to small groups and organizations. The potential of 21-century technologies are mind-blowing as destructive capability and need resources available just to one person, therefore – impossible for control. This is so because everything brings with itself in embryo its own negation, the knowledge - also. However the pressure of increasing knowledge becomes driving force for social evolution.

Contradiction between exponential development of technologies and increase of vulnerability of humanity could be defined as basic contradiction in modern society. It is most important contradiction among thousands others contradictions facing modern world because resolving this particular contradiction is a matter of life and death for humanity. Not part of it, but humanity as a whole. Apparently scientific and technological development is endless and unstoppable. So how society could survive or how humanity could resolve this basic contradiction?

Social evolution is continuation of biological evolution although in a new qualitatively different level. Mother Nature is a blind and merciless power. To survive biological species should meet Mother Nature “standards” – to adapt to constantly changing environment. If one particular species fail to do that, it is matter of time to vanish from the face of Earth. Homo Sapience also could extinct without trace as many biological species before. However we are not only biological species, we are social creatures too, and yet the social Future is unpredictable as well. People are curious about future, but consider it as something, which is entirely in hands of God. For thousands of years the present has been determined mainly by history.

During the last few decades something extraordinary has happened. Some people realize Future as a factor of ever increasing importance for surviving of humanity – climate change, increasing shortage of drinking water, WMD, KMD among many others global issues. Facing pressure of emerging problems, people have to take responsibility for the future of humanity in their own hands. In this way both Mother Nature and Father Future (metaphor for social evolution) gave birth of new social phenomenon – emergence of global self-consciousness. Global self-consciousness is a new level of social awareness, and only social factor, which could resolve above-mentioned contradiction.

In 1994 Carl Sagan, wrote: “Some planetary civilizations see their way through, place limits on what may and what must not be done, and safely pass through the time of perils. Others, not so lucky or so prudent, perish.”^[2] Apparently our future in a great deal depends of our consciousness and wisdom. Therefore Social Evolution has its own “standards” for surviving of the cultures and civilizations in accelerating changes of society as a whole. To meet these social “standards” mean to resolve above-mentioned basic contradiction between increasing knowledge and raise of vulnerability of society. My task is to highlight one theoretical option for such “positive mutation” of humanity. So, as Romans say, let start “ab ovo”.

Some historical facts couldn’t be explained simply with formal logic. For instance: why the son of ordinary carpenter crucified by Romans, conquer Roman Empire with his teaching in three hundred years, although many similar religion sects or messiahs fail to do that;^[3] why French people have executed Louis XVI and most of French aristocrats, but British monarchy has survived; why after centuries of bloody colonial battles in the world, Mahatma Gandhi following his principles for non-violence and non-resistance, succeed to liberate India without bloody revolution and cause chain reaction, which later on has destroyed entire colonial system. To explain such facts properly we have to accept history as a process of changes and transitions. As an instrument formal logic is very static in its nature to do that.

To discover laws of gravitation, Isaac Newton first laid the foundation for differential and integral calculus.^[4] Without the instrument of high mathematics nobody could explain such complicated movements and associations of celestial bodies using only classical arithmetic and geometry. In same way philosophical problems and historical transitions couldn’t be solved or explained simply with classical formal (Aristotelian) logic. For this purpose is necessary more powerful weapon for thinking. Fortunately such instrument exists. It was discovered, elaborated and explained by Hegel in his capital work “The Phenomenology of Mind”. Those are laws and principles of dialectics and dialectical logic, respectively – laws and principles of evolution. Perhaps this is the most important discovery of XIX century’s philosophy, comparable only with Darwin’s discovery of biological evolution.^[5]

To make things worst nowadays myths are toped up with brainwashing and media manipulations.^[6] There are huge numbers of contemporary myths, media manipulation and ideological brainwashing in modern society. We will mention only three of them, because they are connected directly with social evolution, and are due to common mistake ignoring principles and laws of dialectical logic: a) The first myth relates to robotics. Many people believe with development of artificial intellect (AI), the robots will conquer, put in control or even destroy our civilization. In other words social evolution will be replaced by machine evolution; b) the second myth relates to integration of human mind and artificial intellect, which in the end of the day will lead to emergence of “conscious-technology”; c) the modern myth of creation includes not only technological, but political and economical myths as well. “The end of history”, which “proof” immortality of liberal capitalism is for example such political myth.

