1.  How intellect constricted mind

The source of all errors without any exception relates to comprehension of many, including the ancient Greek and ideas lies in the way of contemporary humanitarian thinking.

Our thinking does not seem to mind the ancient Greeks. The difference lies in the fact that modern humanists have lost one of the most important logical operations - the comparison operation and a range of thinking tools - comparative concepts. Without them, thinking degraded from the sound of its form to the rational, which is called intelligence[2].
        To save the situation, first of all, you need to understand the problem and then learn reasonable thinking, which was used by some ancient thinkers. Socrates and Plato, while abandoning the comparative concept, were the first among the ancient Greeks who went to the exploration of reality through reason. Aristotle was the last of the ancient Greek philosopher, who held a reasonable thinking, while coming to understanding the natural and social world not only from the standpoint of logic, common sense, the main categories of which are categories of "identity" and "difference". He thought of some other comparative notions, from position of which he comprehended the world of pre-Socratics. As a result, Aristotle finds "four kinds of opposites" and uses these forms of thought in all his works, and that: "contrary" to one another, "the opposite", "corresponding", "privation and possession[3]."

Our approach is similar to the Aristotelian approach, however, it is based on the identification of not four, but an infinite set of comparative concepts that lie between the extreme abstractions of identifying and distinguishing - abstract identity and abstract distinction and it does not only helps us to understand the thinking of the ancients. Its advantage is based on the identification of causal relations; it helps with the objective points of view to make sense of the natural and social phenomena. Clarifying the content of human knowledge, lifestyle and behavior in society, it contributes to a good understanding of morality categories, many of which reveal themselves only if they are taken in the light of the laws of the objective (relative) world.

People who do not perceive the causal relationships, which are underlying the basis of being, are fundamentally incapable of rational justification of morality. They are able to make sense of it only from the standpoint of reason, i.e. superficial part. As a result of a dispute between the mind and reason in the first place began to lean in favor of reason.

The situation was aggravated by the fact that the rational thinking of the ancient Greeks was imperfect, because it relies on rather modest means of thinking. This led to relativization of knowledge in order to understand reality from only one side. Especially this shortcoming manifested itself in the studies of the Sophists, because they had a very specific point of view. Moreover, these epistemological positions took place due to nothing other but two types of opposites, based on the abstractions of "meaning assigned" and "opposite". Therefore, the Sophists, who saw the wisdom in its functions of knowledge production as a distinguishing feature of Homo sapiens, could not relativate moral concepts. This means that the Sophists relativism led the way in which they interpret reality. However, all this can be seen only from the standpoint of a reasonable but not rational thinking.

Socrates believed in the omnipotence of the Sophists’ knowledge, but he could not accept their relativism, and eroded the basis of knowledge and the basis of morality. But since relativism Sophists were thinking with comparative concepts; however, Socrates abandoned the concepts of "meaning assigned" and "opposite" and moved on to the classification concepts of marginal communities, such as the concept of "virtue", "justice", "excellent", "courage" and others.

As a result Socrates breaks rational (scientific) understanding of actuality and proceeds to its rational comprehension. It is with Socrates occurs rapid degradation of mind, and this has translated the philosophy of objective science of the world in idle talk about it, as long as Socrates worked without reason and intellect.

Nevertheless, Socrates went on to consider man as a rational, not moral being. He was concerned by the question where does the concept of morality, reality, reflections of what they are come from. But, while standing on the position of reason, Socrates proved to be powerless to comprehend it all.

It must be born in mind that the sophists and reasonable thinking through the concepts of "meaning assigned" and "contrary" could not give correct answers to the questions posed by Socrates. To do this we need different, more succinct comparative concept.

While trying to find out what "virtue" or "courage" is, Socrates appeals to different people. But they, having rational thinking, could not give a full definition of these concepts. Neither Socrates nor anyone else possessed such knowledge. Therefore, Socrates had either to accept relativism of the Sophists or openly admit their ignorance. Socrates chose the second way by saying: "I know that I know nothing." Socrates was not able to take a rational basis for morality, but he was convinced that rational knowledge is possible. Respond to the questions of Socrates, took a pupil of Socrates, Plato, who also tried to comprehend morality through reason. However, abandoning the relativism of the Sophists and from comparative terms, Plato suddenly discovered that the maximum over all classification concepts, such as, for example, "equity" or "excellent", in objective reality there is simply no place. "We had either to deny these concepts that have made the sophists, or devise for them a different world. And he invented it[4].

Plato could not explain morality through rational thinking, but he still believed that the dispute in the first place should be resolved not in favor of morality but in favor of mind. The only problem is that both Socrates and his pupil Plato meant had different understanding of mind - thinking had extremely general classification concepts and later dubbed the philosophical categories.

As a result of renaming the mind - his mind, backed by fundamentally different forms, thinking suffers from the truth, which is inseparably mixed with fallacy. Only with a clear division of these concepts it will become clear that morality is one of the essential forms of social life, along with some other of its forms, for example, with reason and belief. However, the full significance of morality, its claim to first place should be declared excessively. This place should rightfully belong to the mind, which many prominent European philosophers were concerned about.

Under the rule of rational forms of thinking, not able to find a rational basis of morality, it seems to be correct nomination of morality in the first place. In such a way it was presented in Confucian China, in medieval Christian Europe. So, apparently, the same must be nowadays in terms of total domination of rational thinking while dealing with humanitarian issues.

Other than Socrates and Plato, the problem of relations of reason and morality was examined by Aristotle, who in his study of intelligent behavior coupled with his morale, which does not contradict the relativism of Sophists. On the contrary, all the works of Aristotle literally permeated comprehension of reality by means of comparative concepts. Same goes for streamlined ethics, which completely ignores the studies of Aristotle who claims to put morality in a system of universal values in the first place. The reason for this rationalization is reasonable (!) thinking of Aristotle, which relied on the "four kinds of opposites.

