STUDIES ON SECURITY: STUDY 13. FOUR STAGES OF INTELLECTUAL EVOLUTION OF MANKIND

  These Studies on Security contain only the results of my scientific views, research, analyses and models. In other words, they provide a SUMMARY of my MAJOR contributions to the Science of Security.
  
  STUDY 13. FOUR STAGES OF INTELLECTUAL EVOLUTION OF MANKIND
  
  The Law of Three Stages ( Theological, Metaphysical, Positive), reflecting Auguste Comte's understanding of the philosophy of history, is supplemented by the addition (formulation) of another, fourth, modern stage in the intellectual evolution of Mankind, fundamental sciences, societies and individuals – Anthropocentric stage. The fourth stage reflects the qualitative change of security – its riskization.
  
  The following monograph of mine is devoted to a detailed analysis of these four stages:
  Николай Слатински. Рискът – новото име на Сигурността. София: Изток-Запад, 2019.
   [Nikolay Slatinski. Riskut – novoto ime na Sigurnostta. Sofia: Iztok-Zapad, 2019].
  Nikolay Slatinski. Risk – the new Name of Security. Sofia: Iztok-Zapad, 2019 (in Bulgarian)
  
  The French philosopher, the founder of positivism and scientific sociology, Auguste Comte (1798 – 1857), formulated the Law of the Three Stages, which presented his own understanding of the philosophy of history.
  
  Explanation:
  Positivism is a philosophical doctrine that defines empirical research as the only source of true knowledge and denies the cognitive value of philosophical research.
  
  According to the Law of Three Stages, in the unfolding of its history and its intellectual evolution, Mankind, just like every individual society, every individual science, every individual person, even every individual mind, passes through three phases, through three theoretical stages, as follows [1, 2, 3, 4]:
  ⁕ Theological (fictitious, based on imagination) stage – before 1300
  ⁕ Metaphysical (abstract, based on speculation) stage – from 1300 to 1800.
  ⁕ Positive (scientific, based on empiricism) stage – from 1800 to [we add this] 2000.
  
  Explanation:
  Theology – a set of religious doctrines about the essence of the word of God; systematic presentation and interpretation of religious teaching, of religion.
  
  Fictitious – invented, unreal, not real, imaginary, pretend, false, fake.

  Metaphysics is a branch of philosophy that deals with „original principles“/„primary principles“ and „existence“. central area of metaphysics in particular and philosophy in general is ontology, which examines the general foundations and principles of existence and reality, existing and being, their structure, basic categories and regularities, how they relate to each other.
  
  We will substantiate below the thesis that the world is now entering the fourth stage:
  ⁕ Anthropocentric (anthroposophic, based on riskiness) stage – after 2000.
  
  → „Anthropocentrism“ is used here to characterize the stage at the center of which is Man as an object and subject of scientific research and social change.
  
  → „Anthroposophy“ is used here in the sense of a philosophy about Man; at the center of which is Man; it is oriented towards Man; it originates from the interests of Man.
  
  Explanation:
  Unfortunately, the term „Anthroposophy“ was first used to denote a religious-mystical teaching that separated from Theosophy and was founded in 1912 by the Austrian philosopher Rudolf Steiner (1861 – 1925), with the aim of discovering a wide range of methods for self-development and spiritual knowledge through human thinking. It is considered the „science of the spirit“.
  
  Theosophy is a syncretic religious-mystical doctrine. In a broad sense, this is a religious mystical knowledge about God that has existed since ancient times; in a narrow sense, this is the teaching of the Russian and American writer, author of mystical literature, Helena Blavatsky (1831 – 1891) and her followers.
  
  Syncretism is a combination of various thought, ideological currents or beliefs that exist in parallel.
  
  Explanation (following [5]):
  In the generally accepted understanding, anthropocentrism is a philosophical concept, according to which Man is the concentration of the Universe and the highest goal of the Universe, of the events taking place in the world; it can be understood as the superiority of Man; belief that people have the ability to perceive the true qualities of objects. This is a philosophical view that Man can be raised to the level of God, and the essence of God can be dissolved in the essence of Man.
  
  In ancient philosophy, anthropocentrism was first formulated by the remarkable ancient Greek philosopher Socrates (469 – 399 BC), whose teachings marked a turning point in philosophy – from the study of Nature to the study of Man. Anthropocentrism organically fit into the religious worldview and developed there as an understanding of the role of Man and his relationship with God.
  Under the influence of Christianity, anthropocentrism became widespread in medieval European philosophy. In the philosophy of the Renaissance and the Modern Age, anthropocentrism in its religious version ceased to enjoy its former popularity, mainly due to the new high achievements in the natural science and philosophy. Man ceases to be seen as a partaker of God.
  Under the influence of Christianity, anthropocentrism became widespread in medieval European philosophy. In the philosophy of the Renaissance and the Modern Age, anthropocentrism in its religious variant ceased to enjoy its former popularity mainly due to the new high achievements of the natural sciences and philosophy. Man ceases to be seen as involved with God.
  
  A serious blow to traditional anthropocentrism is dealt by:
  ▪ THE HELIOCENTRIC SYSTEM of the prominent Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus (1473 – 1543), which shifts the center from Man to the Sun;
  
  Heliocentrism is a theory of the structure of the Universe, according to which the Sun is at the center of the Universe, and the Earth and other planets revolve around it.
  
  ▪ THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY of the prominent English scientist and naturalist Charles Darwin (1809 – 1882), which removes Man from his assigned place of the highest goal of being and turns him into one of the living beings making their way through life and the world through natural selection.
  
