Scientific editor Oleg Witte

I understood all the insignificance of what happens with such unprofessional translator. I understood the ambiguity for the reader to take the time that you can expect, so just transfer distorted - that methodically outdated (by time - you can see it soon - was a Marxist supporter of philosophy, the victim's political defeat in 20 years after death of the author). I understood the squeamishness English-speaking reader: how to wrap the text, where a few grammatical errors in the line ... I understood all this and still didn't refuse to translate. Why? - Because I believe in the power of the truth. It is as grass, asphalt breaks. Porshnev divined too many things. He can not not to win in the end. Shaft opening gushed over the past third of a century. But the core of his theory survived. And I want this terrible translation to reach out to fellow unrecognized. For thirty years, his theory is exposed almost silencing for different reasons. Now, in Russia - because of, inter alia, the material and spiritual poverty. The international language of science - English, but Russian scientists, paid tribute to Porshnev, not on what to order his transfer ledger and not have the passion to unite and do the translation yourself. Like, sorry, Napoleon Arcole bridge, I was hoping that issued the call for combined efforts, I will push as Napoleon in the river, and they do it themselves. But it did not. Let this translation will be a reproach to individualism and yet another reminder of the plight of the theory of Porshnev.

Reviewers:

Valery Mukhin, doctor of psychological sciences, head of the department of psychology of development of MPGU, full member of Russian Academy of Sciences and Russian Academy of Natural Sciences,

Alexander Gordon, doctor of historical sciences, Senior Research Fellow of Institute of scientific information on social sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences,

Alexander Markov, Dr.Sci.Biol., senior research associate of the Russian Academy of Sciences Paleontologic institute.

B. Porshnev's monograph is devoted to a problem of an origin of the public person and human society. The author sums up long-term researches in the field of physiology of the highest nervous activity, the general and social psychology, history, political economy, sociology, political science, etc. In contrast to the dominant in the world of science approaches that analyze the transition from animal to man in the model of "zooid - environment", B. Porshnev puts into the center the model of "exemplar — an exemplar". The main place is taken by researches of transformation of animal into a human from the point of view of psychology and physiology of higher nervous activity, based on the reinterpretation of the data and conclusions, received by the Russian and foreign scientists belonging to schools of I.Pavlov and A.Ukhtomsky, L.Vygotsky and H.Wallon. On this basis, with attraction of results of own experiences and field researches, identified and analyzed in depth the specific mechanism of influence of exemplars to each other, the premise of which is laid in the physiology of animals; reconstructed the conditions that caused the formation and use of the immediate ancestors of the human mechanism, and the first stages of its development up to the generation of them human speech, psychology, creativity and thinking, social institutions.

Similar researches of mechanisms of influence of one exemplar to another as decisive factor of transformation of an animal in the person, laid the foundation all further historical development of mankind, in world scientific literature still aren't present.

The previous (first) edition of the book of B.F.Porshnev was published by “Mysl” publishing house in 1974 only from the second attempt. During each of these two attempts the text of the author's manuscript was exposed curtailment¹. First typesetting of the book was ready in the summer of 1972, but in the autumn of that year set without signing in printing the book was broken up.

The first typographical set of the book (1972) was preceded by considerable reductions of the author's manuscript presented to publishing house. The book didn't include three heads: Chapter 6 (“Flesh eating”), Chapter 7 ("Emergence of fire") and Chapter 9 ("Troglodytidae’s and hominid’s divergence”). For preservation of integrity of a statement Porshnev included in Chapter 2 ("Ape-man idea for a hundred years") a brief summary of removed heads², , and also made of several fragments of these heads new Chapter 6 ("At a threshold Neanthropines"). This "combined" head included three sections:

I. Some data and assumptions of signal influence from paleanthropus on wild animals (the former section VI of Chapter 6 of the same name);

II. Some mechanisms of neuroalarm interaction between exemplars and populations paleanthropic (the foregone cognominal section 11 of Chapter 9);

III. Divergence time paleanthropus and neoanthropus (the foregone cognominal section III of Chapter 9 added with a fragment from section 1 of the same Chapter 9 of the same name - "Temper of the selection underlying a divergence").

