Economic crisis: who is to blame and what to do | Страница 1 | Онлайн-библиотека
Crisis of the modern society – financial, economic, spiritual and civilization – has its own reasons. All these crises are on Earth. But Cosmos actively impacts the Earth. The comparison of crises with the dynamics of planet motion shows that there is the coincidence which is not by chance. Gravitational-magnetic fields within the periods of
Both these factors in their comparison serve the favorable and unfavorable periods of development of our civilization: passionary and subpassionary periods. Their activity reveals cyclically the contradictions between the social motivators – persons who are successful in social sphere and communication and also domain experts – persons, who are successful in practical subject activity, – cyclically sharpen. Social motivators cyclically get power and submit domain experts, they start cutting off the most part of the cake of the social richness, and the society gradually loses its potential to the intensive development.
Of course the domain experts’ coming to power and the powers of Cosmos do not exhaust all the reasons of crises. We do not stand for expelling the traditional economic factors from the analysis – currency circulation, etc., though these factors submit to cosmic resonances. Our purpose is to enter the non-obvious system of determinants into the analysis methodology, which is connected with the fight not just between poor and rich, educated and non-educated, sated and starving, owners of property and those who have nothing, etc, but also between different psycho-types. The acute peak of this fight and alteration of psycho-types happen in accordance with cosmic cycles.
Resonances of the gravitational and magnet field of the celestial objects appear to be one of the most important factors that impact the development of the mankind. Economic crises are the consequence of the actions of people. And these crises begin more often when the Earth gets into the zone of the unfavorable affection of cosmic forces, so the aftermath of this fact is the alteration of quality of the economic active population. The completion of the system crises is connected with the leaving of these zones and with the alteration of the dominating psychological type that dominates in the economic elite. Practical masters of resonants come to rule the states and economy. They are able to sense the alteration of gravitational-magnetic fields and take measures in accordance with the economic decisions.
Chapter 1. Social motivators and domain experts as the stable psycho-types of people
Class struggle, the struggle of the rich and the poor, struggle between different cultures and nationalities appeared significantly later then the relationships between men and women and between those who developed the system of the social relationships and those who hunted and looked for food, survived by domain labour. By matriarchy the functions of the social regulations in tribes belonged to women. Later these functions were implemented by men, more often older in the generation because the management of others required social experience.
Gradually the function of the social regulation in the human society, the management function started to differ from the function of the simple labour. The ability for the domain labour gradually separated from the ability of the simple labour. It is connected with the differences between the abilities of people, with the differences in the processes that take place in our brain. But it could be unnoticeable for the people who surround us, because the management itself should be unnoticeable, and manipulation with people in own interests is effective when it is hidden, not obvious.
Psycho-physiological differences of domain experts and social motivators are also not unnoticeable both on the level of psychological specifics and on the psychophysiological processes. They look like if they were hidden from the eyes of the explorer. The division between the domain experts and the social motivators is the first social division of labour. Its influence on the progress of the human mankind has a great number of aspects. It affects also on the processes causing crisis both in social community and in the world as a whole.
Already at the level of the ancient people the individuals appeared who were capable of self-organization, change of the structure of the social relationships. The appearance of such people was a great step forward to the way of the civilization development. Of course, among the ancient people the abilities to manage the social relationships were distributed not equally between the individuals. Like we now the ancient people were distinguished in accordance with their psycho-type, the type of their intellect. Those who were able to regulate the social relationships in a greater degree than others and to manage others could be conditionally called as social motivators. Those who were devoted to the labour work could be called domain experts.
The relationships between the domain experts who more often have higher IQ and social motivators who have more developed social and emotional intellect (they have higher EQ) also have different aspects. One of the aspects is that domain experts systematically, constantly lose to the social motivators on different levels of the historical development.
There are the interesting ideas of the evolutionist, paleo-neurologist and the doctor of the biological sciences, professor, and the head of the nerve system development labouratory of the Institute of the Human Morphology of the Russian Academy of Medical Science Sergey Vyacheslavovich Saveliev concerning this question. In his opinion the only advantage of human being over the other mammals is our intellect. Intellect developed with the development of the ability of a person to get food and create the means of labour.
Speech and communication emerged as the need to optimize their actions during the hunt and collective labour. However, it began to be used for fraud. It does not necessarily suggest some sort of domain activity and therefore it started the independent evolution. Speech is energetically favorable.
Anyone who could lie so that everyone believed them won in the struggle for females, for food, for the status in the pack, for dominance. Yet the development of speech has no direct connection with the increase in brain size. As it is known, microcephals have lesser brain than chimpanzees, but they speak well enough. According to S. Saveliev at the time of social selection, namely 10 million years ago, at the moment of the emergence of consciousness by primates they stood the process of fighting for females, food and dominance in the pack through social mechanisms. This led to the fact that while combining the individuals began to force out the objectionable from the pack. Such were not only the most aggressive. Such were also cleverer in domain activity, but less successful in the social one.