Aristotle uses these forms of thought in the scientific understanding of the whole universe, and not only part of it. Alongside, morality is amenable to rational scientific comprehension in terms of intelligence, based on the comparative concept of "meaning assigned" and "opposite" and does not differ fundamentally from other forms of reality. Therefore, the starting point of view, as an objective frame of reference, Aristotle takes it as a "middle" between opposites, which he comprehended as "excess" and "lack of" respect "intermediate". And precisely this point of reference he calls the "extreme perfection." In the end, like many of his predecessors, Aristotle raises the mind and the knowledge of higher morality. But rational thinking of Aristotle does not rise to the development of more complex forms of thinking, rather than four types of opposites, and this has a limited Aristotelian thinking.

Superiority of mind comes at the cost of relativizing morality and is conceptualized by Aristotle and the Sophists in terms of "meaning assigned" and "opposite" as the first principles of rational thinking. As a result, the mind rises to the highest level, the last instance.

Spiritual revolution of modern times, replacing the Christian Middle Ages, was the revival of the ancient cult of reason and cognition. In the natural sciences revived reasonable thinking, due to the development of various forms of thinking, not just isolated Aristotle's original "four kinds of opposites. This led to the rapid development of science, engineering and technology. Then, as a humanitarian way of thinking has not changed, while remaining rational, Platonic thinking led to the emergence of the gap between the two components of contemporary culture: the sciences and the humanities. Abyss can be overcome only by changing the humanitarian thinking, rearranging it in terms of understanding the position of the mind.

It is no accident that not only Socrates, Plato or Aristotle, who lived two and a half thousand years ago, but our contemporaries have failed to respond to the questions of Socrates. For the study of the contemporary issues question the justification of morality, reason humanities encounter its own insurmountable boundary. Mixing up the "mind" and "reason" leads to the confusion between truth and error, so that practically it becomes difficult or even impossible to categorize.

In order to counter the permissiveness and the protection of moral virtue, one must have strong and unshakable foundations of philosophy, more reliable than those offered by modern rational thinking, humanists.

     2.  In what way should the modern philosophy be presented

Despite attempts of the world to overcome those or other global issues, including the economic crisis, there is little hope for a quick normalization of the situation. This suggests that after the collapse of a closed socialist system and the collapse of Marxist collectivist philosophy of an open capitalist system, with its individualism and selfishness, it was on the verge of destruction. The need to change strategies for the development of civilizations emerges. So you want to find a direction in the development of society, which would eliminate the extremes of collectivism and individualism, resulting from the contradiction between public and personal interests of people.

To address this issue we have to consider the philosophy of any other way of understanding how the world, including the social, is changing. The proposed approach to philosophy is fundamentally different from conventional, abstract and general approach, which for all its breadth was not able to rise above the formal-logical rational thinking and possess a reasonable, concrete universal dialectic of his form. The latter is intended to show the logic of human development, provide guidance on how to connect the personal and social interests of its members.

Therefore, the first of what society needs - it is an appearance of reasonable dialectical thinking, based on which the only possible understanding of the problems set by life, including the issue of class struggle, revolution, terrorism, corruption and other social phenomena.

Unfortunately, until now philosophers have not yet decided what they mean by the term "philosophy", and what its essence is. The result was a lot of philosophical trends from open-ended terms inherent subjective rational thinking, which is absolutely not suitable for understanding of social processes.

In the search for the philosophical foundations, we turn to the classics of philosophy - to Aristotle, G. Hegel, Marx, because their works already have concrete foundations of general theory and practice of philosophical knowledge in the form of two closely related ways of understanding the world - the logic and dialectics.

But if the logic, while identifying the formal and logical connections, managed to become a recognized science, the dialectic as a way of understanding causal relationships, remained at a crossroads.

The idea is to start building a new, more specific philosophical knowledge, which should reflect not only the public sphere, but also the sphere in particular. This is made to avoid the artificial separation of reason, logic and dialectics, the philosophical and natural scientific approaches.

Going to the concrete universal level of philosophical thinking is to find such thinking tools that could reflect multiple causal relations of reality. With these dynamic links and the corresponding structures of thought, we identified as comparative concepts.

Comparison of the two sides of philosophy as a science of thinking - formal logic and dialectics with the proposed new thinking means not only clearly indication of their significant difference, but will provide an opportunity to understand their natural affinity, genematic unity of their foundations.

For formal logic - that abstract relations of identity and abstract distinction, as the limit values the entire spectrum of relations of identity and difference, performing the role of initial mental structures of rational thinking.

The basis of the new non-classical forms of theoretical and practical philosophy should be a set of intermediate abstractions, located between the marginal relationship of identity and difference, and determined the Hegelian abstract universal concept of "concrete identity". This notion is the link, which gives the opportunity to see the genetic unity of formal logic and the logic of scientific knowledge - dialectics:

     Abstract identity - the identity of concrete - abstract distinction.

The principle of individual identity is the recognition that all phenomena and processes of nature, society and thought, discovered structures that combine identity and difference, i.e. relate to the objects of the same properties, but different intensities: hot and cold, above and below, good and evil, and so forth.

Depending on the point of view we can look at this opposition as the "opposite" or "corresponding". Thus, if the opposition is seen as "excess" and "lack" on average, talking about contraries. If one party is conceptualized on the other - it's about "correlated[5]".

If a single process identified by not one but two pairs of opposites that are displaced relative to each other in a cyclic process of a quarter periods (or at an angle of 90 degrees) - we are talking about "orthogonal". One example is the ratio of day and night, morning and evening, alternately into each other. This relationship allows us to describe the different variations (waves, rhythms, exchanges) in the animate and inanimate nature, and most importantly, allows you to make the sense of social action, as exchanges of resources.