  Gradually, anthropocentrism acquired a more different content and began to be interpreted as a way to solve worldview problems, when the researcher goes not from God and the world to Man, but from Man – to the world and God.
  In the XX century, a radical transition to Man took place – thanks to Christian theology. It was necessary to understand that fundamental knowledge of God and the world can only be achieved if, together with them, the understanding of Man is also achieved. Thus, in the „trinity“ of God, World and Man, the places are shifted and move to Man, God and World and increasingly more and more to Man, World and God – in the sense that, first of all, it is necessary to look for answers to questions about the essence of Man and about the character of his aspirations, about his cognitive abilities in our world, and only after that to construct a new understanding of Man in the World, by including in the Knowledge the doctrine of God.
  
  • In the THEOLOGICAL STAGE (before 1300) at the base of the system of ideas
comes the Faith in God.
  The immediate result of the Faith in God is the Obedience by Man to God and His powers.
  
  God is high, on the highest possible pedestal. The original and fundamental source of all that exists is supernatural forces and religious figures created in the image of man. God is the Explanatory Hypothesis and the Main Cause of everything visible and invisible. The social and physical world is a creation of God, the fate of people is (pre)determined by God. The supernatural dominates, and the anomalous, and the abnormal, and the unattainable, and the impossible are explained by it.
  In order to navigate in this complex, irrationally affecting his sensations and feelings, rationally practically inexplicable for his mind environment, Man is „armed“ with religion – it is precisely this that gives logical, dialogic and ideological meaning to faith in God. And it cannot be otherwise, because the world and life can settle down and acquire an understandable meaning, can move from the opacity of the unreal to the transparency of the real only if they are the result and function of the supernatural, of those forces that are connected to one degree or another with the under-earth (looking far down), the beyond-earth (looking far ahead), the above-earth (looking far up) and the even non-earth (looking far beyond the world – to other worlds).
  
  Explanation:
  Theism (from Greek theos – god) – in a general sense, this is the belief in the existence of at least one god. In a narrower sense, theism is a religious-philosophical worldview, a monotheistic doctrine according to which God is one, he is personified; he created the world and continues his activity in it. This is the classical idea of God in Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc. The principle of the religious worldview of these monotheistic religions is theocentrism. It most consistently realized the principles of theism, understanding God as a personal and „living“ being, residing outside the world, freely creating the world and caring for it. From the ultimate theistic point of view, God gives man free will, „reveals“ himself to him and maintains a constant „dialogue“ with every soul he created [6].
  
  During the Theological stage, religion is penetrated primarily and in all its depth by theism, i.e. it is built from religio-mystical ideas based on the understanding and recognition of God as an absolute, beyond and outside of this world, an infinite person who created the world and rules it directly or indirectly „from above“, so that everything that happens (and does not happen) in this world is the realization of God's providence (i.e. the purposeful action of this Supreme Being, aimed at the highest good of creation in general and of Man and Mankind – above all) which it does not lend itself to scientific or any other rational analysis.
  Theism also affirms the possibility and necessity of God's revelation. God is not only transcendent to the world but also immanent to it. God is God with the largest „G“ possible!
  
  Explanation:
  Revelation is the unexpected clarification of a truth; sharing intimate feelings or thoughts; I fall into a revelation; in religion and theology – a diverse discovery of God – of himself and of his will – before people.
  
  Transcendence (lat. transcendens – transcending, going beyond) – beyond knowledge and experience; something that goes beyond the limits of the natural, cognizable by the senses world.
  
  Immanence (lat. in manere – within, within) – intrinsic, inherent, arising from the nature of the object or phenomenon.
  
  Man, in his development as a social being, gradually acquiring a conscience, has developed in his evolution three protective (deterrent) mechanisms against harmful, immoral and abnormal behavior.
  
  To point out these protective (deterrent) mechanisms, we will first go back to those distant, prehistoric times when Man was in subjection to supernatural forces. Man knows that to rebel against these supernatural forces is baseless and devoid of any meaning, especially since the retribution will fall on him, his children, his family and his relatives. That is why Man lives in humility and does not go beyond the seemingly eternal boundaries between which his life is destined to pass – boundaries delineated by many taboos, abstinence and restraint, the non-violation of which rests on fear.
  FEAR (I can do something bad, but I do not because I'm afraid of being punished by God) – this is the first of the three protective (deterrent) mechanisms.
  Then, the second protective (deterrent) mechanism is activated with its protective (deterrent) power – the name of which is SHAME (I can do something bad, but I do not because I'm ashamed to do it).
  Finally, in this chronological sequence, the third protective (deterrent) mechanism appears, whose name is CONSCIENCE (I don't do something bad because I can't, conscience doesn't allow me to even think about doing it).
  
  If in the first two protective (deterrent) mechanisms, FEAR AND SHAME, the person mentally calculates the pros and cons, the damages and the benefits of a certain harmful, immoral or abnormal action, in order to assess whether to commit it and to decide not to commit it, then with the third protective (deterrent) mechanism CONSCIENCE, such a calculation, a dilemma of this kind does not confront a Man – he cannot even [afford himself to] think that he is capable of performing such a harmful, immoral or abnormal act, because it is not at all compatible with his value system and professed faith, with the ideals and principles of conduct in life which he professes and follows.
  
  During this stage there is no other knowledge than the absolute, and it is contained in religion and is drawn from it by the help of faith; every cognitive effort is a frantic drive to achieve Absolute Knowledge and an implicit belief that this attainment is possible.
  
  In the Theological stage, people live in the World of uncertainty (insecurity, vagueness, ambiguity) [7].
  That is why the paradigm of the Theological stage is Uncertainty.
  