The averaged type in pack better surrendered to social management. Persons with the more developed domain intellect are more prone to individual activities. They are difficult to control socially, by surroundings, elders, leaders. And how can the leader in the pack allow the presence of those who are not inclined to obey him? If you let even one such character into the pack, then second, third, you can quickly lose power. Domain experts are always dangerous for those with advanced social intelligence. Therefore those who did not yield management on their part were expelled from the pack by the first opportunity.
The banished ones moved to the new places, adapted to the new environment, reproduced and again banished the asocial and cleverer individuals from their society. Those individuals were always banished who due to the highly-developed domain intellect were individualists and badly submitted to the social management. Thus, the cleverest and indestructible ones were banished which were clever enough to unite with the same ones and that was the danger for the “leaders” of the pack. The domain experts were always tried to be banished and they constantly moved looking for the places of the Earth worldwide.
S. Saveliev supposes that human brain was growing while human being had a place to migrate and until the socialization has become the main branch of the development of humanity. At once as the main problems of surviving acquired the social character (it was about 100 thousand years ago), the brain started to lose weight.
Here is the opinion of the professor S. Saveliev, recorded by Anna Natitnik – head of the editor of the "Harvard Business Review – Russia" See:Natitnik А. The society banishes the clever ones (interview). United Press, May 2012.
“Millions and even more years ago the social structure of society thanks to the fiercest internal selection developed frontal lobe of the brain. In humans this area is huge: the rest of mammals have it much smaller relative to the whole brain. The formed frontal area was not designed to think, but to make an individual share food with a neighbour. No animal is able to share food, because food is a source of energy. And people who did not share food in a social group were simply eliminated”.
Brain was growing until there was a place for people to migrate and while they had to deal with only biological tasks. When humanity faced the social problems, the brain began to lose weight. This process began about 100 thousand years ago. About 30 thousand years ago that has led to the destruction of the Neanderthals. They were smarter, stronger than our ancestors, the Cro-Magnons; they creatively solved all the problems, they came up with tools, means of making fire, etc. But due to the fact that they lived in small populations, their social selection was less expressed. The Cro-Magnon benefited from large populations. As a result of the long-term negative social selection their groups were integrated well enough. Due to their population Cro-Magnons unity destroyed the Neanderthals. Against the mass of mediocrity even the strongest genius can not do anything. In the end, we left on this planet alone. As this story shows, for the socialization the large brain is not needed. Well socialized stupid individual is integrated into any community much better than any individualist. During the evolution the personal talents and characteristics were sacrificed for biological advantages: food, breeding, dominance. This is the price paid by humanity!”.
And further: “The negative social selection that started 10 million years ago acts till now. Not only are the asocial elements banished from the society, but also the cleverest ones. Look at the destinies of the great scientists, thinkers, philosophers – less of them had good life. It is explained through the fact that we keep on competing like monkeys. If there is a dominant person among us, he or she has to be immediately eliminated because this person threatens each individual personally. And because mediocrities prevail, any talent has to be whether banished or eliminated. That is why the excellent students are insulted, offended and treated badly at school, and it lasts for a lifetime. And who remains? The mediocrity. Nevertheless well socialized one”.
In its sense these ideas are about the fact that persons with domain intelligence were struck by persons with more developed social intelligence. Let us provide the data from S. Saveliev about the change of the volume of the skull of our ancestors (11, page 209).
As we can see about 70 thousand years ago the skull volume of our ancestors started decreasing. Let us provide the statements of the author on this matter.
“In sufficiently large groups of sapiens constant hard artificial selection for the "sociality" was taking place: reproductive benefits were received by the best adapted individuals to the existence of a group of individuals. The most socialized individuals had the reduced aggressiveness, the developed communicative and food tolerance to neighbors”.
In such conditions the primary surplus arising in brain volume was not popular, and the optimal combination of qualities was achieved in much smaller amounts. Probably a regular solution of super tasks necessary for basic survive has been replaced by the group training. In fact, there was an external method of storage and transmission of biologically important information, which has reduced the role of the individual abilities. This gradually reduced the average volume of the brain to 1330 cubic cm. Socialization and development of primary cultural traditions was not the stimulus, but the reason for the prosperity of individuals with a minimum of individual differences. The support of the existing forms of relationship and behavioral skills in a group provides benefits for individuals with mediocre abilities. Extreme individualization of behavior in the family, or the mixed flock group reduces the likelihood of reproductive success at a low dominance. In connection with this the level of socialization of group is inversely proportional to the realization of the abilities of the individuals. These phenomena are observed in modern societies. Individualized forms of behavior are not usually accepted by members of the society… These observations suggest that 50 thousand years ago socialization, development of cultural and hunting traditions contributed into the artificial selection of the less capable but more socialized individuals "[11, page 290-291].
If you take the labour tools of that period, arrange them in time, it can be clearly seen that a decrease in brain size and their improvement seems to be frozen. But what had been achieved was handed down from generation to generation for thousands of years. Public consciousness through the socialization remembered what ancestors made. The social motivators are able to maintain and transfer knowledge and experience from generation to generation. And we must agree with S. Saveliev: “The situation looks quite anecdotal. Very capable people with big brains create a complex and effective system of training and retention of knowledge for the entire population. Having taught the less capable relatives the lessons of survivals, they doom themselves to destruction. Humanity faces such situation now.” [11, page 292].