More complex relations and processes actually included in the notion "specific identity" requires more complex abstractions of identification and differentiation, linking together all the differences being more distant. As a result, we can conclude that the operation "comparison" and a number of comparative concepts define a universal paradigm of knowledge, advancing on which like the "ladder of creatures" we open reality.

A new type of rationality deploys elements of reality and the processes taking place in it in two parallel rows of mental structure reflecting an infinite number of comparative terms, each of which gives an objective view of the world.

Like many numbers in arithmetic or similar notes in music, ranging variety of differences, we can build a comparative concept, and, as knowledge of reality, complement them with new concepts. As the steps we will rise from the knowledge of the identity of things to comprehend more and more distant their relationship, and that means - to create more complete theoretical models that reflect the wisdom of world structure[6].

                 <      Corresponding    -          Orthogonal 1 …     <

Identical               ¦                                                                         Different

                <       Opposite          -           Orthogonal 2  …    <  

                            Fig.1. A universal paradigm of cognition

The top row of cognition universal paradigm through the concept of "corresponding" makes it possible to make sense of the quantitative parameters of reality, whereas the bottom row, through the concept of "opposite" - allows you to make sense of self-organization and self-motion. Without a revival of these abstractions, forming truly scientific system of universals, philosophy as a rigorous theoretical science will never be able to reborn.

Indeed, the intellectual development of mankind began with the cognition of the binary opposition of "good" and "evil", branded in the Old Testament the word "sin". Later, Aristotle outlined the relation with the word "opposite", akin to modern art - "polarity. G. Hegel, Marx and many our contemporaries also believed that the most productive mechanism for structuring the reality was the selection of relations, "the opposition". However, their approach only superficially resembles the position of Aristotle unlike the Aristotelian understanding of the "polarity"; all in all, subsequent thinkers do not have a clear understanding of the differences between binary oppositions. As a result the "opposites" concepts were hiding all of the possible natural and social differences.

In this regard, an important step in the development of philosophy, i.e. in the ascent from the abstract to the concrete, is a reflection of the central principle of G. Hegel’s dialectics, which is the "principle of individual identity", defined as the "identity of opposites". Although G. Hegel did not allocate certain types of binary oppositions and did not put them one after another in a strictly specified order, which can be called a ranking, but instead called them all in one word - "opposites", but he is mediated by trying to eliminate this disadvantage with the help of three famous laws of dialectics.

All of this suggests the need for further development and Aristotle's study about the "four kinds of opposites", which can be recharged with infinite number of new categories - the comparative concepts, and the Hegelian doctrine of "concrete identity", the differentiation of which the "specific differences" would have to go on scheduled Aristotle's way. And this shifts to thinking, less general than philosophical category, but more specific comparative concepts, capable of not only lead to the construction of universally valid, the same for all the philosophical picture of the world, but also to mutual understanding between people.

     3.  The new scale for assessing the social action

One of the most important tasks of philosophy is to comprehend the logic of human development, justification for which must begin with an understanding of social action as one of the main sources of social development. It is logic with a capital letter, which, according to Lenin, not Marx left us, but who left us the logic of capital. And if in Capital for thinking of bourgeois society, Marx for his "cell" would take only one form of exchange - the exchange of commodities, all social formations need not one but several similar forms. And they define the social life:

work - the exchange between man and nature, economic relations as an exchange value or resources, family and marriage relations as an exchange activities in the field of reproductive life, etc. All human actions are motivated, i.e. committed because they satisfy the needs of those who commit them. As a result, social life can be understood as a set of metabolic processes that are evolving and combined with each other in every way. Therefore, the category sharing should be taken as the indispensable "cell", which is only suitable for the rational justification of morality.

First, we consider the ratio of social exchange in its most general form, i.e. as the structure of thinking, which lies not only in the accumulation of money or any other resources, including mining or any other capital, but also as a form of thought conducive to the rational justification of morality.

Those trends in moral philosophy which has brought morality to the use and needs, to understanding social relations as exchange values may not bring their ideas to their logical conclusion. They came to understanding the evolution of exchange forms of resources, to understand the humanistic orientation of the evolutionary process, to understand the exchange relations as a kind of dynamic formalized structure. And since there are several objective forms of exchange, causing public relations, so there are many significant differences not only between individuals but between nations, socio-economic formations and Civilizations.

Social exchanges are accomplished due to a kind of harmony, which can be understood only if the characteristics of social action is used as the category of "orthogonal" - one of the cornerstones of abstractions concrete universal philosophy. This structure of thought can reflect not only all the processes of exchange, but also the evolutionary route, due to the transition from one form of exchange, to other, more perfect. The following four forms of exchange relations are suggested: tyrannical, feudal, liberal, servistic. Two of them are violent, selfish, immoral, whereas the two others are non-violent, altruistic, and moral.

The first form of social exchange was the most primitive - tyrannical. And it is the most immoral, since it is based on egoism, on the extreme violence and the ruthless exploitation. It is determined that the products of human activity or any other value passed in exchange for the preservation of life - the most significant value to people. This form of exchange can be described by the formula: "not as you want, but as I want." At any time and in any overt manifestations, it is characterized by the the domination of some men and thrall - servility (from Lat. Servilis - slave) of others. Therefore, based on this form of exchange structure of the economy may be called archaic, oppressive or criminal economy. This is the form of exchange that permeated the slave socio-economic structure.

The second form of exchange relations - feudal - is associated with the restriction, but not with the exception of violence. However, even here the deprivation of human life is immoral, unacceptable. Serf form of exchange relations defines the bureaucratic economy of feudal or communist type. It is based on less clear (we would say "reasonable") selfishness and is associated with the dependent status of people, with a definite, though less extreme form of violence. Here also dominates the formula: "not as you want, but as I want."