The ideas of possibility to invent intelligent even “spiritual” machines, emergence of machine civilization as continuation of social evolution are suggested by science fiction. In fact “the intelligent machines” simulate only logical component of thinking, but they do not modelling the human reason and consciousness. The psychological aspect of thinking and reason are excessively different concepts. The reason includes valuating functions and is closer to concept of consciousness. The machine “thinking” is not oriented to “understand” the process of thinking itself, there aren't valuating functions, or tendency to form insight, consciousness or values. These limitations make the machines phenomenal at speed and accuracy, but “one-dimensional” as “thinkers”. If intelligent machines become “conscious”, they inevitably will become vulnerable as humans. If they gain element of “self-consciousness”, they probably will destroy themselves before destroying its own creator.

The human mind is not only logic it is also a social or more precisely a cultural phenomenon and exactly this cultural phenomenon is core of human spirit. There is no sign what so ever that such cultural aspect emerges in artificial intellect so far. Moreover, the advantages of artificial intellect as speed and accuracy go together with its “native debility”. With other words computers simulate the logic of the cogitative process, but not the reason and consciousness, because they are a cultural phenomenon. Machine’s processing of information and human thinking are two completely different classes of “thinking”.

The machine processing of information simulate only logical component of objective thinking. In other words machines deal with information. Human mind deals with knowledge, which is consciousness information. Machines are powerful because they are “soulless”; there is no dilemma like “To be or not to be”. If machines gain a glimpse of soul, they will generate an avalanche of mistakes and will become utterly useless. The human thinking has long history of evolution, from magical, mythological to objective. So-called “soul” is behind logic and represent cultural component of thinking. Both rockets and birds fly, but rockets don’t need wings neither the birds – rocket engine, because they are two different classes of flying. The point is – could this type of very powerful, but “one-dimensional” machine “thinking” overcome less powerful, but more flexible and “multidimensional” and cultural human type of thinking? Apparently as a processing of information machines will overcome humans, as a culture – no.

Frequently as an argument for emergence of “spiritual” machines - superior to the human in degree to puts it in dependence has been adduced Moore’s law for the exponential development of technologies. However Gordon Moore has second law that is being undervalued. According this law the production expenditure grows up faster than profit. This law in great degree is an answer to the question for the intelligent machines, because it determines the reasonable limit of machine’s development. There is no sense to produce machines wasting resources instead to create such. Who needed such machines? Yes, new generations and classes of computers will be invented - based on optic- and nanotechnology; perhaps DNA and quantum computes. No doubt so-called “intelligent machines” will become more powerful, but not spiritual, as with time rockets became more powerful but never living creatures, and they don’t need to be. Machine civilization is a myth, a by-product of technological thinking. Usually such myths are created when applied scientists extrapolate one particular trend (in this case technological trend) and jump from concrete scientific field to philosophical conclusions, which is a methodological mistake. The machine intelligence has a limit and this is the border of their usefulness.

No doubt machine will become more humanlike, thanks to speech recognition, AI, software agents and other future wonders of science and technology. On the other hand humans will use more technologies, such as implants, wearable computers etc. to enhance their body and mind. However these changes can’t lead to merger of mind and AI into something as “conscious-technology”.^[7] “Division of labour” between human mind and AI, somewhat like intelligence amplification or hybrid intellect is inevitable. Perhaps "uploading" of mind into a machine, which would allow human mind to “survive” long after its physical body has decayed or so called cybernetic immortality, as part of this integration seems possible. But conscious-technology, something as rocked-bird is not the way, which social evolution will follow.

The human brain is a product of 3.5 billion years of biological evolution and around 2.5 million years of social evolution. First glimmerings of consciousness and introspection commenced only about 3,000 years ago, after developing of languages, farming, and urbanisation. Therefore both biological and social evolutions follow their own natural laws. It is anti-evolutionary to change its direction of development instead to follow its immanent natural lows. Both human mind and society have more exiting potentials for natural development, perfecting, expanding and modifying, which will lead to greater intelligence and awareness, or new social organization. Replacing human brain by something completely different, such wearable or implanted computer hardware is not the right way of social evolution, because contradict with evolutionary laws.

