Moscow 2015 Dmitry N. Alekseev
Yüklə 2,28 Mb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
298 greats) – precisely because of the fundamental error of the very way of understanding and interactions. After all, no other organized control of the world, except for "controllability" and its denial, most people do not imagine themselves (the deistic "created and let go" applies here). As the world perceives them (and is known in such a presumption), it is siemjazhno-intuitively-instinctively as essentially hostile, stagnant and "assimilated" (whereas in reality it is hostile only with respect to conditions, order and mediation of interaction), the very question of "arrangements" with it looks either as absurd or as a compromising "weak- willed position." And the cybernetic model of the "black box", applied most widely (to the whole world and its macro components), is regarded as insufficient due to either its depersonification, excluding the possibility of talking about an "abstract God", or – more often – the prerequisite for a principled cognition of the world order as a certain, self-contained (and, correspondingly, within the framework of a certain "universal theory") of unity. Meanwhile, the approach from the point of view of an agreement and dialogue is based on the presumption of trust, primarily related to the recognition of an environment that is not controlled by us (and our own device, by the way) on universal universal principles – both in the structural and in the activity plans. And the fact that the organization given to our observation and reflection is only partially open to our ratio, is not irrational because of this lack of control, is not completely isolated from us, not necessarily hostile to us and not necessarily uncontrollable – contrary to the common error of confusion of the concepts of uncontrollability and uncontrollability, most likely, from a correspondent (in many respects a solipsist) concept of authenticity. But agreement means reciprocity of obligations, because the desire or decision to change (at whatever level it was not taken) is a question of price, and most important of all, of meaning. One-sided desire realized within the framework of the existing living conditions on the fact of the possibility of realization, without taking into account price, meaning and consequences, is a condition of infinite growth, which turns out to be quite finite for testing, and even catastrophic in this limb. Meanwhile, there are enough resources on the Earth and in the Universe to solve almost any of our problems – the question is to act "in the light of its interests", since we ourselves are part of it as a scenario. These words are not unfounded: the history of science and technology knows a lot of amazing insights based on simple and elegant things. But one should not expect from the universe the "pre-established harmony," since harmony is not something that is "pre-established", but that is created and 299 reproduced. And in this – an important aspect of the principle of openness of managing and managed systems. Since the question of the commensurability, observability, and comprehensibility of the processes that manifest themselves as "universal harmony," to our essence, can always be reformulated into the question of whether always and in all these commensurability, observability and comprehensibility are necessary, since it is known that it is more important not to teach the mind of knowledge is necessary knowledge (and in fact in a strange way this "suddenly" is found only at a certain stage in the development of human cognitive abilities). I believe that a substantial part of further research should be devoted to the study of what is needed within this approach. 300 List of references 1. «Философско-релизгиозные истоки науки» под ред. П.Гайденко. Изд. «Мартис», ИФ РАН. М, 1997 (стр. 68, 171) 2. Е.З.Мирская «Научные школы как форма организации науки: Социологический анализ проблемы» (Науковедение. – 2002. – N 3 (15). – С.8- 24) (стр. 136) 3. Т.Ю.Павельева «Научные школы в системе науки: философский анализ» ( http://www.dslib.net/filosofia-texniki/nauchnye-shkoly-v-sisteme-nauki- filosofskij-analiz.html ) Изд. «Станкин». М., 2012 (стр. 139) 4. П.Бергер, Т.Лукман «Социальное конструирование реальности». Изд. «Медиум». М, 1995. (стр. 146) 5. О.В.Григорьев, Е.А.Ижицкая. Неокономика. Введение в метод. http://neoconomica.org/article.php?id=376 , 27.08.2014 (стр. 166) 6. О.В.Григорьев. «Эпоха роста». ИД «Карьера пресс». М., 2014 (стр. 178) 7. А.В.Бузгалин, А.И.Колганов. «Глобальный капитал». УРСС. М., 2014 (стр. 178) 8. С.Нефедов. Война и общество. Факторный анализ исторического процесса. История Востока. ИД «Территория будущего». М, 2008. (стр. 221) 9. Р.Б.Фуллер. «Усмешка гигантов» http://www.dalekseev.ru/sites/default/files/attachments/articles/fuller_usmeshk a_gigantov_0.pdf , на 25.09.2015 (стр. 229) 10. Д.А.Губанов, Д.А.Новиков и А.Г.Чхартишвили «Социальные сети: модели информационного влияния, управления и противоборства». Изд. «Физматлит». М., 2010 (стр. 254) 11. Интерруссофт: http://ta.interrussoft.com/s_centre.html ; http://ta.interrussoft.com/s_centre.html , на 25.09.2015 (стр. 256) 12. Компьютер-информ: http://www.ci.ru/inform21_04/p_22.htm , на 25.09.2015 (стр. 256) 13. Информсвязь: http://www.informsviaz.ru/inform_tech/629.html , на к. 2012 (стр. 260) 14. Статья Википедии «Общегосударственная автоматизированная система учёта и обработки информации», на 25.09.2015 (стр. 263) 15. Сайт ГАС «Управление»: http://gasu.gov.ru/web/guest/home;jsessionid=CrpyWFBZ9tphGq2jJNJDjvLXWyFc Vgy4sc4t12mMG8ynmLFSQQLN!1437386769!1443184921966 48 (стр. 266) 16. Виктор Абрамов, директор по продажам компании InterSystems, 2010, http://www.cnews.ru/reviews/free/infrastructure2009/int/intersystems/ , на 25.09.2015 (стр. 273) 17. С.Бир. «Мозг фирмы». Изд. «Либроком». М., 2009 (стр. 281) 18. Ж.Делез, «Логика смысла». 48 The data and links in the text are presented for 2012, when the section on GAS "Management" was created. Yüklə 2,28 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|