The third form of exchange - liberal. The transition to this form of public relations makes a revolution in the direction of social interactions (the revolution), and thus gives rise to the coup from selfishness to altruism, from the formula of hatred to yet misunderstood the formula of love: "Not only as I want, but as YOU want" because it claims of non-violent, free and mutually beneficial exchange.

In place of power, authoritarian forms of social organization comes the self-organization, based on freedom, non-violence, mutual self-interest and profit. It characterizes the market economy of industrial society in which people are mature enough to start thinking not only about their own needs, as is the case in authoritarian terms, but also about addressing the needs of others. And each side gets richer, because the free exchange of each pays less valuable price, i.e.in less need and gets right - that evaluates mentioned above.

The essence of liberal relations as a manifestation of the emerging and as yet not understood altruism determined by the free and the public exchange result of human activities take the form of goods. It is to understand that the essence of liberal society as notion "cell" Marx used the term "exchange of goods," meaning it as a social action, as the ratio of orthogonal trends - the two exchanges and two use values. On this point, Marx wrote: products come as use value, and leave as exchange value, hence the cycle, "the social metabolism[7]".

The fourth form of exchange - servistic (from the English word “service”) is responsible for the unity of personal and public interest on the basis of mutual ministry, rather than mutual hostility. Its peculiarity is that a person achieves its personal goals not through the domination of people by means of the first two forms of exchange, and not even by the liberal relations. He achieves success through community service or to predict a con people. Therefore, the formula determining the next stage in the development of market relations is the formula: "Not how I want, but how YOU want”. This means that by serving their customers or clients a person can become rich by serving his country or even around the world - from well known and famous, through the ministry of nature - it is impossible to obtain all this by force. From the product of social relations, from their slave, human was mastering the laws of social development, becomes their creator, the new man, a subject of social creativity. From the previous form of exchange, it differs in that the actions of people, satisfying their own interests, would be more moral and pronounced altruistic nature.

It turns out that the four possible social forms of exchange, by Marx, analyzed the only one - the exchange of goods, which determines the economic relations of bourgeois society. And this was made at a high scientific level, i.e. not with an abstract universal, but with concrete-general positions. However, what was made by Marx was not enough, because other stage of social development occurred: work - owner, the feudal and Post-Capitalist, which in Marxism called communist, also demanded concrete. However, wanting to put an end to inequality, the division of society into classes, Marx, in his social theory, denies any form of exchange of the right to exist. As a result of this decision the doctrine of Karl Marx of communism is losing ground, as it hangs in the air, and, therefore, can not be omnipotent, since in many respects is not faithful.

While being humanized and smooth transition from one form of exchange relations to another indicate the inclusion of one rhythm to another, more global HYDRATED rhythm of history.

Fig. 2. Humanization of exchange relations as a movement along a circular scale

Humanization of forms of social action, understood as the exchange of resources, defines a circular scale on which one can observe the progressive or regressive changes in society. It allows you to celebrate not only the degree of civilization development, but also provides benchmarks against which we can judge the moral (social) maturity of individuals, groups, ethnic groups or political parties.

Two of the four forms of exchange are resource engrossing authoritarian attitudes that underlie all immorality. These are tyrannical and feudal forms. While the other two - liberal and servistic declare itself as a resource, fair and highly moral forms of social relations. And because they are opposed to authoritarian relations, we call them alloritarian.

The first three forms of social relations have occurred in the history of society and define the stages of its social maturity. As for the fourth form of exchange, which we call servistic, its emergence and widespread adoption is not inevitable. Its arrival will depend on the moral development of people, i.e. their expectations and will be determined by their upbringing.

Historically, all four forms of exchange, causing the four forms of morality, co-exist in society, but one usually dominates. This is for it the degree of social development is judged. In this regard, we can speak of four fundamentally different socio-economic formations and, correspondingly, the four forms of class morality.

If for any reason, the dominant form of exchange ceases to operate, there is a regression, i.e. return to the previous form, right up to the original - the tyrannical. That, incidentally, happened in the result of an October Socialist Revolution (or rather, counter-revolution).

In contrast to the classical abstract - universal theory of development of a new form of rationality allows you to see the inextricable link political goals and means of achieving them. Based on it, we can say any number that wants to build a liberal or even a communist society, but authoritarian and immoral forms of exchange that form the foundation of its construction issues us with a head, shows that we did not realize what we promise or not what we expected. Therefore, one of the most important points of theoretical philosophy is a phenomenon of not only the social existence objectives, but also methods for realizing this goal.

Any exchange relations, that bind people, make human community possible. Especially the society is interested in servistic relations; the moral principle which unites people is not based on violence, but on self-organization. Their advantages over other forms of exchange lies in that they provide the state of human solidarity, their harmony with themselves and with each other, combine private and public interests of the people.

Authoritarian attitude, however, determines the power forms of social organization, such as the organization of the ancient slave state, which alone could not occur except in conditions of total hostility between people - a war of all against all. All these relations are concrete; they not only occur between different individuals, but also in the social scale, as well as between the States and, as a rule, are built on the same principle. They correspond to the experience, and, therefore, are fundamental to the theory of rationality.

The new thinking in many ways is superior to what we now enjoy. As an example, showing the superiority of the concrete universal thinking over abstract universal, we consider the difference between the two attitudes: altruism and selfishness, which confront each other as good and evil, virtue and vice. Modern moral theory can see egoism and altruism as a binary opposition, i.e. within the calibration scale at one pole of which is selfishness, while at the other pole - altruism (by the principle of good - evil, white - black). As the transition from one extreme to another occurs, only their proportion is changed. The more it manifests itself in a moral quality, the less pronounced the other and vice versa.