  The key concepts, explanatory constructs for the Theological stage are:
  ‣ Omnipotence of God;
  ‣ Omnipotence rests on Faith;
  ‣ Reality is comprehended and changed through Religion;
  ‣ This is achieved through Theism;
  ‣ The main thing that Man lives with is Humility.
  
  • In the METAPHYSICAL STAGE (1300 – 1800), at the base of the system of ideas
  after the Faith in God and its immediate result – the Obedience by Man to God and His powers;
  comes the Philosophy of Nature.
  The immediate result of the Philosophy of Nature is the Adoration of Man of the Nature and its powers.
  
  Supernatural forces are replaced by abstract principles (essences, entities, substances, ideas) that govern phenomena; God as an explanatory hypothesis gives way to natural laws, and as a first, root cause to natural causes.
  Thus, instead of an anthropomorphic God or personified deities, the world is ruled by abstract spiritual entities of different kind, interpreted, however, as real and independent, thanks to which Nature becomes something of a rational being, albeit an impersonal one, and it is credited with striving for perfection and clear order.
  Thinking that deals with abstractions is fertilized by a philosophy which cannot but be at this period still too little critical and rather too much speculative, based more on sensation and invention/imagination than on reason and facts.
  Theology gives way to philosophy (metaphysics).
  
  Explanation:
  Substance – the essence, the first basis, fundamental principle of all objects and phenomena; matter, material. The idea of substance arose with the birth of philosophy.
  
  Anthropomorphy or anthropomorphism is the attribution of human form and other human characteristics to animals, inanimate objects, natural phenomena and elements, concepts or mythological creatures.
  
  Speculation is speculative philosophical knowledge, abstract reasoning, theoretical knowledge that is derived without resorting to experience (speculative judgment).
  I speculate (about something, on some topic) – I think abstractly, speculatively [8].
  
  At this stage, the religious view of the picture of being remains, because it could not be otherwise, after all, we are talking about the period 1300 – 1800, but Man looks at the world not so much through the prism of faith, but through the prism of philosophy and does this through a synthesis of metaphysics and deism. The world comes to be perceived as a perfectly working clock, designed by God and left to itself and for itself, and its strict, rhythmic course does not need the additional intervention of God.
  This is so because God remains increasingly transcendent, i.e. more and more incomprehensible and inaccessible for Man in the knowledge of the World (in contrast to the personal spiritual and material life of Man), but less and less immanent and (therefore) less and less capable of Revelation, of Providence, of help and of means of guidance for the more and more autonomous Man, whose material and spiritual life requires less and less communion with God [9, 10, 11].
  
  Explanation:
  Deism from (lat. deus – god) is a religious and philosophical doctrine that arose in the XVIII century – XVIII century, which, like the brilliant ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle (c. 384 – 322 BC), recognizes the existence of God and the creation of the world, but only as the first cause, and denies His existence as a person (as in theism), and also His intervention and control over events in nature and society.
  In other words, for deism, God is like a watchmaker who has designed a clock and set its pendulum in motion and after that does not take any part in its functioning.
  Deism, therefore, contradicts the very essence of Christianity [12].
  
  During the Metaphysical stage, Man must consider God in his personal affairs, compare his values with God's commandments, but in comprehending the World, Nature, things outside of personal life, Man needs God less and less.
  Yes, Man does not fence himself off from God, he continues to owe much to him in the personal sphere of his life, but in his cognitive efforts he is more and more independent, he knows that the established laws lead their own and unchanging life and the knowledge depends only on his, on Man’s efforts.
  And since the boundaries between personal life and the life of Knowledge are very close to each other and often intersect, faith in knowledge fills Man with a new self-confidence, he begins to emancipate himself from God more and more strongly, even more violently at times, and in his personal life, and this not only benefits him, but also harms him. Because if there is no God to regulate private life, then everything is allowed. Even if one knows and remembers that there is God (and in fact there is less and less God) in personal life, this inevitably leads to the sad fact that more and more is allowed in this personal life of a Man.
  Man remains a believer, even a strong believer and a strong God-fearer, but the deistic seeds of Voltairianism and Rousseauism are sown in his anxious soul.
  
  Explanation:
  Voltaire, pseudonym of François-Marie Arouet (1694 – 1778) – a significant French writer and philosopher, one of the symbols of the Enlightenment. He has deistic views. „Voltaire needs a Creator of the World and Supreme Judge of human affairs. „Philosophy,“ he writes, „tells us that there is a God, but it cannot say what He is, why He acts, whether He exists in time and space, whether He has acted only once, or whether He acts constantly. You have to become God himself in order to know all this“ [13].
  
  In his treatise „Emile or On Education“ (Émile ou De l'éducation, 1762), the Swiss philosopher and writer who worked for a large part of his life in France, Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712 – 1778) wrote: „The universe is a single whole, which proves the existence of a unique Mind. For I see that every single thing is an integral part of the whole ordered system, and that every single thing contributes to the general purpose, i.e. for the preservation of the established order in the system. This Being who expresses his will and can carry it out, this Almighty Being who moves the Universe and orders all creation, I call God“ [14].
  
  During this stage, the existence of Absolute Knowledge remains self-evident, but the process of knowledge is a constant, most likely endless, never-completed path to its attainment. Theological ideas give way to abstract, philosophical-speculative concepts, „illusory essences“ and invented „primary causes“ – the „ideas“ of the genius ancient Greek philosopher and student of Socrates Plato (c. 427 – 347 BC), the „forms“ of Aristotle and the scholastics, as well as „social contract“, „human rights“, „substance“ of the eminent Dutch philosopher Benedict de Spinoza (1632 – 1677), „monads“ of the German philosopher and mathematician Gottfried Leibniz (1646 – 1716); „thing-in-itself“ of one of the most important thinkers of all time, the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804), „absolute spirit“ of the great German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770 – 1831), „matter“ of the materialists and others. The ideas of altruism, sociality, positive philosophy, individualism, liberalism and democracy spread. This along with industrial development leads to the decay of traditional beliefs and previous orders. Mankind is experiencing the Reformation, Enlightenment and Revolution [15].
  
