What is the "law of the removability of kvadr"? by
Bublefish translation
What such is the "law of the removability of kvadr"? the "law of the removability of kvadr" (further - ZSK) at the present moment (article it is written in the spring of 1998 editor's notes) is considered one of the most vital parts not only of etnosotsioniki, but also sotsioniki generally. It is asserted in any case that this "fundamental law" is used in the practical work of the colleagues OF OOO "international institute of sotsioniki". It is interesting that the formulation of this law by the author (A.Bukalovym) thoroughly hides itself. In any case for me, until now, it did not be necessary to see the published works with the substantiation or the formulation ZSK. Then very frequently it was necessary to deal concerning the references to it and the criticism of those sotsionikov, which have its impudence not to know. Since A.Bukalov it restrained from the performance of its oral promise, given at September (1997) conference about the publication of its views on etnosotsioniku, 4 it was forced as far as possible to reconstruct the views of contemporary sotsionikov on the formulation ZSK. These views, judging by everything, coincide only in that part, what acknowledges change of kvadr according to their calculation (i.e. - from the first to the fourth). In connection with this for me it was necessary to conduct reconstruction using its own logic. 1. first formulation is most general and already too frequently it results from the appearances of a number of sotsionikov: "everything which is divided into four, sootnosimo with kvadrami". On the use in real sotsionike of this formulation speak, for example, the fragments Of s. shteynikov's reports at two last conferences, where it attempted the correspondence of kvadr to the stages of koitusa {1}. To in earnest receive (but those more - to criticize) this concept is simply impossible. Any discussion in this direction will leave into the thickets of the explanation of status of sotsioniki in a number of contemporary sciences and real role of kvadr in sotsionike. The consideration of the concepts, connected with these questions, into the theme of this article does not enter. However, I will allow itself to express surprise apropos of the absence of the "scientific works", which connect the internal essence of kvadr with writing of the first four arabic numerals or names it is finger hands (than chiromancy it is worse than the maps of containers?) {2}. 2. "the development of all public structures occurs in the stages, which correspond to spirit and values of kvadr. In this case active (but not oppositional!) the part of the structures is formed from the Tim corresponding kvadry ". Specifically, this formulation escapes from the materials, published in N1 journal "sotsion" in present (1998) yr. Itself the first part of the formulation of special questions does not cause. Mainly because it does not have special relation to sotsionike - this is the truth of sensible reason. To all it is known (on this based many historical studies), that any organization passes to its development of the stage of generation, bloom, decline and loss. In the context of the development of ethnoses it is possible to name the theories of Nietzsche, Spengler, Gumileva, etc. since they appeared earlier than contemporary sotsioniki, there is every reason to believe this they had an effect on creators ZSK, but not vice versa. To base these theories of sotsionikoy at the present moment is impossible - attempts at the determination of the Tim the ancient tsars appear extremely suspiciously from the point of view of procedure. Furthermore, it is long ago known that any fairly complicated process can be broken into the practically immeasurable number of stages (completely not compulsorily to 4 or 16). If we, in accordance with the theory of information metabolism, begin to divide history precisely into this quantity of parts, we must somehow base the selection of this classification, namely this system must be obosnovanna by means of the historical material. Causes doubts this formulation, also, from the point of view of scale. Within the framework of different structures the time flows in different ways. As result, we can have the successful tret'ekvadrennuyu structure in the vtorokvadrennoy country and vice versa. The same formulation actually recognizes only identical change of stages in the entire civilization at once. However, similar things completely can have statistical nature. For example, in the period of the supremacy of third kvadry it is possible to assume an increase in the percentage of the leading workers of those representing the Tim third kvadry. Misfortune in the fact that the supporters ZSK the applicability of statistical methods in sotsionike deny... The second part of the formulation is also doubtful simply because any empirical data into an example are not led. A modest attempt At i. arvachev {3} causes faster bewilderment - the author substantiates a special case by reference to the unproven general law! And this on scales of a comparatively small group of schoolboys. However, on scales of ethnos similar research cannot be conducted apparently generally. However, ZSK only one of the sotsionicheskikh principles, which must be confirmed by practical given, yes no one so was assembled - already very this is heavy. 