The situation looks different if the egoism and altruism would be considered not graded, and a circular scale, which manifest themselves, not two, but already four trends as exchanges of resources. There are new grounds for evaluating actions, as opposed to egoism and altruism appears before us in four ways: two of them express a selfish morality, while two others - altruistic.

     4.  Public relations in terms of speculation

As any other business, the relation between people in society needs to learn, just as we study the relation in inanimate nature. But it is here that stops most people, leaving large and long-term science.

However, you can change the situation if, while comprehending not only transient but also sustained social processes using a new paradigm of social and humanitarian thought, due to the concepts of one of the oldest market disciplines, which is not entirely apt name - "technical analysis". This analytical discipline is based on the data, which gives it a real trading, when market participants - customers and sellers engaged in metabolic processes, redistribute investment in their own interests, based on the current behavior of prices.

Technical analysis reflects the collective actions of people and kind assesses their behavior. It says a lot about shares, bonds, commodities and currencies, but technical analysis, being by nature a universal knowledge of the exchange, is suitable for analyzing not only economic but also in any market, any exchange - a market of physical labor, market of intellectual and spiritual resources, etc. In recent years the unprecedented growth demonstrates the sex market, which many now see no longer as a successful experiment, but as a fact. Equity investor in the social market is his health and physical condition, level of development of its spiritual, intellectual and business capacity, the state of his sex appeal and much more.

In a market where people enter a free exchange it is not important, what to sell and how much it costs. The important thing is how they determine the price. Therefore, the market reflects the human perception of value. The price is determined by supply and demand, which are determined by the aggressiveness of customers and sellers. Price varies with the prevailing expectations in the market. We do not know where to go for money, for example, on the dollar. But our collective expectations are that the price will go up leads to the fact that the dollar is beginning to actively buy and its price rises. Thus, the psychology of the masses is an important component of technical analysis, because our current expectations shape the future developments.

Almost everything we learn on the charts of trading on exchanges is true for the analysis of socio-humanitarian processes, as members exchange game schedules do not draw a picture, but only in psychological terms. Therefore, analysis of metabolic processes, especially if it is used as a universal discipline: philosophy, sociology, psychology, or even in ethics should be of a completely different name. As an all-inclusive learning tool, it could be called "socio-humanitarian" analysis, as its principal objective is the analysis of public relations as a form of resource sharing without exception in all disciplines of Social Humanitarian cycle. In this broad context of socio-humanitarian analysis an analysis of society lies in all its stages, the analysis of our expectations lies in the context of its development.

The core component of Social Humanitarian analysis, as well as his prototype - technical analysis is the graph showing not only a change in the form of resource sharing, and thus fixing the value of human beings at any moment of historical time. And since the individual in any exchange process supports both the seller and the customer, so far the word "trader", borrowed from the technical analysis, can be used not only to party speculation, but in the broadest context. That is to refer to people participating in any games or social interactions. In this sense, each person is a trader, i.e. a member of the global stock exchange - games, under the title "Life". Another thing is that each plays within a given element and each player's own scale, its qualifications and its time span.

The word "trader" is of English origin. It is formed from the word "trade". From these same words comes the word «trading», which denotes the purchase and sale of securities, currency or other valuables. The word "trend" is the current general direction of price movement, the trend towards the movement.

Therefore, we see the reflection of all that is happening or happened before in the global market of human interactions - the market share of total resource requirements arising from the life of society. We can see the reflection and behavioral psychology of individuals and groups, and even entire nations. But the main thing is that we realize the value of the person, which does not occur except in the process of social exchange.

Intuitively, we feel that, like all things in nature, the value of human beings, their lives and well-being, independence and freedom, vary from age to age. Today, the constitutions of many countries already protect a person's worth. In fact, much of what is written in the constitutions - it is so far an empty declaration, as the state through its officials is not always seeking to enforce and protect these rights. Politicians and officials are only saying that everything must be done for the benefit of the people that civil society can not be otherwise, for its highest of values - the person. However, in real life, their words are often at variance with their deeds.

Therefore, the formula "to buy someone else's cheap and sell yours expensive" is acting at all, without exception, markets, because buyers want to give as little as possible, and sellers - to get as much as possible. Exchange (transaction) takes place at a time when the buyer and seller estimated market equally. Therefore, any price on the stock exchange, whether the price of oil, grain, currency, or any other interchangeable values, including a man - a momentary agreement about the value of the goods. It is achieved by the exchange crowd in the fact of the transaction, and, therefore, not only as a part of social action, expressed through one of the four forms of resource sharing: tyranny, feudal, liberal and servistic. Historically, these forms of exchange determined slave, feudal, capitalist socio-economic formations. With servistic form of exchange it is possible (not compulsory), but not yet implemented Post-Capitalist perspective.

This means that an agreement on the value of human personality is the result of the prevailing social relations, and this value is constantly changing. In some cases, it is set in a peaceful environment, i.e. when social relations are changing gradually, in others - in the storm of social passions, revolutions. But in any case, the measure of human value and dignity in favor of morality as a characteristic of relations between people of any age or any country, expressed in four forms of exchange. So, speaking of humanizing forms of resource sharing, we are talking about the global trend, reflecting the increase in the value of each individual in the transition from one form of exchange to another, more humanistic.

This transition from one form of social relations to another can be seen on a circular scale, shown in Fig. 2. However, following the example of technical analysts who are also based on the idea of cycling, we can depict the rhythms which are not only circular but also graded as the transition from one extreme to another. Time is plotted on the horizontal axis. In vertical coordinate we plot the price of the human person, expressed in four forms of resource exchange: the tyrannical (T), feudal (K), liberal (L), servistic (C). This method allows you to reflect on the schedule constantly changing value of the Euro-prince, whereas the measure of value will serve as relations, characterized by the dominance in society of morality.