Everything in Mother Nature and society is interconnected in very sophisticated way and any change could trigger chain reaction with unforeseeable consequences. Recently became clear that so-called gene-modified food could damage internal organs. Genetics could recreate the genome of mammoth in foreseeable future; perhaps one animal as a proof, but to inhabit our planet with mammoths, dinosaurs and other already extinct species is entirely different matter. This will never happen, not because it is impossible, but because it is not necessary, probably very risky for a nowadays and future environment. In both above-mentioned cases dialectics of possibility and reality has been ignored. Not everything that is possible became reality. The transition from possibilities to reality depends from outside factors. Even theoretically and technologically “the spiritual machines” and “conscious-technology” to be possible in remote future, it doesn’t mean they will become reality inevitably. In these cases everything depend of the expedience on such machines their usefulness and the needs of the society.

The third myth related to social evolution is “the end of history”, which in fact reject social evolution at all. The capitalism as any economic formation is temporal stage in development of society and inevitably will be transformed to another more adequate economic formation corresponding to the changed reality. If “the end of history” is not simply propaganda, it is very naïve view, and definitely bad science. Proclaiming immortality of the capitalism, the members of this political sect (liberal capitalism), mortify it completely.

Apparently social evolution has its own objective laws and we have to study it very carefully to understand its nature and direction of social development. Theoretically the problem with exponentially increasing knowledge and vulnerability of society, therefore the next step of social evolution, has two possible solutions – a) emergence of elusive “super- consciousness”, and b) forming new type of Global consciousness and self-consciousness. The fist possibility - individual consciousness to evolve in higher level something as “super consciousness” is out of our scope for now. We will concentrate our effort to highlight only emergence of virtual (global) brain and global intellect i.e. forming new type of Global consciousness and self-consciousness.

The governing of society is a decision-making process. Evolving society becomes more and more complex and complicated system. In certain historical moment society reach a point when existing decision-making mechanism can not resolve contradictions related to its own surviving and inevitably have been replaced by new more sophisticated one. This replacement of decision-making mechanism leads to changes in the entire structure, organization and culture of society. From point of view how many people make the vital decisions, selection and organization of those people known as “ruling elite”, there are three fundamental forms of social governing: autocracy, democracy and netocracy. All historically existing forms of governing are derivates and variations from autocracy and democracy. Netocracy, which just emerge on the horizon, is completely new decision-making mechanism based on virtual global mind or intelligent networks. The netocracy is without historical precedent and on same root level as autocracy and democracy.

Social networks services like Facebook, MySpace, MyLive, Bebo, Twitter, LinkedIn etc. changed the world beyond recognition. In less of decade they turned the world in digital village in sense of communication, entertainment, dating, and so fort. ^[2] However those networks are not the case we are talking about. People who developed such social networks services and transformed Internet into moneymaking machine are example of good entrepreneurs, but they definitely are not prototype of future netocrats.

The second class networks are Intelligent networks. Example for emerging intelligent network is Wikipedia project. Virtual group of thousands contributors and editors from around the world are united in their effort to systematize existing knowledge in one single source, constantly elaborated as online cyclopaedia. This project is not commercially oriented. The cyclopaedia is open to everybody free of charge. The participants in this network are truly netocrats, because they are motivated not by money, but by spiritual value – contribution to society as a whole. This is an example how virtual brain look like and how global mind works, example of newly emerging social phenomena, culture and moral. No doubt significance of this project as achievement is immense. However “the by-product” - organization and function of Wikipedia network one day could be estimated even higher as a blueprint for thousands new intelligent networks, which is just round the corner.

The netocracy is a form of a social organization and rule, based on morality as form of global consciousness and global self-consciousness as a mechanism resolving social contradictions. Apparently the decision-making networks, resembling the core of humane brain, will be even more complicated compare with the network dedicated to systematization of existing knowledge. The first such networks should resolve not only the problems they are created for, but number of attended organizational problems like construction and deployment of specific software agents, cognitive architecture and collaborative software. Perhaps the first decision-making networks will be based on already existing thousands of mailing lists, replacing email communications with intelligent agents exhibiting some aspect of AI, such as learning and reasoning.