  Explanation:
  Plato's Theory of Ideas or Theory of Forms asserts that the highest and most fundamental kind of reality is contained not in the material world known to us through the senses, but in immaterial, abstract but essential forms or ideas – the world of perfect forms, situated behind, above, and beyond real, tangible objects. These forms are the only true objects of study that can provide true knowledge. When what our senses tell us contradicts our mental conclusions, then what we receive from the senses must be ignored [16].
  
  According to Aristotle, eidos, i.e. form is also the essence of the separate, single object, and all that is encompassed by that concept. So every thing is a unity of eidos and matter, but together with this every thing has its own causal origin and purpose – „that for which it exists“, as both the active and the final cause are determined by the eidos, i.e. by the form. The basic, unconditional properties of a given constitute its essence, which is unchanged by definition, because if it changes, the object will no longer be the same, but some other [17].
  
  Scholasticism is a systematic European medieval philosophy (IX century – XV century). It maintains the notion that the truth is contained in the Holy Scriptures and is based on church dogmatics. „Scholasticism inherited from ancient philosophy the conviction that the world is fundamentally rational and therefore rational knowledge of the world is possible and attainable. The knowledge of things means, first of all, the knowledge of their essence, their essential characteristics; these characteristics determine the „type“, „form“ of each thing, and and thus allow it to be subsumed under the general concept“ [18].
  
  According to Spinoza: „Substance is one, indivisible and infinite. It is that which exists in itself and is apprehended through itself; the concept of which does not need the concept of anything else for its explanation. And this makes it possible to identify it with the concept of Nature. Nothing exists outside of substance. And since it is the absolute essence of everything, it is equal to God. He is ... Nature. But this is not nature understood as a totality of all single, concrete, existing things, but as Nature creating these things. Substance is creative nature and as such is God: Substance = Creative Nature = God. Substance is identified with the „universal unity“, outside of which nothing is real, because it would be outside of Nature“ [19].
  
  Gottfried Leibniz wrote (in French) his „Monadologie“ in 1714. It was published in German in 1720 and in Latin in 1721. The basic concept is monads – immaterial, incorporeal, „simple substances“, „the true Atoms of Nature“, „the Beginnings of things“. In the indivisible and indestructible monads there is a continual change proceeding from an inner principle, whose activity he calls Aspiration. In monads, comprehension (perceptions) and consciousness (apperception) are distinguished. Monads are either created or uncreated. Among the first, he includes the primitive monads, then the Souls – „everything that has perceptions and desires“, and the Spirits, rational Souls, knowing the necessary and eternal truths and possessing Reason and sciences“ [20].
  
  „Thing-in-itself“ (das Ding an sich) – noumenon, i.e. a rational thing, a mental, thought object, a philosophical term denoting phenomena and objects comprehended through the mind, as opposed to sensually comprehended through the senses (existing in objective reality) phenomena. The „Thing-in-itself (Thing as it is in itself) is independent of our perception, it is something whose essence and meaning are known only to those who can comprehend knowledge with the help of the mind, through reasoning, and not only with his senses and with the help of experience [21].
  
  The absolute Spirit (der absolute Geist) is the highest category in Hegel's philosophical system, the basis of everything that exists, meaning the most developed form of being – the absolute idea, the highest concreteness. This is the self-aware absolute idea. Forms of the absolute spirit as self-consciousness of the absolute idea are the three stages through which the development of the absolute spirit passes: art (thesis), religion (antithesis) and philosophy (synthesis), in which the absolute idea completely completes the process of its self-knowledge and reaches the „absolute knowledge“. The subjective spirit and the objective spirit are considered to be the way in which the Absolute Spirit is created [22].
  
  Matter (lat. materia - substance) – „One of the most ambiguous philosophical concepts, to which various meanings are given: That, the defining characteristics of which are extension, place in space, mass, weight, motion, inertia, resistance, impenetrability, attraction and repulsion, or some combination of these properties; external cause of sense experience; that which constitutes the „world given in sensations“; stable, constant (or relatively constant); common to many (available to more than one cognizing subject); ... That which refers to content as opposed to form; ... Source of sensations; that which is given in experience as opposed to that which is given by the mind; ... Primordial or primary basis“ [23].
  
  Enlightenment is reflected primarily in literature and culture, as well as in people's thinking. One of the main features of the Enlightenment is the connection with science. For this reason, the XVIII century was called the „Century of Philosophy“.
  
  The Metaphysical stage is the time when Man experiences the Renaissance and begins to live in the Enlightenment – he is enlightened, i.e. educated, elevated, cultured, civilized; he has believed that he can decode the eternal laws of nature and he had a new self-confidence – a prerequisite for the later birth of the Individual for whom Freedom is the natural state and content of his personal and social life, and democracy, modern democracy, is the natural process and the way society functions.
  
  Explanation:
  Renaissance (fr. Renaissance - revival) – a historical period, also called Revival, of rapid cultural development in ideas, means of expression and in general in creativity, which lasted approximately from the XIV century to the XVII century. It originated in Florence in the XIV century, and in the following centuries spread to other parts of Europe. In a more general sense, the term Renaissance is also used for the historical period that is a transition from the Middle Ages to the New (Modern) Age.
  