The second typesetting of the first edition (1974) was preceded by additional reductions — a row small and one essential. Chapter 8 ("Disputes on fundamental concepts") was cut almost by half and "is lowered in the status": the kept text is placed in the final chapter ("Speech-thinking genesis: Suggestiya and diplastiya") as its section 1: "Work, production, society".

¹ See in more detail about circumstances of preparation of the first edition of the book in the present edition: Porshneva E.B. Reality of imagination (a note about the father); Vite O.T. "I — the happy person". The book "About the Beginning of Human History" and its place in B.F.Porshnev's creative biography (in Russian: Поршнева Е.Б. Реальность воображения (записки об отце); Вите О.Т. “Я — счастливый человек”. Книга “О начале человеческой истории” и ее место в творческой биографии Б.Ф. Поршнева).

² In the present edition this summary is placed at the end of the book, in "Notes of the scientific editor" (to chapter 2).

This (second) edition published the full text of the author of the book "The beginning of Human History". The manuscript which has been handed over by Porshnev in publishing house for the publication in 1972, didn't remain. The materials used for its restoration can be divided into four groups. Used for its restoration materials can be divided into four groups.

I. Proofreading book’s set in 1972. Preserved two copies of the proofs. One is stored in a personal archive of A.I. Burtseva, the other - in a personal archive of L.N. Dorogova. The archive is stored Dorogova proofreading with the author's corrections. Both surviving copy proofs are not complete, some pages missing, but available in the two copies of the gap is not the same. Thus, these specimens, in general, allow to collect one full version of proofs.

II. Manuscripts of three chapters of the book (typewritten copies) ), which Porshnev had to withdraw from the book. Stored in a personal archive of L.N. Dorogova. Possibly, these manuscripts — the latest version of the text of these chapters.

III. The manuscripts of the same three chapters reduced (typewritten copies). An earlier version of the text of these chapters. Stored in the Manuscript Department of the Russian State Library.

IV. Manuscripts of various chapters of the book, written in 1968 - 1971 years. (autographs), as well as preparatory materials to them. Many of these manuscripts are not complete. Stored in the Manuscript Department of the Russian State Library.

In basis of present edition put the text of proofreading taking into acaunt avtor’s correction (group I), verified with the text of the book published in 1974. The reduced to a set of 1972 chapters recovered from their most recent within typewritten versions (group II). The updates text is put in a basis of the present edition taking into account author's editing (group I), verified with the text of the book published in 1974. Reduced to a set of 1972 of head are restored according to their latest typewritten versions (group II). The fragments of these heads included in a set of 1972 as sections of new ("composite") of Chapter 6 (and therefore not in the materials group II), restored to proof (group I), verified with the text published in 1974. Fragments, missing during this forced "restructuring" of the text, restored to earlier versions of abbreviated typed chapters (group III). At last, links to the withdrawn chapters which were available before in other heads, are restored according to early manuscripts (autographs) of the respective chapters (group IV). Abridged edition in 1974 Chapter 8 recovered from proof (group I).

In this edition, significantly expanded scientific apparatus. First, many footnotes are specified, provides links to the latest Russian edition cited works(including the latest transfers); links to the authors whose work is published in the collected works (L.S.Vygotsky, I.P.Pavlov, A.A. Ukhtomsky) completely diverted to these publications; finally, added links to some of the authors mentioned by Porshnev without links. These added links are marked with numbers with an asterisk (*). Secondly, at the end of the book placed notes, which give the reader more information on a particular topic, including quotes from the works of authors who are not mentioned by Porshnev, but nearer to the views of the latter, and also retrieves a number of inaccuracies allowed by Porshnev. Footnotes to these notes are marked with Roman numerals. Thirdly, at the end of the book

subject and nominal indexes, the bibliography of works of Porshnev, and also the bibliography of works about Porshnev are placed.

Besides, as the appendix E.B.Porshnevoy's memories of the father, and also the sketch of the creative biography of Porshnev written by me are published in the present edition.