Although decision-making networks presenting virtual brain and global intellect are most important for surviving of society, similar decision-making networks will be created on all levels of social organism resembling physiology, nerve system, muscular system, blood system etc. More likely - existed stratas or professional groups to form or be transformed into networks. For instance decision-making networks of teachers, policemen, doctors, etc. united to improve professional standards and performance. However there is principle deference. Existing social stratification are division according to social factors like status and power, the decision-making networks are based exclusively on moral values. Apparently digital platform will prevent possibilities, bad gays like criminals and terrorists to form their decision-making networks or to vandalised authentic networks. Perhaps a special network dedicated to solve this problem resembling immune system in any living organism will be crated as well.

Connections among networks will be more complicated than simple hierarchical subordination. The communications among decision-making networks probably will resemble association in human brain. Communications between decision-making networks and those resembling one particular social system like education, health, security etc. will look like communication between brain and body. There is subordination, but there is no hierarchy. Netocratic society will be without political parties, leaders, presidents, ministers, voting system and other common attributes of democracy. It seems to be tedious from nowadays point of view and values, but this is the prize to pay for surviving of society as a whole. All people as “cells” of social organism will be treated equally, although they could be very different.

The decision-making networks resemble virtual brain or global intellect. Each citizen on the planet with necessary expertise, background and knowledge could contribute in resolving any problem. The final result of discussion is elaboration of feasible model. There is no vote and “dictatorship of the majority”, no media manipulations, no lobbyist interests. The domains will service not only the discussion of the issue. They will gain something as spontaneous associations of thoughts and ideas in unveiling the contradictions and possible solutions, bearing in mind all potential aspects and consequences. Hundreds of thousands servers connected in a network aiming to resolve social, economic, political, moral and many others local, national and global problems. Perhaps this is something more than intelligent network; it is a truly virtual brain respectively global intellect taking responsibility for surviving of humanity as a whole.

So, the modern society is on the verge of transition from democracy or more precisely its generic form – corporatocracy to netocracy. As was highlighted above, the basic contradiction nowadays is between exponential development of hi-technologies and increased vulnerability of society. The possibility of this process to destroy natural environment and humanity itself become apparent. This contradiction is very complicated and cannot be resolved by existing decision-making mechanism – corporatocracy. Because of this reason corporatocracy inevitably will be replaced with more sophisticated one - netocracy.

This means the corrupted politics presented by machinery of political parties to pass away and be replaced by new decision-making mechanism resembling human brain. The existing elected parliaments, as all decision-making institutions, gradually will be replaced by self-selected groups (decision-making networks) of experts (netocrats) according to any specific issue. The final decisions will resolve the problems or will become a law. In fact netocrats without mediation of politics will solve all social problems. Remember solving one particular problem the brain use only cells, which are associated with this problem. In this way the system will self-regulate itself. As far as being consciousness activity we could define it as a self-ruling society. This is netocracy, which overcomes the existing hierarchy and creates optimal conditions for self-governing. This society will have contradictions, but will be without ideologies, conflicts and wars. A world governed by morality, and oriented to surviving of the humanity as a living organism. Nobody knows how future society will look like in details, because this entirely depends of decisions of the future netocrats, but there is no doubt, future society will be fair and better place to live.

In this way ideologies, religious organizations, political parties and leaders, which in our days are deeply corrupted, become needless and with time will perish, because the collective consciousness that they offer is inadequate to the new realities in the world. The corporatocracy will disappear and influence of the capitalists will be limited to “physiology” of the system – its economy. In nowadays language, the netocracy is intelligent democracy, because it is based on morality.

Political revolutions present transition of political powers. They lead to acceleration of economic development. Transition of political power could be bloody revolution (French way) or peaceful development (British way). Therefore revolution as transition of power is not necessary bloody process by definition. It become bloody in case ruling elite decide to gain absolute power (French and Russian absolutism). Since Magna Carta was issued (1215) only Charles I attempted to gain absolute power provoking a second Civil War. He was executed in 1649 and the monarchy was abolished for ten years. Since restoration of the monarchy Britain succeeded to maintain balance of political power. British aristocracy never have been tempted to achieve absolute power and succeed to avoid such bloody event and survive during the last few centuries. Therefore revolutions become “bloody”, if political elite is not limited as a power. Political revolutions are linked to surviving of power elite.