This means that the price change of the human person, we can now express in the form of a curve with a consistently changing peaks and troughs. Thus, obtained the schedule for which we have inflicted change in the value of the human person in time - a picture of social action by all members of social exchange, not only for a certain period of time, but at this particular moment. Each price is the result of the interaction of two interrelated groups: customers, or "bulls" and sellers, or "bears", which together make up the market "crowd" - the citizens of a country.

Tracking the dynamics of boom and bust, we begin to better understand the true cost of rights at a particular stage of historical development, and what is the trend in changing social relations today, in this community people as it is long, and it is going to change in the future. The graph shows that the rising trend of society is more democratic, with the downward trend is running wild. Emerging trends can never go up sharply, while the descending portion are sharply down since the fall of morality (the outbreak of wars, the rise to power of dictators or the emergence of totalitarian regimes) can occur very rapidly, in contrast to its recovery.

Fig. 3.

This upward global trend caused by the chart in any form, reflects proposed by Marx and Engels' conception of the historical process as a succession of socio-economic formations. Beginning with slavery in antiquity, it covers the entire subsequent period up to the present time. The graph in an arbitrary manner as shown for many centuries has changed the value of man. It first increases, and then rapidly falls down[8]. For the purposes of this coincides with changes in the value of resources in the commodity or financial markets.

This fact leads to the conclusion that the use of the idea of technical analysis for understanding social phenomena can be productive not only in economic but also in all other social markets. Therefore, the proposed analysis, as a universal tool to play a leading role in interpreting the development of society in the medium and large stretches of time, and it will also be useful in studying short historic ranges. The analysis includes not only an analysis of the social action that prevailed in the past; it is also able to give predictions for the future.

The study of social phenomena means Social Humanitarian analysis, just as it takes place in the modern stock market game, will facilitate the study of mass psychology in the large and relatively closed social groups, for example, countries, ethnic groups or civilizations. Its goal is to determine the balance of power between "bulls" and "bear", i.e. those who raise the bar of public morality, and those who put it down. And some people see the meaning of his life in increasing the real value of Euro person in this country and in this historical moment – these are the supporters of the so-called "bull" trend. While other players - representatives of the "bear" trend, however, catch their luck at its lowered. The first players to develop public morality, the latter forced it to degrade. The first represented the bulls, sheep, pigeons, whose life is focused on ministering to people, for the approval of high moral standards, to increase the value of human personality, to meet altruistically based personal interest. The second player presented predators: bears, wolves, hawks, which meaning of life are to seek for domination, to satisfy their selfish oriented personal interests. The struggle between these two forces shaping the moral climate of the community in each historical point in time, determines the direction of the trend, its rise and fall.

As a result, the analysis of social relations, just as in the analysis of transactions in the stock market game, there are three types of trends: "bullish" when the value of human personality is increased, i.e. the process of humanizing forms of exchange, "bearish" when the opposite occurs and the process of "lateral" in stagnation and immutability of social relations in time. All three types of trends do not occur in pure form, but in some combination. In order to vividly demonstrate these trends traders explain: "bull horns, beat the enemy from the bottom up". Bull is a player who relies on raising public morality. It benefits from a humanizing forms of exchange, and, hence, the growth of human values, from a humane attitude towards all living things, from the respect for nature. This is a supporter of progressive evolution.

"The Bear hit the enemy with his paw down" - explain traders. Bear is a player who relies on immoral forms of social relations, the lowering of public morals. He wins when public morality is degrading, when it is ruled by authoritarian attitudes, and value of human personality falls.

Focusing on life in one or another party - in line with "bullish or bearish trend, we first need to define ourselves, what we want from our games. Playing for us in the direction of long-term trend, directed toward the humanization of human relations, within which is a universal human development. Or, conversely, should catch the luck in the short-term fluctuations in the "price" and engage in building their personal welfare.

In the analysis we assume that at any time on any of the social market, as well as on a conventional financial market can reveal several trends: the main trend, secondary trends and minor trends.

The main (global) trend, which determines the social stage in the development of all mankind, takes thousands of years. This upward trend is caused by the humanization forms of exchange. It has four consecutive phases: the tyrannical, feudal, liberal and post-liberal, which we call servistic.

Here we should recall one of the greatest thinkers, Karl Marx, in the teachings of which one of the major categories of supports the notion of socio-economic structure, which, revealing the unity of historical development, largely separates some historical periods from the others. Not having to analyze in detail the teachings of Marx, we note only that the relations of exchange, typical of primitive society (tribal relations), we do not include the number of public relations. Therefore, the social stage in human development is divided not into five as in Marx, but into four successive steps, which are defined by four forms of exchange, and which in our opinion, makes the analysis of society strictly scientific. The main thing here is that in contrast to the logic of Marx, who used only one of the only forms of exchange - the exchange of goods, we use four, harmoniously passing from one to another.

Secondary trends are intermediate motions, not necessarily directed in the opposite direction from the main trend. It characterizes relations within a country, group or civilization. These trends can last for hundreds of years and is usually accompanied by social organism from its inception until its death.

Minor trends are moving within the secondary trends that can be directed towards the main trend, and against it. They characterize the change in social relations, both under the influence of new philosophical ideas, and under the influence of various historical figures.

All these trends suggest that social relations are not constant, but its change can be traced as a significant time intervals of hundreds or thousands of years, and within decades, years or even months. Each small cycle is an integral part of a higher level, whereas in its entirety, they form a model of central tendency. Therefore, to assess the global social development it is important not to be a single, small or even a secondary trend, and the overall score on the basis of a long period of historical time.