I consider a duty to express sincere gratitude for support and the help in work on preparation for printing to the full author's version of the book of Porshnev and in work on a biographic sketch to many people: Averyanov I.A., Antsyferova L.I., Bayanov D.Yu., Burtseva A.I., Burtsev I.D., Werner O.N. (Ukraine), Voronkov V.M., Gordon A.V., Dorogova L.N., Zvyagin F.V., Ivanov N. B., Karp S.Ya., Koval G.M., Kutsenkov P.A., Markov A.V., Mukhina V.S., Myagkov V.N., Oyzerman T.I., Pavlova I.E., Pavlovsky G.O., Petrova A.G., to priest Dimitrii Pochepa, Raychev V. (Bulgaria), Samodova Yu.V., Sokolova L.V., Tiraspolsky I.Z., Tomchin G. A., Tulchinsky G.L, Filippov A.V., Hryukin A.R., Chudinov A.V.

Special gratitude I want to express to Boris Fedorovich Porshnev's daughter, his granddaughter and the great-grandson — Porshneva E.B., Plyutinskaia E.V. and to Ovchinnikov B.V., and also staff of Department of manuscripts of the Russian state library (Moscow), Information and bibliographic department of the Russian national library (St. Petersburg) and Center of independent sociological researches (St. Petersburg).

Without support and the help — at different times and in different forms — from all these people and collectives the present edition couldn't appear.

April, 2006.

P.S.

Unexpected "newly discovered facts" require complete story of the preparation of this publication some detail.

In bygone 2000 Mrs. Dorogova acquainted me with Mr. to Kontarevs who have agreed with certain publishing house about reprinting of the book of Porshnev. Faced with Kontaryova, I gave him all the time prepared for the materials in electronic format. Soon the publishing house refused this project. Still after a while Kontarev died...

And here, six years later that early project, at last, is carried out: in the summer of 2006 the Russian publishing house "FERI-V" published the "double" of the present edition who has reflected results of my editorial work for 2000.

On the one hand, this event speaks about undoubted growth in modern Russia of interest to Porshnev's researches. With another — the reader of the present edition has the right to know, than differ the offered book from unexpectedly appeared "double", in other words, what are the results of editing since 2000.

Along with the scientific device (additional references on sources, notes of the scientific editor, the bibliography, nominal and subject indexes), and also the materials placed in the present edition in "Appendix", the main results of the second stage of work (2000 - 2006) which didn't find a place in "double", are as follows:

(1) The inaccuracies allowed de Porshnev³, and also allowed at a reprint of its manuscript are corrected, links to sources, writing of names, initials, etc. are refined.

(2) After a thorough verification of proofs from 1972 published in the 1974 book, with the result that restored a number of important exceptions, not seen before.

(3) Fragments of the text reduced still before a set of 1972 (first of all, sendings in the remained chapters to chapters reduced) are restored according to earlier manuscripts.

(4) found to be unlawful plan to restore the structure of the book division of all the chapters of the four "parts" (the original Porshnev's plan)⁴.

(5) Fixed errors when scanning typewritten texts of chapters that were not included in the 1974 edition. As publishers of "double" had the opportunity to work with only the electronic version prepared by me, but not with the author's text, the "twin" is not corrected some of my mistakes, distorted thought of Porshnev. Finally, it is important to note that the publishers of "twin" was made in the text of the book of Porshnev much a change, not specifying their editorial clarifications: author's names of some sections of chapters and one chapter are changed, changes are made to texts of some chapters and even the author's sequence of chapters is changed...

³ All corrections are stipulated in "Notes of the scientific editor".

⁴ See Whitte O.T. "I - a happy man ..." This edition, p. 680-687.

This book is extraction from more extensive composition conceived and prepared by me from the middle of the 20th years. Mentally, I called it "The criticism of human history." The present book belongs to the middle part of the work mentioned. Its first part by the "paleontologic" analysis of problems of history, philosophy and sociology should lead to the conclusion, that a further level of the totality of the sciences of the people will depend on a substantial shift in the knowledge of the beginning of human history. The middle part, which is partially represented, contains the contours of this shift. The last part — ascending viewing of development of humanity of from this point of view offered understanding of the beginning^I.

But it may well be me not on the cards to finish all work, and the present book remains its only trace. That she had the character of an independent whole, it opens a chapter in another motivating broad theoretical significance of the theme¹. It will be a question in this book of a great theme of philosophy and natural sciences: about a correspondence and genetic transition between the biological and social. Or, in understanding of old philosophers, about character and sources of communication in people between a body and soul. Otherwise, about the nature of the accomplished transformation between an animal and the man. Is not this what is meant by the "mystery man"?