Cultural revolutions lead to transition to higher degree of morality, therefore to truly social evolution. From Ten Commandments of Old Testament, through Jesus’ love, elaborated moral codex of Islam – Koran, Italian Renaissance, French Enlightenment, to emerging nowadays global self-consciousness are examples of spiritual revolutions. Spiritual revolutions are linked directly with surviving of society. The Roman society has been based on principles “Eye for eye, tooth for tooth.”^[8] At a certain historical point such society can’t survive without dramatic change of its moral values. So Christianity conquers Roman Empire in three hundred years bringing new moral values to society. Now 2000 years later people still don’t love each other like Jesus was pitched, but human life is of great value today compare with Romans time, and this is right alternative for surviving of society and truly Cultural Revolution. As a matter of fact emergence of all worlds’ religions are cultural revolutions related to one or another particular culture.

The dialectics between the political and the cultural revolution has not been studied in deep. K. Marx paid special attention to political revolutions, but cultural revolutions have been ignored or underestimated. Generally speaking, historically cultural revolutions precede political revolutions. For instance Enlightenment precedes French revolution. Nowadays however, because of accelerating development of both economy and culture, political and cultural revolutions seem to run in parallel. Political revolutions involve part of society, but very few people make cultural revolutions. At the end of day the social evolution is evolution of morality.

Now in a process of ongoing transition from stage of accumulation of material wealth to the stage with base problem -- physical survival of the society arise the problem of emergence of new elite with mission to implement this transition and resolve above-mentioned basic contradiction. The history shows that in such cases the older elite is powerless to solve newly arising problems and inevitably have been replaced by new one with completely different mindset. In our case these are people who become aware of global problems and how they could be solved. This is elite of knowledgeable people, not simply experts and narrowed specialists, but people combined knowledge from concrete field with very high moral standards. This elite resembles the brain in the living body that works for the survival of the organism as a whole, and no simply in interest of some organs and systems as all existing elites so far.

There is very slim line between using and abusing of power. Crossing this invisible and elusive line, the power is transformed from constructive to destructive force. Nowadays abusing of power is widespread phenomenon on all levels. To reach full insight of decision-making process of political elite and how this border has been crossed throughout human history, we have to take in account two “side effects” of political tanking. Firstly – it is broadly accepted that any power corrupts, the absolute power – absolutely. Secondly – the power affects ability of elite to think properly, bending perception of reality. Let explains this fact with simple example: Any bird on the ground is a very common creature. Flaying bird (metaphor for power) is something different. Facing air resistance, she probably “thinks” that without air she could fly faster and easer. It is necessary to have incredible insight to realise that without air flying is impossible at all. Unfortunately the side-effect of power is which prevent such prudence. Because of special position in the sky her “thinking” is closed in a much narrowed paradigm.^[9] This style of thinking is very typical for power elites of all times and we could define such style of thinking as bird syndrome. Because of temptation to gain absolute power and “fly faster”, power elite cut of all feedbacks, which maintain integrity of the system and collapse is inevitable. At the end of the day all emperies and brutal regimes, including latest totalitarian fascism and communism have collapsed. Attempting to gain and maintain absolute power French King and Russian tsar have been executed. Due to limitation of power by signed Magna Carta, British monarchy survived and still exists, although as political soup opera. Perhaps this particular syndrome determinate in a great deal, which way will take place in expected transition of political power from democracy to netocracy and nowadays democrats to netocrats.

At the present time political and finance elites owns and control material resources and can be defined, as substantial, newly formed elite is functional. The new elite (netocrats) does not own material resources but control it -- delivering oxygen and food substances to each living cell of social organism. The actions of the new elite will be managed only from moral considerations and will be oriented to the surviving of the society as a whole. The understanding that each cell of organism is important for society, because each individual cell can start to “degenerate and spread as cancer” and destroy not only the organ itself, but also the organism as whole. This social organization could be defined as netocracy. Establishing of netocracy means transition in social values from material values – money to the spiritual valuables – knowledge and morality.