  In the Metaphysical Stage, people live in a transitional time – they emerge more and more confidently from the World of uncertainty (insecurity, vagueness, ambiguity) and proceed slowly and with certain doubts and hesitations into a different, perhaps even more difficult, but a more exciting world – in the World of both uncertainty and risk.
That is why the paradigm of the Metaphysical stage is the Transition from Uncertainty to Uncertainty and Risk.
  
  The key concepts, explanatory constructs for the Metaphysical stage are:
  ‣ Omnipotence of Nature;
  ‣ Omnipotence rests on Philosophy;
  ‣ Reality is comprehended and changed through Metaphysics;
  ‣ This is achieved through Deism;
  ‣ The main thing that Man lives with is Enlightenment.
  
  • In the POSUTIVE STAGE (1800 – 2000) at the base of the system of ideas
after the Faith in God and its immediate result – the Obedience by Man to God and His powers;
and later – after the Philosophy of Nature and its immediate result – the Adoration of Man of Nature and its powers;
  comes the Knowledge of Science.
  The immediate result of the Knowledge of Science is the Reliance of Man on Science and its powers.
  
  This is now the real Science, the one that we know today – the Science that conducts deep, fundamental research, performs complex experiments, systematizes the facts it observes and establishes them into verifiable dependencies, becoming through our understandings into laws that have an immutable and objective character – laws based on the established facts and suggesting new facts, which, when established, confirm the correctness of the already established laws. Thus, critical scientific thinking and knowledge accumulated in a scientific way, in addition to explaining reality and what is happening, begin to change reality and predict what will happen.
  The ability to predict becomes no less important than the ability to understand [24].
If metaphysics, figuratively speaking, took a purposeful look at the transcendent, „what is beyond“, then science, true science, observes and comprehends the immanent, „what is here“.
  This is a transition – evolutionary, and perhaps even revolutionary, from fictions to facts, from God's to what is, from the irrational to the rational. It is a refusal, as a rule gradual, from to achieving the meaning of what is beyond the limits of facts and experience, i.e. of what is outside of being and inaccessible to consciousness. This is already an aspiration – to reach the meaning of what is within the range of facts and experience, i.e. what is in being and accessible to consciousness [25]!
  
  Explanation:
  Verification – checking, proving assumptions, comparison with data and statements, establishing the truth.
  
  During the Positive Stage, the understanding that there is no absolute knowledge, and all knowledge is only relative, becomes leading and all-encompassing. This is the time of Relative Knowledge. The only form of knowledge is scientific knowledge, and scientific knowledge can only be relative.
  Relative knowledge does not simply displace Absolute knowledge, i.e. the belief in it or the pursuit of it; it, Relative knowledge, puts an end to the existence of the know-it-alls, the all-knowing scientists, the encyclopedists.
  
  Modern scientists enter the scene – as creators and producers of positive knowledge (and the knowledge of this era is only positive), i.e. it is ascertainable and precise, useful and necessary, reliable and verifiable, affirmative and pragmatic.
  Mankind relies on science and therefore refuses to look for (and consider that they exist) absolute causes (God, Nature), and by observing the social and physical world will try – by trial and error – to find the laws that govern them.
  Science discovers the exact laws, and what else are laws but existing constant relations between reliably established facts. Science – it and only it, it alone can give a strictly objective and maximally synthetic picture of the world and Man. Scientific knowledge, the laws derived in a purely scientific way for the functioning of social systems, take part together with the material and moral resources of people in the transformation of society.
  The mind becomes not less, but more free, when it refuses to believe and even more – to seek the explanations of all processes with the help of abstraction and abstract theories, but begins to strive energetically and enthusiastically for what it is convinced, that it is in his power – to establish a connection between the phenomena through increasingly insightful observations (measurements, experiments and reliance on empiricism) and ever deeper, profound reasoning (analyses, syntheses and prognosis).
  
  During this stage, Man breathes in his chest and with his mind the fresh air of a previously unknown feeling – Freedom. This is still not Freedom of Man in today's liberal-democratic sense – freedom in a free society. This is Freedom from the predetermination of Fate, Destiny, Fortune and Karma, from the otherworldliness of supernatural forces, from the invincibility of natural elements. This is Freedom to understand the World, to discover objective laws, to derive Knowledge, to extract Cognition, that not only explains what is happening, but also predicts what may happen. This is Freedom to live in all three dimensions of Space – length, width, height. This is Freedom to live in all three dimensions of Time – past, present, future. This is Freedom to understand that you are not a blind and helpless speck of dust in this world, but you are also its intelligent creator. That you are not a passive object of the processes, but also their active subject.
  
  In the Positive stage, people already live and more patiently and also too persistently learn, get used to living in the World of uncertainty and risk at the same time.
  That is why the paradigm of the Positive stage is Uncertainty and Risk.
  
  The key concepts, explanatory constructs for the Positive stage are:
  ‣ Omnipotence of Science;
  ‣ Omnipotence rests on Knowledge;
  ‣ Reality is comprehended and changed through Research;
  ‣ This is achieved through Trials;
  ‣ The main thing that Man lives with is Freedom.
  
  And now the time has come when we reflect on the philosophy of history, i.e. on the intellectual evolution of Mankind, to talk of the fourth stage:
  ⁕ Anthropocentric stage – after 2000
  
  • In the ANTHROPOCENTRIC STAGE (after 2000) at the base of the system of ideas
  after the Faith in God and its immediate result – the Obedience by Man to God and His powers;
  and later – after the Philosophy of Nature and its immediate result – the Adoration of Man of Nature and its powers;
  and then – after the Knowledge of Science and its immediate result – the Reliance of Man on Science and its powers;
  comes the Power of Man.
  The immediate result of the Power of Man is the Self-Deification of Man and his powers.
  
