DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2017-3-328-334

GLOBAL CATASTROPHIC RISKS IN THE LIGHT OF UNIFIED OBJECTIVELY DETERMINED UNIVERSAL PROCESS CONCEPT. PART 1

Vnutskih Alexander Yur’evich
Doctor of Philosophy, Docent

Professor of the Department of Philosophy,
Perm State University,
15, Bukirev str., Perm, 614990, Russia;

Professor of the Department of Philosophy and Law,
Perm National Research Polytechnic University,
29, Komsomolskiy av., Perm, 614990, Russia;

e-mail: avnut@inbox.ru
ORCID: 0000-0003-4162-1033

The article deals with the comparison of ontological and epistemological principles of the global catastrophic risks concept and the concept of unified objectively determined universal process. The author suggests that the concept of global catastrophic risks is an important contemporary trans-disciplinary concept, which has a significant influence both in the expert community and in the mass consciousness. Three ontological and three epistemological principles of the concept have been reconstructed in the article. Ontological principles are focused on the idea of casual and unpredictable character of any processes in the world, including processes leading to global catastrophes. It follows from equal probability of these processes and the «equality» of all possibilities. Epistemological principles are focused on the idea of autonomy of the subjective side in cognition and its limitations. These limitations are interpreted as results of finiteness of the human experience’s sphere, due to cognitive biases and observation selection effects. However, the system of sciences and humanities facts, which can be interpreted in the light of the concept of unified objectively determined universal process, evidences that the philosophical principles (first of all, ontological ones) of the concept of global catastrophic risks are insufficiently substantiated. The author believes, that the idea of a hierarchy of possibilities and «quantum entanglement’s» phenomenon in the light of the concept unified objectively determined universal process suffer to combine the idea of determined integral progress with the idea of casual processes (including the chances of global catastrophes). Also, the link between the world’s infinity and human experience’s sphere in the light of the un-chaotic world’s concept allows to speak about the representative character of our experience with respect to the world as a whole.

Keywords:global catastroрhic risks, unified objectively determined universal process, cognitive biases, observation selection effects.

References

1. Lenin V.I. Karl Marks (Kratkiy biograficheskiy ocherk s izlozheniem marksizma) [Karl Marx (A Brief Biographical Sketch With an Exposition of Marxism)]. Polnoe sobranie sochineniy [Complete works]. Moscow, Izdatelstvo politicheskoy literatury Publ., 1969, vol. 26, pp. 43–93. (In Russian).
2. Orlov V.V. Istoriya chelovecheskogo intellekta [The history of human intellect]. Perm, Perm State University Publ., 1999, part 3, 184 p. (In Russian).
3. Fukuyama F. Nashe postchelovecheskoe buduschee: Posledstviya biotekhnologicheskoy revolyutsii [Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution]. Moscow, AST Publ., 2004, 349 p. (In Russian).
4. Beck U. Obschestvo riska: na puti k drugomu modernu [Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity]. Moscow, Progress-Traditsiya Publ., 2000, 383 p. (In Russian).
5. Future of Humanity Institute. Available at: http://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/about/ (accessed 31.07.2017). (In English).
6. Global Risks Report. Available at: https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-risks-report-2017 (accessed 31.07.2017). (In English).
7. Turchin A.V. Struktura global’noy katastrofy: riski vymiraniya chelovechestva v XXI veke [The structure of the global catastrophe. Risks of human extinction in the XXI century]. Moscow, URSS Publ., LKI Publ., 2011, 431 p. (In Russian).
8. Lakatos I. Falsification and Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. The methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. N.Y., Cambridge University Press, 1989, pp. 8–101. DOI: 10.1017/cbo9780511621123.003. (In English).
9. Bostrom N., Čirkoviċ M. Introduction. Global Catastrophic Risks. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 1–29. DOI: 10.3726/978-3-653-00719-0/3. (In English).
10. Hanson R. Catastrophe, Social collapse, and human extinction. Global Catastrophic Risks. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 363–378.(In English).
11. Bostrom N. Existential Risks. Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios and Related Hazards. Journal of Evolution and Technology. 2002, vol. 9, no. 1. Available at: http://jetpress.org/contents.htm (accessed 30.07.2017). (In English).
12. Yudkowsky E. Cognitive biases potentially affecting judgment of global risks. Global Catastrophic Risks. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 91–119. (In English).
13. Adams F. Long-term astrophysical processes. Global Catastrophic Risks. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 33–47. (In English).
14. Čirkovič M, Sandberg A., Bostrom N. Antropic shadow: observation selection effects and human extinction risks. Risk Analysis. 2010, vol. 30, no. 10, pp. 1495–1506. DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01460.x. (In English).

The date of the manuscript receipt 01.08.2017

Please cite this article in English as:

Vnutskih A.Yu. Global catastrophic risks in the light of unified objectively determined universal process concept. Part 1 // Perm University Herald. Series «Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology». 2017. Iss. 3. P. 328–334.DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2017-3-328-334