The first five qualitative transitions are objective laws therefore inevitable. The sixth factor is subjective. The shift of the ruling elite however is objective necessity. This conflict between subjective and objective factors produces the revolutionary situations. Analogously to the transition from feudalism to capitalism, at the transition from capitalism to epistemism there are two roads – “French” and “British” (or revolutionary and peacefully). The political process today shows that Europe follows the peaceful road. “Exporting” democracy to countries rich in oil, USA is oriented to the revolutionary (in sense of bloody) way so far.^[11]

Two very different processes – globalisation and globalism, nowadays present above mentioned two ways of social development. It is very important to distinguish two similar terms: “globalisation” and “globalism”. The globalisation reflects currently the impact of telecommunications and technological revolution on society. It is part of natural road followed by social evolution since emergence of urbanisation, trough assimilation of tribes turning into sovereign nations to emerging at the present time national Unions. The globalism reflects the development of capitalism as an economic system in newly emerging conditions. The globalisation is a sociological concept for description of the social consequences from the technological revolution. Globalism is a concept of the political economy reflecting the changes of the economic system - new form of imperialism. The globalism reflects the appetites of the multinational companies to place a new kind of monopolism, using the achievements of the new technologies. In this way the anti-globalisation movement is directed definitely against the globalism – the policy of multinational companies and free (but unfair) trade and doesn't have nothing in common with the globalisation as positive tendency of unification of nations and states, transforming the world in digital village or single living organism. Globalisation is a positive, irreversible process, natural way of social evolution. The corporate globalism is ephemeral process. The globalism will survive up to disappearing of the capitalism as economic system. Therefore globalisation resemble “British way” of peaceful development and transition, globalism resemble “French way” of bloody transition of society.^[12]

The transition from political consciousness to a global self-consciousness is analogical to period of the bourgeois revolutions that gained transition from individual to collective rule of the society. Some transitions related to globalization are already underway. For instance transition from intensive to extensive development of society has started with technological revolution. Other transitions related to netocracy just emerge.

In a nutshell the Information is fundamental property of matter as space, time and motion. Both biological and social evolutions are evolution of information - from a structural pattern, (inanimate matter) to genome (living matter) to knowledge (society). Life is self-replicating gene; society is “self-replicating” knowledge. Evolution of society is evolution of knowledge. Civilizations are level of achieved knowledge.

In everyday life and even scientific writings, culture and civilization are often used as synonyms. In fact they are not. In most general terms social evolution is a process for verification of knowledge. Relations between culture and civilization present dialectics of beliefs and knowledge, which is verified information. Roughly - culture characterise mainly belief systems of the society or social groups. Civilizations are based on proven knowledge. Therefore a criterion for civilization is a level of positive or proven knowledge.

So throughout history thousands cultures have been melted in only two civilizations – empirical and technological. Empirical civilization is based on empirical (“trial and error”) verification of knowledge. Technology springs from natural sciences. Technological civilization is based on laws of natural science, exploring material resources. Empirical civilization has begun with neolith, (urbanisation, agriculture and handcrafts) and continues to the invention of the steam engine. Technological civilization starts with the invention of the steam engine, which has powered the industrial revolution and continues to recently emerging global self-consciousness, just few decades ago. Nowadays humanity is in transition from technological to humanitarian civilization. It is based on the laws of humanitarian sciences.

In foreseeable future genetic engineering could recreate the genome of extinct species and open the door for artificial neo-genesis. Nanotechnology could manufacture from raw materials almost everything. Despite all above-mentioned incredible technological achievements the next step of evolution of knowledge will be transition from natural science to human science. Therefore social evolution and forthcoming humanitarian civilization will be determinated by discoveries in human sciences, exploring spiritual dimension of society.

Human sciences are in its “classical” stage. Psychology, sociology, ethics, etc, are on the level of Newton’s physic and expect its own Einstein to make the most important discoveries in these fields. So in general technological civilization will be transformed to humanitarian civilization based on clear understanding of objective laws of human sciences, therefore - moral values. At the present our knowledge regarding the living matter and especially the human brain and mind are very limited. The living matter is an ocean of information, which we do not understand properly. The human brain and mind is an immense Universe of undiscovered scientific laws. Twenty-first century will be marked of discoveries in this field. So the approaching humanitarian civilization will be based on objective laws of human science, which remain undiscovered so far.