As any economic aspect of our life, here everything is progressing along the same rules. Professional players in the market of life are successful precisely because according to folk wisdom "never spit against the wind", i.e. play in the direction of the trend, whereas otherwise the players are pushed aside, and sometimes killed. Therefore, many individuals, like professional gamblers, are guided only by short-term system of trade. "They are always in the game and are able to clearly define the direction of the current trend. Following the trend, they are always on the winning side, but if it shifts they can quickly readjust to re-capitalize. Examples are those officials or politicians who were under the Soviet Communists, internationalists, and a collectivist, uncompromising atheists and ardent opponents of liberal relations. After the fall of communism, the mainstay of which were precisely such people who also remain in power. But today they have become advocates of completely different ideas. They have become advocates of liberal ideology with particular fervor facilitate the spread of religion in society, individualism and nationalism.

The same is true and not visible people who have never resisted a small trend. They do not philosophize, but they have learned to understand themselves, and know how to compare this with the understanding of behavior of ecstatic crowd. It is this tactic guarantees them in any contexts, not only survive, but even some prosperity.

As for the people of another type, they are often well-educated and morally exalted people who play by all means to increase within the main trend. Their situation is quite the opposite. I support these people in emotional terms, as their personal interest and their personal position is due to long-term interests of the majority, but the reason I understand that on a personal level, they tend to flourish.

Moreover, they are constantly in danger. An example is Jesus, Giordano Bruno, and Andrei Sakharov. But in the long term, through hundreds of years such people are winners, because they did not orient themselves to a small, ongoing, and substantive, long-term trend in the development of society.

Therefore, the main factor that prevents many hoping to live is that they are complying with the prohibition of short positions, which is the game for a fall. They play only in one direction - to increase, and, quite simply, to uphold standards of high moral standards. And it puts these people at a disadvantage with competitors who play by the trend in two directions. So the more we learn about trading, giving the man a universal knowledge not only about himself but about the society - of the intelligible element, to which he wants to adjust, the easier it will be to become successful in any business, whether the activities of officials, politicians, businessman or a punter.

     5.  The philosophy and ideology of service

The development of new more ethical public relations is envisaged by the evolution of the harmonization way of relations between people, between man and nature. Not war, but trade as a way of redistributing resources, not the rule, and mutual ministry in the framework of social and ethical market, on which principles should be based morality of modern civilized nations, and, hence, the entire world community.

This path is connected with the formation of representatives of all countries universal idea of morality, which must be understood by everyone and every nation on the level of its national idea. Briefly it can be formulated as the following paradigm:
                                "Life is a ministry".

Moving into more advanced, resource-public relations man gradually increases the efficiency of utilization of all resources. And this is due to the development of social exchange forms, i.e. as we move from despotic feudal relations to and from them through a coup in the direction of social interactions (via Revolution) - a liberal and servistic relations. This means that morality, ultimately determines the social progress and the wealth of the country.

Therefore, any serious social project should be based on the moral development of people, which should eliminate the imbalance between the development of human intelligence (education) and poverty of his actions, by which it achieves its goals (rising).

But this is the humanistic revolution - a revolution against an authoritarian egoism to alloritarian altruism, from the desire to solve the problem of "us" from domination of "strangers", the effort to solve their problems through service to others, from the madness - to reason, of immorality - the highest form of moral relations.

The history of society there is a search of a harmonic fusion between the natural desire, binding rights to care for their own well-received, and moral aspiration, which impose duties in relation to other people. A new form of thinking and anticipatory education to help understand how to connect the personal and public interests, as an atmosphere of hostility and hatred to transform the atmosphere of goodwill and love, how to achieve such a synthesis. This servistic form of exchange most fully harmonizes the relationship between people, between their private and public interests.

Love and hate manifest themselves in diametrically opposite actions: to love - means to do so, as she wants another - this is a general formula of love, not reducible to individual feelings. Doing something that does not want another, against which he rebelled, protesting and what is fiercely resistant - so be on him violence, but it is a general formula of hatred.

Therefore it is important in the education to teach a person of high moral forms of social action, through which an individual can achieve their personal goals. In this regard, neither the ancient heroes, or one or another way of Superman at a later time can not serve as a model for our contemporary. Today we need new models and new examples of manifestations of superhuman, heroic deeds. It is necessary to form a new man who learns to perceive the world not as a relentless struggle of all against all in a total hatred and as a competition, as a mutual and rewarding service that makes the social and ethical market for the post-industrial society.

For real Superman - "Serviceman" - and what should be presented modern hero, life - is not a struggle for supremacy between people - life is to serve people.

After meeting the needs of other people, through caring for their loved ones by serving their customers or to patients through service to their constituents, the people or the natural environment, people will be able to get everything they want, including being rich, powerful, famous. The modern morality remains underdeveloped in social morality on the types, the morality of "lords" and "slaves", it is an instrument of their co-existence of class domination.

Unfortunately, we never advance not knowing in what direction will swing the pendulum of social development, due to the predominance of a relationship of exchange. However, our current expectations due to surpass of the moral upbringing will shape the future.

Therefore, in the public mind should adopt a new servistic morality and proclamation of a new hero - strong, good, fair and rich Superman.

For rich countries it is not only its resources, not only the intellectual capital of its people, but also its moral capital, i.e. the social relations that prevail in society, and which evolved from the immoral, authoritarian attitudes of the past and the present socio-ethical future. So the idea of service - this is the only bridge that can connect the private interest of the individual, group interest of the nation or ethnic group with human freedom-interest.

This policy should proceed from the class interests and class structure of society, which is determined not by people belonging to a particular stratum, occupation or field of activity, although this classification has its positive sides. Classes are due to those social relations that dominated, dominate and will dominate in society, and the proportion and form of power held by belonging to these classes of people.

Social evolution should be viewed from the perspective of humanization of exchanging resources, which entails a shift from one pair of class antagonisms to another pair, from one class to another morality. This means that instead of slave owners and slaves (the relations between them are determined by a tyrannical form of exchange and tyrannical form of morality) comes another pair - the feudal lords and serfs, and they, in turn, change the new couple: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

This means that in its development a society can only go one way: either towards the humanization of social relations as forms of exchange, or in the direction of dehumanization: either forward or back - no other way. All the logic of social development leads us to an understanding of the process of humanization as essential to further human progress.