  This is Man's belief in himself, in his capabilities and responsibilities, powers and strengths. Along with Man's belief in himself, we must also add Man's disbelief that someone else can determine his agenda, plans and goals; Man's distrust of many of the values of past millennia; Man's disbelief in religious norms and canons. Man is on the scene and this is not only good, although it is not only bad for our Planet. Man will continue to comply with God, with Nature and with Science, but to the extent that this helps to achieve his goals. Such an attitude towards God, Nature and Science has its high price and Man has to pay it, although sometimes it is beyond his strength. From such an attitude, at least partially, the idea of God suffers, the understanding of Nature suffers, the authority of Science suffers. Man gains not only the freedom to be independent of and stand above them, but also loses: he loses his moral guidelines, transformed over the millennia into God's commandments, and this threatens to leave him without prohibitions and moral regulators; he loses from the deterioration of the environment to which he has adapted over the millennia, and this threatens him with deteriorating health and disease-causing consequences, with disasters and accidents caused by damaged nature; he is losing the powerful creative power of science, which he has developed over millennia for his own good, and this threatens him with science getting out of his control, without him knowing how to deal with the potential consequences of this, and with the introduction of beckoning modern technologies, which from being his servants, can suddenly become his masters.
  
  Already at the previous stage, Man parted with Absolute knowledge – both with the belief in it and its unconditional existence, and with the conviction that striving for it will bring us closer to it, although this approach is a long and actually endless process. Parting with Absolute knowledge, Man painfully began to realize even then that he had entered the time of Relative knowledge, had entered into an alliance with Knowledge, and therefore also with himself, that all knowledge is relative and there is no other knowledge than relative.
  However, unlike before, two extremely important changes are now taking place.
  
  √ THE FIRST CHANGE is that the emphasis in the concept of „relative knowledge“ moves from „knowledge“ to „relative“. Man begins to build his worldview not only by the understanding that knowledge is relative, but also by the fact that everything is relative – everything about which he wants to know at least something or even everything is relative. Thus Man casts off the shackles of absoluteness, but falls into the Realm of the relativity of everything, because everything is relative. Moreover, this relativity is relative – it is not only objective, but also subjective, because it depends both on the knowledge of it and on the one who gets to know it and wants to have as complete a knowledge of it as possible. For me an object or process is one – with my understanding of how far its relativity extends; for you the same object or process is something else completely different, with your understanding of how far its relativity extends. Even the concepts of Truth, Lie, Honor, Dignity are relativized – both as content and as attitude towards them, and the decrease in their objectivity is paid for by an increase in the subjectivity of the attitude towards them.
  
  √ THE SECOND CHANGE is expressed in the fact that if earlier the direction of Man's efforts was from him, from Man to Knowledge, i.e. Man, even realizing the sad fact of the relativity of Knowledge, did not lost his energy and his desire to reduce this relativity and to come at least a little closer to the maximum available Knowledge, and therefore Man worked for Knowledge; now the direction of Man's efforts is from Knowledge to him, to Man. Knowledge, with all its relativity, must work for Man. Thus, conditions are created for Man to forget that Knowledge is relative and to live subconsciously with the feeling of some seeming absoluteness of it. Although Knowledge remains relative, Man already treats it as almost-absolute Knowledge, and that is why there are constantly risks associated with the incompleteness of Knowledge and what is more – with the incompleteness of our knowledge about the incompleteness of Knowledge.
  
  These two changes, epochal in form and civilizational in content, throw Man into the arms of Risk!
  Man comes face to face with risks, he enters the Risk Society because (to clarify the above reasoning once more):
  
  √ He changes the emphasis in the concept of „relative knowledge“ from „knowledge“ to „relative“. Thus, in fact, not only the knowledge of everything becomes relative, but also everything we know about becomes relative. Relativity loses its most important quality of being relative, and itself transforms into its negation, becoming absolute.
  √ He changes the direction of his efforts instead of „from Man to Knowledge“, it becomes „from Knowledge to Man“. Thus, in fact, it is not Man who serves Knowledge in order to multiply it as a Good, but Knowledge serves Man in order to multiply his goods.
  
  As the English philosopher Francis Bacon (1561 – 1626) said, „Knowledge is power“ („Knowledge itself is power“, Latin „Ipsa scientia potestas est“; to point out that potestas also means skill, power, capacity, opportunity, possibility, ability, control; and power – also ability, possibility, opportunity, might, energy, power, including political, potency). But nowadays, knowledge from strength, from power, from might, from potency becomes more and more a servant of Man, i.e. it turns into something that serves Man's desires (and his passions and complexes – too), into an instrument with which man serves himself – often selfishly and mercantile.
  The frenzied passion of Man to discover new technologies and make them work for him, for his standard of living, for his ever-farther horizon, for his self-esteem, and for his power over inanimate and animate nature, brings him close to the edge – not to the edge of the abyss (although it is not excluded that this may turn out to be the edge of the abyss as well), but to the edge of Man's ability to control these technologies, to evaluate their consequences and to bear responsibility for the use of these technologies and for what they can cause – as well as for what they cannot achieve (for example – to find the cures for certain diseases).
  
  Technology becomes the other name of life and the hope for a better life. Knowledge is not only positive, it is also applicable – even if it is as ascertainable and precise, as reliable and verifiable, as affirmative and pragmatic as it is applicable. Otherwise, it is some kind of abstraction, a field for self-expression of office, armchair scientists or for fundamental research that is successful and will be funded only if the knowledge obtained from them is applicable and can be harnessed in technologies that work for Man.
  