3. "in all structures occurs the change of the leading workers in accordance with kvadrami". This formulation more corresponds to reality (at least, it it does not come into conflict with the common sense); however, it cannot pretend to status of "fundamental law". In principle, there is nothing of surprising in existence similar rule - people attempt to work in maximally comfortable conditions, and as the most comfortable small group in sotsionike is considered kvadra. Accordingly, the leaders of any structure will attempt to surround themselves by the representatives of the Tim their kvadry, and the Tim another kvadr will be displaced. A central failure in this formulation should be considered the absence of empirical studies and elementary statistics on this question. The statements Of a.Bukalova about the results of the work of the colleagues OF MIS in the number of firms are incorrect, it is simple on the basis of the elementary standards of scientific ethics, which forbid references to the materials of the experiments, which are not published or are not the units of archive storage. Furthermore, with this formulation is not applied the concept of the change of kvadr in the completely determined order (but this order (basis ZSK)) conquers that kvadra, which has numerical superiority. As is evident, the formulations proposed do not cause enthusiasm. Not better does be matter also concerning the historical examples, with which operate the authors OF ZSK. The most essential arguments in favor ZSK are given in the book Of a.Bukalova {4}. First example - development of Communist idea and its embodiment in THE USSR. To stop on the definition of the Tim of concrete historical characters 4 not I will be (although to define G.V. of Plekhanov as ILE could only the person, who has very vague ideas about the development of Marxism in Russia). Why as the first development stage of Marxism in THE USSR is considered precisely the activity of Marx and Engels, which to Russia no did refer? In this case by the author is undertaken the mixing of civilizations {5}. In this case is ignored the real situation in the country. So, period to the end of the 20th is annual it treats as "vtorokvadrennyy", but indeed it is not necessary to be by large specialist in order to know - this time of the inner-party democracy, such as democracy must be considered the property not of second (there continuous dictatorship), but first kvadry. The poslestalinskoye softening of regime and economic reforms (up to the the kosyginskikh inclusively) completely can be considered the time of third kvadry, and to brezhnevshchinu - by the fourth. This distribution more corresponds to the real motion of historical process, although it contradicts that exaggerated idea about the role of personality in the history, which it is characteristic for Kiev sotsionikov. However, I consider discussion with the laymen on this especially special question senseless of news. The examples, connected with the history of ancient peace are even less accessible for the understanding. Thus, for instance, Bukalov are considered ancient China the vtorokvadrennym state, but it does not refine, that the political device of China changed generally never! From the moment of creation on the present moment China - despotic state, where the continuances of stagnation alternated by "spasms" in the form of people uprisings and foreign achievements. And which is characteristic - as a result of "spasms" was reproduced the same system for control, as before (up to the details). We can see based on the example of China that the "work" OF ZSK in the real history is reduced to its idleness for the duration of millenia. On such "trifles", as the simultaneously opened By bukalovym "principle of the combination of kvadr" {6} 4 already and I do not say... It is natural that in this short article I illuminated far from all possible formulations and not entire set of problems, connected with ZSK. For example, 4 it did not concern the questions, connected with the real role of kvadr in sotsionike, possibility ZSK with other (netsivilizatsionnom) approach in the history, by the relationship between thymoma and the "removability of kvadr" (in such cases. - for the man) and the like however, even in this case a conclusion from the carried out investigation to draw is possible, and conclusion this sad - sotsioniki are not characterized by the distinct understanding of the law of the removability of kvadr, but the examples, which oblige it to confirm, they make it necessary to assume that the concealment from the community of the formulation of law is completely conscious - to confirm its faithfulness by something.
Reply With Quote