Therefore, arguments about the possibility of several future scenarios, and even more about fans of possible scenarios have no basis. Another thing is that we can never know in advance which of us is sensible of the two scenarios and who will occur in the near historic time. In the best case we can only guess which of them more or less probable.

The struggle between classes, as the struggle for moral progress does occur, is not between opposing classes of the same formation as the thinkers of the past, but between the obsolescent and the emerging pair of classes. It is a struggle between the orthogonal and not between opposing tendencies, "the struggle" for the approval of new forms of resource sharing, and that means the struggle between the old positions and morality. Therefore, opposing classes are not enemies, but the friendly components of the same formation. A "struggle" is not among them, and those classes that are trying to preserve the remnants of the old social relations, and thus save phenomenon, which is indicated today by the word "corruption".

The abolition of classes and their struggle is impossible, since their interaction determines the entire social energy. Therefore, we must bear in mind that the place of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat must also come a new pair of classes, which will approve new, more moral than the liberal attitude of exchange. And this new, until the time is not differentiated couple classes actually occurs within the objective of a liberal society in the transition towards a post-industrial society. It should not go forward on the basis of a blunt imitation, but on the basis of a reasonable analysis of objective reality. And our post-Soviet reality shows not so much of our common willingness to accept the idea of constructing the society, as the fact that neither the people nor the power of the majority, are not yet ready to use other, more committed relationship than serfdom. This is the specific causes of not only corruption, but all other antisocial phenomena, both in Russia and Ukraine, and throughout the former Soviet Union.

Therefore, the main problem for us all, as, indeed, for the most developed countries in the world, is to find a universal human idea, which would have been able to fill not just regional, national, and global ideological vacuum. Such a moral idea, which would be calculated not only on the date of any country or group of countries, but also on more distant and general perspective.

We believe that the basis of this new ideology is necessary to put the idea of mutual service, and remunerated in the social and ethical market.

The important thing here is that servistic education justifies the need for more moral relations not only between the authorities and people, not only between individuals or social classes, but also between the sexes and races, between nations and religions, between humanity and nature. This means that servistic morality underlying the fight against global warming, corruption, terrorism and similar evils reflects not only the interests of any one isolated group of people; it represents the interests of all inhabitants of the earth.

Therefore, violation of moral norms by public officials, their corruption, terrorizing people, perpetuates moribund feudal system contribute to a total spread of evil, which makes them particularly serious offenses. Under the guise of protecting the public interest, many representatives of state and municipal authorities, representatives of regulatory and law enforcement - thin psychologists and unscrupulous thieves, shameless extortion, sum business to a single address - need to pay off - to give a bribe, without which it is difficult to obtain the necessary authorization or to avoid substantial fines sanctions.

As a result, there is a usurpation of all powers and all more or less promising areas in the economy, people with selfish moral consciousness. They do not give the country an opportunity to move from communist-feudal, authoritarian attitudes towards more developed, liberal forms of exchange. It becomes clear that only a victory over the mentality of these people will be the eradication of corruption and the appearance of truly market economy, which laid the foundation of a free exchange of resources. But this means that "the formation of ideological platform" enables people to "steadfastly observe moral norms" should be interested not only in individual moral personality, but all citizens of the country.

     6.  The party serving the public

The evolution of public relations is characterized by the emergence of new realities. In place of one stage in the development of the world market economy should see a different stage, and the relationship of the liberal-bourgeois society, though slowly, to give place to new relations. This is due to the fact that an increasing number of creative people voluntarily give their energy to public service, but their talent and their moral development have become the main resource of universal evolution.

But this does not mean that creative people do not want to live rich and happy life. However, in the first place they make no material success due to fighting costs, not "business" in the post-Soviet understood, and the possibility of expression, an opportunity to do well and have their socially useful work. At the same time earned money they regard as a measure of its usefulness as a public recognition of their personal efforts.

For them life is creativity.

An increasing number of knowledge workers, changing the nature of production, the basic motive of which is to meet consumer demand, expanding the scope of various services. The character is not only central but also local authorities, the purpose of which should be not in profit and satisfaction of social needs in the region. In this context, one must realize the new alignment of political forces and accept as reality, the emergence of two opposing social classes, representatives of which are im-bued with a universal aspiration.

For them life is a ministry.

This real humanist movement can be described as an international movement of all the creative people behind the global power of the mind, for understanding, for spiritual and moral progress of mankind. The essence of this movement is that its speakers see the meaning of his life not in the domination of people and in serving them. Having been around for hundreds of years in the form of various religious and secular currents, the movement has not yet become widespread. It did not become aware of itself as a global political force; it did not create its "philosophy and ideology of service" and has constituted itself into political parties. But it lives and lives the future of humanity during this new movement and new servistic parties - public service. By the power - through the ministry!

---

[1]  (Mp. 20: 25-28)

[2] Yuri Rotenfeld. Sensibility and morale: the ascent from intellect to mind.

 http://wpf.unesco-tlee.org/rus/offpap/top2/yurot.htm

[3] Aristotle. Work in 4 v. V. 1. М.: Mysl, 1975. P. 258-262.

[4] А.А.Guseinov «Morale and reason».

[5] For deeper understanding of notions «corresponding» and «opposite» we should look through «Methaphysics» by Aristotle  in which philosopher  reveales his study about «fouyr kinds of opposites».

[6] The dotes put after categories «Orthogonal 1» and «Orthogonal 2» prove the existence of infinite number of comparative notions that follow them.

[7] Marks К.,Engels F. Work. V.23. P.113.

[8] If to consider Asuian way of industry, it is characterized not by risisng but side trend.