"Вестник МГСУ"

The authors elaborate on a new critical approach to the assessment of the concept of the “noosphere”. The basic principles of Vernadskiy’s concept of the “noosphere” are assessed from the viewpoint of the current state of the human civilization. It is proven that the key principles of Vernadskiy’s theory cannot serve as the basis for the noosphere. So far, the theory of the “noosphere” does not exist. There are just a few prerequisites for the attainment of the noosphere, due to the limited knowledge and information about the natural environment and the human ability to interact with it without inflicting any damage. The authors argue the noosphere can only be attained if and when the superiority of the anthropocentrism is overcome and the shift-over to the biocentrism is implemented. The authors insist that the concept of “sustainable development”, which is widely regarded as the primary method for overcoming the global ecological crisis, can be evaluated as a limited and purely pragmatic solution to the environmental problems arising at this phase of the human development; therefore, it may serve as the basis for the modern theory of the “noosphere” to a limited extent.The basic principles of the method of harmonization used to arrange the conditions needed for the implementation of the noosphere are considered in the article. The authors demonstrate that the co-evolutionary approach to further development of the humanity and the biosphere is the basis for the formation of the noosphere. The conclusion is that both mutualism and competition facilitate evolution. The concept of co-evolution applies to the philosophical principle of harmonization valid both for an individual person and the whole humankind. A widening gap between the research achievements and the ability of the biosphere to perceive and to assimilate them is the reason for the ecological crisis. The solution consists in the ecologization of science and technology, as well as in the generation by each person and the whole humankind of the noosphere-centered mode of thinking. Compilation of the modern theory of the “noosphere” is a key task of natural sciences to be attained through the employment of technological advancements.

The authors study the philosophical correlation between postmodernism and the concept of sustainable development. The author assesses modernism as the place of origin of postmodernism and its basic principles. The author also demonstrates the principal laws of sustainable development as the opposition to the global ecological crisis. Postmodernism is perceived as the most adequate expression of the intellectual and emotional personification of the epoch. Besides, philosophical postmodernism strives to act as the general theory of the modern art. As a result, postmodernism is regarded as the expression of the spirit of the time in all spheres of human life: art, sociology, science, economics, politics, etc. It has been identified that since the acceptance of the Rio Declaration, its results have been discussed for over 20 years. Spiritual fundamentals of modernism include commonsense, progress, and emancipation. In their turn, postmodernists believe that these ideas have been perverted in their new European version, as it represents the ideology of the consumer society and the “Gold Billion”. Criticism of three fundamentals of modernism and postmodernism, and the main provisions of the concept of sustainable development, considered by the authors, serve as the confirmation of the authors’ assumption that sustainable development is the expression of postmodernism.

Noosphere is considered as modern state of biosphere, which appeared as a result of scientific, artistic and labour activity of people. The theory of noosphere is a biospheric-noospheric concept of V.I. Vernadsky, which postulates transfer from biosphere to noosphere, which must definitely happen. Within the limits of each civilization the problems of energy supply, creation of favorable living environment and waste disposal — inevitable end product of antroposhere — are being solved. The latter is a separate complicated problem and the lines of approach are not found yet. Many other modern problems: political, ideological, economic — are often solved not from the perspective of rationality. Sometimes mind activity is used for destructive purposes, including modern types of weapons. Construction activity supposes the creation of something new, necessary for people. In this sense construction as philosophic category corresponds to the ideas of Vernadsky, according to which he wanted to see our future harmonical and sustainable, but not self-destructive.

Culture in ecology is a research area founded in Russia by Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev in 1979. Like any science, it has its target of research (World Culture), its purpose — the preservation of national cultures, its own generalization method related to the method of ecology. Culture in ecology is a scientific discipline. It is not a part of the environment, as it has a separate subject of study. It can be considered a part of the noosphere theory. Culture as a whole is vast human creation, which includes creative, handicraft and other skills related to agriculture, development of the planet's resources, education and training of children, the highest ideals of human being, engineering, arts, protecting the environment and cultural heritage.Culture is a means of managing material noospheric objects. Culture ecology studies the creativity, engineering, and economic interactions in the society and their impact on the human environment, because it is closely connected to ecology. Culture ecology should be developed in order to manage the biosphere or even the noosphere as rationally constructed megasystem consisting of natural and man-made objects. Noosphere as an ideal state of the environment does not exist in reality. It is far from predation and barbarism in terms of using natural resources. Today the principles of culture ecology are based on the development of projects of recreating historic landscapes, historic buildings and structures for the purposes of modern society. In the report the author focuses on two examples of such work: the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow and the Frauenkirche in Dresden. They are the examples of constructions corresponding to the requirements for ecological facilities and cultural experience. They should be considered the islands of noosphere in the modern imperfect world and science. The combination of old and new is a tricky thing. It is easy to destroy the balance between old guardian of the spirit, and new functioning elements of the statutes for the modern society needs. It is easy to upset the balance and thus give rise for objections from one side or another. The debates on inclusion old and new parts should be going in the process of rebuilding objects in new social environment.