  Mankind is not content with finding the laws that govern the world, it wants to govern those laws, or at least subdue them, using them for its own good. For Mankind, undoubtedly, all laws are important, i.e. all constant relations between reliably ascertainable facts, but ascertainability of facts is no longer sufficient, but only necessary – their applicability is sufficient.
  Important and studied today are those laws that represent permanent and useful relationships between reliably ascertainable and applicable facts. The same applies to science – today it is not enough for it to give a strictly objective and maximally synthetic picture of the world and Man, what is discovered and established in this picture must be able to be used, to be turned into a tool in the hands and consciousness of Man.
  Science is a true science only if it has an outlet for practice, if it gives Man new technology, if it makes him stronger, more knowledgeable, more capable and more self-confident.
  
  Armed with the new and the latest technologies, Man not only becomes more free, he begins to believe that he is completely free, that he is absolutely free, that he is God – here on Earth - because he has mastered such powerful technologies, he has subdued them and made them an extension of his mind and his hands. And what else can his self-confidence be, if he has such technologies with the help of which he can see the secret of life and turn life into a competition only with himself.
  
  However, sobering up is inevitable. The transition from the previous period to the current one was accompanied by two accidents with terrible consequences – Chernobyl and Fukushima. They showed that Man's omnipotence in the application of technology can turn into his impotence in managing it. And the fine line between his omnipotence and his impotence is called risk. The omnipotence of Man creates risks, his impotence can lead to catastrophic consequences as a result of these risks. That is why risk management comes to the fore.
  Management is like Faust's pact with the devil – Man sells his soul to discover and master all technologies and will not give up on implementing new technologies. But in order for them not to turn against him, he must manage the risks that these technologies bring. Only then can he find the blissful peace of being in control of his own affairs and his future.
  
  Explanation:
  The Chernobyl accident is a severe industrial accident that occurred on April 26, 1986, at the Soviet Chernobyl Lenin Nuclear Power Plant. As a result of technological defects, human errors and bad circumstances, an explosion occurs in the reactor. This is the worst accident in the history of nuclear power. Along with the Fukushima I nuclear accident, it is one of two Level 7 events on the International Nuclear Event Scale. As a result of the accident, a cloud of radioactive waste swept over parts of the USSR, Eastern Europe and Scandinavia. Vast areas in present-day Ukraine, Belarus and Russia were contaminated and suffered huge losses.
  
  The accident at the Japanese nuclear power plant „Fukushima-1“ (03/11/2011) was an extremely dangerous accident as a result of the strongest earthquake in the history of Japan and the tsunami that followed it (tsunami: powerful – fast, high and strong – long waves).
  
   „Faust, a tragedy“ (Faust. Eine Tragödie) is a philosophical drama, the main work of the great German writer, poet, philosopher Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749 – 1832). Dr. Faust understands the value of knowledge, wants to discover the secrets of the Universe, and is ready to pay a high price for it. That is why he sells his soul to the devil (in the form of Mephistopheles). „Faust is a dreamer who longs to penetrate into the divine, strives to merge with the Cosmos, to get to know the Universe. His tragedy... lies in the painful struggle between faith and unbelief, between the consciousness of spiritual power and the feeling of social powerlessness, between the contemplation of the infinite and the limitation of human power“ [25].
  
  And if:
  > That God is omnipotent, at the Theological stage, rests on the Faith...
  > That Nature is omnipotent, at the Metaphysical stage, rests on the Philosophy...
  > That Science is omnipotent, at the Positive stage, rests on the Knowledge...
  
  Why not assume that:
  > That Man is omnipotent now, at the Anthropocentric stage, rests on the Power – on Man's Power?
  
  And if:
  > Once, the Faith was the strong incentive for people to believe that God is omnipotent...
  > After that, the Philosophy was the strong incentive for people to believe that Nature is omnipotent...
  > And later, the Knowledge was the strong incentive for people to believe that Science is omnipotent...
  
  So why not assume that:
  > Nowadays already the Power is the strong incentive for people to believe that Man is omnipotent?
  
  And if:
  > The omnipotence of God at the Theological stage rests on Faith, reality is comprehended and changed through Religion and this is achieved through Theism...
  > The omnipotence of Nature at the Metaphysical stage rests on Philosophy, reality is comprehended and changed through Metaphysics and this is achieved through Deism...
  > The omnipotence of Science at the Positive stage rests on Knowledge, reality is comprehended and changed through Research and this is achieved through Trials...
  
  Why not assume that:
  > The omnipotence of Man at the Anthropocentric stage rests on Power, reality is comprehended and changed through Technologies and this is achieved through Management?
  
  Thus, we can make the following conclusion:
  In the Anthropocentric stage, in the rapidly developing XXI century, people live under the pressure of processes, events and circumstances that generate risks, contain risks, represent risks. If they want to survive as a society, develop as a societyр and prosper as a society, people must learn to live in a world in which risk has completely replaced uncertainty (insecurity, vagueness, ambiguity). And this world is not fiction, it is not an illusion, it is not self-delusion, it is not self-deception, it is not something that could possibly happen to us – it is today's world, the World of risk.
  That is why today's society cannot be called anything other than Risk Society, i.e. it is comprehensively, completely and fully the Risk Society – the society of serially produced uncertainties and insecurities.
  The Risk society, the Society of Risk, the Society of risks is characterized by many times higher insecurity.
  On the one hand, it is insecurity in itself, insecurity as such (in a conventional sense – traditional insecurity, insecurity with its traditional, albeit escalating dimensions and contents).
  And on the other hand, it is insecurity that arises from the growing uncertainty (vagueness, ambiguity).
  In other words, the insecurity in the Risk Society becomes quantitative and, even more importantly, qualitatively different, much riskier, it becomes riskized.
  That is why the paradigm of the Anthropocentric stage is Risk.
  