Mystery of man and is the beginning of the mystery of human history. What began? Why and how began? When began? The last question is on the surface, generates controversy in the Soviet scientific press. If to speak about a narrow chronological aspect, three answers are available.

1. People and their specific, i.e. not purely biological, history began about one and a half-two million years ago. It was caused by emergence in the late Tertiary or early Quaternary geological epoch of species of orthograde highest primacies with a brain initially more evolutionarily closer to anthropoids than to modern man, but with a hand, that can produce tools, let extremely elementary, but testifying about the main complex

It was caused by emergence at the end of tertiary or the beginning of a quarternary geological era of species of orthograde highest primacies with a brain first still evolutionarily closer to the anthropoid, than to the modern person, but with a hand, capable to make tools, let extremely elementary, but testifying to the main complex

This was due to the appearance in the late Tertiary or early Quaternary geological epoch of bipedal apes with a brain initially more evolutionarily closer to anthropoids than to modern man, but with a hand that can produce weapons, though very basic, but indicative of the main complex

¹ The sketch of such exodrium was given by me in the report article: Porshnev B.F. About the beginning of human history / / Philosophical problems of historical science. Moscow, 1969 (in Russian: Поршнев Б.Ф. О начале человеческой истории // Философские проблемы исторической науки. М., 1969).

of human social and spiritual qualities. The emergence of the latter - the "step", even "act"².

2. People - a specie of Homo sapiens, formed 40 - 35 thousand years ago, and finally - 25 - 20 thousand years ago, and this is only the maximum duration of human history; as for the previous year and a half to two million years of development of ancient forms, they can be fully interpreted in concepts of natural sciences. The transition process of becoming human is a segment that begins with late paleanthropines and includes early neanthropines³.

3. Both of the above facets mark the beginning and end ("two steps") process of the formation of the human preceding animal form⁴.

Each of these three directions claims for only correct understanding of a scientific and philosophical method. Each is based on different kinds of evidence.

For completeness it should be noted and the fourth offered position: anthropoids (anthropomorphous apes) have the rudiments of properties, such as "exploratory behavior", "tool activity", which allows them to counter with people to all other animal kingdom, - therefore, the change goes back to the Miocene.

Resolution of the dispute should be based primarily on the natural sciences. In power they or are powerless with sufficient completeness to explain features of activity of the highest primacies to Homo sapiens, as well as to explain its emergence? If the power-nothing in the law to limit. The great philosophical principle to which, maybe, would capitulate dualism and Descartes, and Kant, outlined I.P. Pavlov: "I don't deny psychology as knowledge a person's inner world. That less I am inclined to deny something from the deepest inclinations of human spirit. Here and now I only defend and I confirm the absolute, indisputable rights of natural-science thought everywhere and until then where and while it can show the power. And who knows where this possibility comes to an end!”⁵ This book is a review of cash and emerging powers to promote the natural sciences into the mystery of human origin. However, the directing beam has to throw on a subject not the philosophy of natural science, but the philosophy of history. In particular, the category of historicism. Once the history looked as ripples of accidents on a surface of the immovable, unchangeable

² This look prevails, its "manifesto" can be found in article: Kraynov D.L. Some questions of becoming of the human and human society//Lenin ideas in studying of history of primitive society, slave-owning and feudalism. M, 1970 (in Russian: Крайнов Д.Л. Некоторые вопросы становления человека и человеческого общества // Ленинские идеи в изучении истории первобытного общества, рабовладения и феодализма. М., 1970).

³ See: Porshnev B.F. Whether scientific revolution in a primatologiya is possible now? // Philosophy questions. M, 1966, No. 3 (in Russian: Поршнев Б.Ф. Возможна ли сейчас научная революция в приматологии? // Вопросы философии. М., 1966, №3).

⁴ This quasi reconciling contrast view nevertheless is near to the first; its finishing formulations and the argument see: Roginsky Ya.Ya. Anthropogenesis problems. M, 1969 (in Russian: Рогинский Я.Я. Проблемы антропогенеза. М., 1969).