The above-mentioned basic contradiction seems irresolvable, but it is. The solution is in the next step of social evolution – emergence of global self-conciseness and transition to new form of social self-governing - netocracy. This society with virtual brain and global intellect resembles a living organism. It consist a number of decision-making networks communicating through digital platform. The networks will make decisions in favour of the society as whole, not particular privileged group of people. Ever increasing knowledge leads to singularity and knowledge will change its domain from collective to global intellect. Singularity is not a doomsday scenario by definition. Singularity pressures the society to change. Vernor Vinge has suggested that such pressure would create an even more intelligent system. So, the global brain will become intelligent enough to improve its own thinking. ^[13] Therefore humanity inevitably will transit to new social organization i.e. new civilization. Consequently the solution of above-mentioned contradiction between the high technologies and the surviving of the society is not in it its “technological dimension” securing efficient control on potential WMD or KMD, but in its “social dimension” -- elimination of such possibility through reorganization of society.

Both the biological and the social evolutions have specific “standards”. The biological “standards” are clear. The point is which are the “standards” of the social evolution? Obviously because any scientific and technological achievements could be beneficial or destructive for society, should be very clear borderline (or measure), ^[14] which shouldn’t be crossed in any circumstances. This line is principle of integrity of nature and humanity. Integrity of nature and humanity should be accepted as paramount moral value. If something is in favour of this principle it is moral, if not – it is immoral, and should be banned and avoided at any price. If at certain time the answer of this question is unclear any activities should be delayed until clarification of this point.

Transition to new society could be peaceful or bloody. Globalization and globalism present these two ways of transition. To avoid bloodshed the society badly need new Magna Carta, which should limit the power of politicians and financial barons. Uncontrolled power transforms existing democracy to plutocracy, cleptocracy and corporatocracy; mass media – from an instrument for social education - to brainwashing machine. This is deadly dangerous game and puts humanity at risk. The question is – where is the measure separating wealth as good for society and wealth as risk for society? Apparently the measure is the borderline, which marks using wealth not for economical, but for political purposes. Any such use of wealth bending democracy, corrupt politicians, violates the principle of integrity and destroys the society. The new Magna Carta couldn’t prevent transition to new organization of the society. It will make this transition peaceful and will guarantee surviving of the nowadays elite. The monarchy survived losing its political power. However the most of the politicians and financial barons are unlikely to accept such agreement, because they are very powerful, arrogant and blinded by the bird syndrome thinking. They will continue to push society to globalism; where at the end of the day will face their “power decapitation” and will perish as the aristocrats of the nineteen century. However drafting such a document as moral charter and legal document by dedicated decision-making network will be very helpful. Such document will bring awareness and insight to this crucial point.

Since the end of the Cold war, the political life is in complete mess, because the emerging contradictions are so great and are beyond the capacity of the collective intelligence offered by the political system. Moreover with time political crises will be intensified and permanent. Fortunately relatively small groups of people (critical mass) of netocrats are needed to carry out and complete already emerging Cultural Revolution. The last one could solve the problems of political revolution and save humanity as always did throughout the centuries of the social evolution.^[15]

There are some evidences about symmetry between phylogenesis and ontogenesis. According to Earnst Haeckel, ontogenesis is a brief and rapid recapitulation of phylogenies.^[16] So if the emerging global self-consciousness is comparable with the emerging self-consciousness in the ontogenesis this could produce a rough idea about the “age” of our society. Recently the emerged global self-consciousness is a sign of transition from youth to mature age; hence our civilization is in its “teens”. This means humanity is in the middle of the road or perhaps in the middle of the first half, and there are centuries of evolutions ahead. “The end of history” is at least scientific naivety. The humanity has chance to evolve in unforeseeable long period of time. Nowadays the liberal capitalism and democracy are not the end of the social evolution, they are just small segment of it.

So, to meet Mother Nature’s “standards”, the biological species should mutate positively to adapt to constantly changing environment; to meet the Future’s “standards” humanity should “mutates positively” to new global self-consciousness, organization and self-governing. This new step of social evolution is emerging netocracy or transition from technological to humanitarian civilization. This transition is simultaneously politico-economical and cultural revolution. Transition from one civilization to another is a very rare event. Historically it has happened two times so far and in general terms marks the “age” of humanity.^[17]

During the last 6000 years sixteen world’s empires assimilated thousands of tribes into about 200 sovereign nations. At the present running globalization assimilate existing nations through few unions, to one single social organism and with time all nations will perish as almost forgotten tribes. Society is in transition from the dominating of the politics as a form of social consciousness to a global self-consciousness or morality as dominating form of social consciousness.