  The key concepts, explanatory constructs for the Anthropocentric stage are:
  ‣ Omnipotence of Man;
  ‣ Omnipotence rests on Power;
  ‣ Reality is comprehended and changed through Technologies;
  ‣ This is achieved through Management;
  ‣ The main thing that Man lives with is Insecurity.
  
  
  





  
   Table 1. Four stages of the intellectual evolution of Mankind
  
  
  
  References:
  1. Конт Огюст. Социалната наука. София: Глория Мунди, 1998.
Kont, Ogiust. Socialnata nauka. Sofia: Gloria Mundi, 1998. (in Bulgarian)
(Comte Auguste. Social science)
  2. https://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/ruwiki/1072070. (in Russian)
  3. http://epistemology_of_science.academic.ru/187/%D0%94%D1%83%D1%85_%D0%BF.... (in Russian)
  4. http://filosof.historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000007/st015.shtml. (in Russian)
  5. Касавин, И.Т. (сост.). Энциклопедия эпистемологии и философии науки. М.: Канон+, РООИ Реабилитация, 2009, http://platona.net/load/knigi_po_filosofii/slovari_ehnciklopedii/ehncikl..., 64 – 65.
Kasavin, I.T. (sost.) Enciklopedia epistemologii I filosofii nauki. Moskva: Kanon+, ROOI Reabilitacia, 2009, http://platona.net/load/knigi_po_filosofii/slovari_ehnciklopedii/ehncikl..., 64 – 65. (in Russian)
  6. Касавин, И.Т. (сост.). Энциклопедия эпистемологии и философии науки…, с. 980.
(Kasavin, I.T. (comp.). Encyclopedia of epistemologies and philosophies of science, p. 980)
  7. Rumford, Chris. Risk Society. Society and Sociology in the New Millennium. Lecture 6. Slides 3 – 24, http://www.powershow.com/view/507a5-NWVhM/RISK_SOCIETY_powerpoint_ppt_pr..., Slide 7.
  8. https://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BE%D1%84.... (in Bulgarian)
  9. http://www.ubrus.org/data/library/pages/362/H17-T.htm. (in Russian)
  10. http://apologia-christ.ru/basis/bogoslovie/osipov/osipov_3.htm. (in Russian)
  11. https://www.e-reading.club/chapter.php/70745/19/Osipov_-_Osnovnoe_bogosl.... (in Russian)
  12. Касавин, И.Т. (сост.). Энциклопедия эпистемологии и философии науки…, с. 92.
(Kasavin, I.T. (comp.). Encyclopedia of epistemologies and philosophies of science, p. 92)
  13. http://rushist.com/index.php/philosophical-articles/2732-deizm-voltera. (in Russian)
  14. http://nobelisti.tripod.com/id13.html. (in Bulgarian)
  15. https://culture.wikireading.ru/58009. (in Russian)
  16. Слатински, Николай. Сигурността – животът на Мрежата. София: Военно издателство, 2014, 270 – 271. (in Bulgarian)
Slatinski, Nikolay. Sigurnostta – zhivotu na Mrezhata. Sofia: Voenno izdatelstvo, 2014, 270 – 271.
(Slatinsky, Nikolai. Security – the life of the Network)
  17. Слатински, Николай. Сигурността – животът на Мрежата…, с. 271.
(Slatinsky, Nikolai. Security – the life of the Network, p. 271)
  18. http://yanko.lib.ru/books/philosoph/mgu-ist_filosofii-2005-8l.pdf. (in Russian)
  19. http://www.ikant.info/substancia.html. (in Bulgarian)
  20. Касавин, И.Т. (сост.). Энциклопедия эпистемологии и философии науки…, 530 – 531; translation compared with Leibniz, Gottfried. Monadology. Sofia: East-West, 2015.
(Kasavin, I.T. (comp.). Encyclopedia of epistemologies and philosophies of science, 530 – 531)
  21. Слатински, Николай. Сигурността – животът на Мрежата…, 271 – 272.
(Slatinsky, Nikolai. Security – the life of the Network, 271 – 272)
  22. http://www.olegcherne.ru/hora/9-/, https://iphras.ru/page50973574.htm. (in Russian)
  23. Ивин, Александр (ред.). Философия: Энциклопедический словарь. Москва: Гардарики, 2004, http://www.read.in.ua/book173921/, 882 – 883.
Ivin, Aleksandr (red.). Filosofia: Enciklopedicheskiy slovar. Moskva: Gardariki, 2004, http://www.read.in.ua/book173921/, 882 – 883.
(Ivin, Alexander (ed.). Philosophy: An Encyclopedic Dictionary)
  24. http://vikent.ru/enc/321/. (in Russian)
  25. http://epistemology_of_science.academic.ru/187/%D0%94%D1%83%D1%85_%D0%BF.... (in Bulgarian)
  26. https://liternet.bg/publish3/vkonstantinov/faust.htm. (in Bulgarian)
  
  
  03/25/2023
  
  
  Brief explanation:
  The texts of my Studies have been translated into English by me. They have not been read and edited by a native English speaker, nor by a professional translator. Therefore, all errors and ambiguities caused by the quality of the translation are solely mine. But I have been guided by the thought that the purpose of these Studies is to give information about my contributions to the Science of Security by presenting them in a brief exposition, and not to demonstrate excellent English, which, unfortunately, I cannot boast of.