⁵ Pavlov I.P. Natural science and the brain / / Pavlov I.P. Complete Works. Edition 2, amplified. T. 111, Vol. 1. Moscow - Leningrad, 1951, p. 125 (in Russian: Павлов И.П. Естествознание и мозг // Павлов И.П. Полное собрание сочинений. Издание 2-е, дополненное. Т. 111, кн. 1. М. – Л., 1951, с. 125.).

ocean in the depths of human essence. The historians of the Renaissance, as Guicciardini and Machiavelli, and historians of the Enlightenment, including Voltaire, saw the wisdom in this opinion: as if all changes in history, including not only the events, but also customs, state, household, but people something with their characters, desires, needs, and desires are always the same. That history is the development, it was discovered only in the late XVIII - early XIX century a wake-up action of the Great French Revolution, Condorcet was discovered in a rectilinear form of quantitative material progress, and a great idealist, Hegel - in the form of a dialectical negation of one another succession of ages. But only with the emergence of Marxist idea of world-historical development, including development of the person, received a scientific basis, and itself became the theoretical basis of all of scripture history. Only from this time spurring historicism. Yet Marxist historical psychology faces here and there on the habit of historians to this always to itself equal, unchanged in the deep psychological effect, i.e. immobile person in general.

This particularly affects when it comes to the distant past. If, in the words of Engels, the science about thinking — the science of the historical development of human thinking, that many archaeologists and anthropologists believe that the ideas have history, but in any case not thinking. The same applies to the basics of feelings, perceptions, human activity. Historicism but inexorably pushed over the last refuge of immutability. Once everything is in the history develops, changes not only in quantity (and this implies also a transition into its opposite), and hence there is no room for the view that everything is changing in the world-historical movement of mankind, except for the support of this movement, the constant of its molecules - man. Changes in society were at the same changes people, of course, not their anatomy, but their psyche, which is social in everything, at all its levels. Expose themselves with their subjectivity to place the subjects of the past - a form of anthropomorphism. The most egregious sin is a scientist, when it refers to the most ancient layers of history - to prehistory.

Historicism leads to the thesis: at the dawn of history, people in their mental characteristics was not only it isn't similar to that of modern humans, but also represented his opposite. Only if we understand the matter so, between these poles stretches reality, not verbally declared road development. Disclose more particularly biological and social content of this thesis - a task of some chapters of the book lying before the reader.

Social can not be reduced to biological. Social there are nothing to remove, as from the biological. In the book, I offer a solution to this antinomy. It is based on the idea of inversion. The latter can be expressed briefly as follows: a certain quality (A / B) is transformed in the course of its opposite (B / A), - here everything isn't new, but everything is new^6*. But should imagine not one, but two inversions

^6* See the scheme of such inversion is lower, in Chapter I, page 43.

that follow one after the other. Of these, more recent one of which has just been discussed: consecutive historicism leads to the conclusion that in the early history of everything in human nature to the contrary, the now (if to distract from that, as now we drag out a lot of the inheritance of antiquity): the course of history represented an inversion of the initial condition. And this last, preceded and led to it is another inversion: "inversion" of the animal nature in this, with what people have started the story. Consequently, the story completely falls under the formula Feuerbach "reversing inverted"^II. But this book is devoted only to the history beginning. Accordingly, its demand - a philosophical and natural-science - is to establish the first inversion.

But we have to anticipate this conclusion before starting engagement. In the humanities, in order to achieve the objective truth, it is necessary to treat the object subjectively. Marx should have denied capitalism, to fight with him, to learn his secret. It's one thing to love your profession, in this case, prehistory, the other - to admire fossil Neanderthal. In the latter case, the forecast one - blinding. Before the researcher prehistory dilemma: or look pleasing to the symptoms which appeared in the world of the human mind - our the mind, or to seek evidence that behind us - the deeper the better - then reigned, from which we got off, repel, becoming gradually in the course of the history of common-sense people. In the first case, unavoidable "act" (with all its sad consequences for natural science). In the second - can achieve scientific knowledge.