Mother Nature and the Future need us, because the Homo Sapience as biological species and our technological civilization are far from completion. The humanity is too young to die. Both biological and social evolutions are endless. The life and particularly the mind are unique and extremely rare pearls in the scale of the Universe. The Mother Nature has spent 3.5 billion years to create the consciousness. No doubt it is part of her majesty and beauty. Mother Nature needs us, because the new species “Homo sapientisimus” perhaps should be conceived from the reason and morality. This over-minded human could overcome the space and the time. Such an option of human evolution is more exiting compare with “machine civilization” or “consciousness-technology”.

In short term social evolution lays the foundations of new society and new civilization. However if our society fails to meet anticipated “standards” of social evolution, to overcome its greed and hypocrisy, to transit successfully to new humanitarian civilization, humanity will perish as many planetary civilizations did so according C. Sagan. I hope very much all of us populated this beautiful blue planet, blessed with this rare gift called consciousness, to overcome our egoism, to exhibit wisdom and do not disappoint Mother Nature and the Future. They have created us and rise us with so much casualties and sufferings. They need us, as we need them. At the end of the day this is dialectics of matter and mind.

5. Dialectical philosophy has long history from Heraclitus to Hegel and Marx. Dialectical logic does not contradict to formal or Aristotelian logic. The formal logic is included in dialectical logic as Newton’s physics is included into Einstein physics or Euclid’s geometry is included in Not-Euclidian geometries. Like high mathematics dialectical logic does not avoid subjective mistakes, but it is only precise instruments for analysis of social evolution and transitions.

6. In everyday life, contemporary myths, media manipulation and ideological brainwashing are used often as synonyms, but they are not. Contemporary myths are due to common mistakes ignoring laws and principles of dialectical logic. Media manipulations are deliberately bending of truth to influence public opinion, usually in sake of political purpose. Ideological brainwashing accepts something as truth (most often existence of God or political doctrine) and all fowled discussions and speculations are oriented to proof this “truth”. Contemporary myths are created by very intelligent people and affect mainly scientific community. Political manipulation affects mainly middle class. Brainwashing affects unprivileged part of society. So bending, distorting, misrepresenting the truth is part of our culture, very dangerous one.

10. At present the society is in stage of transition to new economic formation, for which there is no commonly accepted name. Descriptive and expository terms as “post-industrial” society make an intuitive impression of this society, but do not characterize it as content. For the purpose of this essay we introduce neologism “epistemism” i.e. society in which the Knowledge is the major capital and value. The notion “epistemism” is selected excessively unspecified to fulfil the deficiency of more precise name, reflecting the nature of the future economic formation that will emerge in the conditions of netocracy as form of social governing. I personally do not think that epistemism is some form of socialism or communism. Firstly these concepts are badly discredited and even compromised from political speculations and propaganda. Secondly, in 19-century, when they have been introduced, the equality is being understood very limited, referring only to distribution and redistribution of wealth. In the conditions of 21-century the social relations have deeper meaning and value orientation. They are being reoriented from the material sphere to cultural sphere. In other words the “equality” is more spiritual than material factor.

15. Christianity conquers Roman Empire in three hundred years, not because it was so strong, but because: firstly - Roman society has been in moral crisis and badly needed new direction; secondly - among many rivals’ sects, only Christianity pointed out the right direction of social evolution. Moreover replacing traditional polytheism with monotheism and accepting Christianity as official religion for Roman Empire Constantine converted one small sect into world religion.

16. "Haeckel, E., Riddle of the Universe at the Close of the Nineteenth Century. 1899. Also Dr. Spock said: "Each child as he develops is retracing the whole history of mankind, physically and spiritually, step by step. A baby starts off in the womb as a single tiny cell, just the way the first living thing appeared in the ocean. Weeks later, as he lies in the amniotic fluid of the womb, he has gills like a fish". (Baby and Child Care, Dr. Spock, 1957, p. 223). Ken Wilber in his book, A Brief History of Everything, suggests that cultures evolved consciousness following a similar path that children mature through, from magical thinking to mythical and ultimately objective thinking, and for some, holistic thought.