The last thing I will reproach, that the present theory is complex. All that is in the books have been written about the origin of human, especially when it comes to mentality, is the fact one bad, that is insufficiently complex. Usually attracts the conceptual apparatus is ridiculously simple. And I will take just the opposite criticism: if to me show, that and my attempt is not planned sufficiently complex research program. Complexity I say here in several senses. The complexity of the presentation - the least of the difficulties. Difficult the objective structure of the thing, complex relationship of the aggregate used in the study need science. Each of them has a giant machine, a "language" in the narrow and broad sense. I am not arguing here against specialization. On the contrary, full of knowledge attained infinite reduction field. Possible for life to work productively on the details. But the return law works also: need a common project, the general drawing, then let all the detailed design of a more or less unchanged.

This book — only a framework, a skeleton. But chapters compose the whole. It is a design supports and strengthens the chapters, otherwise I would not have had the life and any one of them. Each chapter of this book should be to make the theme of the whole lab, and each such laboratory - even contact with many experts. But someone has to, aware of the responsibility of general drawing of a new design, yet his offer. Otherwise private disciplines at lag of the general scheme are similar to the run-up castors of the mechanism, by inertia sliding who where. It's time to re-assemble them, in the future - to synthesize the complex science of man, people.

As for the beginning of human history, some private discipline, especially paleoarheologiya and paleoanthropology, believe that they are now considering the subject fully and comprehensively. But in this self-delusion and is in trouble. The author of this book does not pretend to say any own word in the morphology and stratigraphy of fossils of human ancestors, nor in the morphology and stratigraphy of stone tools and other artifacts. But he goes his own way, where the interpretation of archaeologists and anthropologists, besides their consciousness, ends their real competence and their confidence reigns in a vacuum in place subcontractory sciences. This representation corresponds to a certain extent the actual underdevelopment not only within these sciences, how many their application to Pleistocene time. None zoologist not engaged seriously Quaternary ecology of man's ancestors, and yet the taxonomy proposed by paleontologists to surrounding these ancestors of animal species can not replace ecology, biocenology, ethology. Neither a psychologist or neuropsychologist not engaged with his hand phylogenetic aspect of the science, preferring to listen to improvisations of experts in absolutely other part: able to excavate and organize findings, but do not know how to pose and very simple experiment in physiological or psychological laboratory. None qualified sociologist and philosopher didn't write about biological prehistory of people of something that would not be induced in the end by the same paleoarheologist and paleoanthropologist, which themselves would need these issues in scientific supervision.

It is a vicious circle. The concept and the writings of archaeologists and anthropologists studying the Paleolithic period, only occupy less than half of the field, where they are professionally competent, and more than half - of the field, where they are not yet aware of his ineligibility. This concerns, on the one hand, the science of psychology, sociology, theoretical economics, on the other - the current level of zoology, based both on evolutionary theory and genetics, and the biocenology. However, the coverage of these vast fields of "foreign land", which just seems to them a "no man's land", all taken for granted, and become well-tested and popular.

As it historically? Anthropologists formed as specializing in human paleontology, morphology, anatomy. But in the science of anthropology has to "passing" to treat the problems that require very different skills: social genesis, Glottogonic, paleopsihologiya, economic theory. The way of thinking of those sciences that lie outside biology, anthropology, the nature of their training far. Quite the contrary was the case with the formation of archaeologists working Palaeolithic, but the result is very similar. Knowledge of a paleolith archeology as a part, is attributed to the humanities, it is part of history. These professionals with the greatest horror considering the looming prospect of the inevitable movement of their profession in the realm of biological sciences. They are not prepared for this. True, each of them familiar with the geology and fauna of the Quaternary period, but only in terms of stratigraphy.

All knowledge of the subject in a giant complex of natural sciences relating to human evolution can be divided into three groups: a) morphology anthropogenesis b) ecology, biocenology and ethology anthropogenesis c) physiology of higher nervous activity and psychology anthropogenesis. In fact, science is developed only the first group as a whole, but the bone material in the hands of scientists still rare. The second group studied only a small sector of stone (and other material) products, and the remains of the fire and dwellings, with complete disregard for the life of the natural environment, especially the animals. But with the third group the situation is very bad: there in front of us there is almost no real science.

Much will have to pass over the virgin soil. In science, there is no forbidden neighboring or distant site where hung a sign: “The entrance is forbidden strangers”. Scientists are allowed - double-check everything, tried everything, all thought, is not valid any barriers diplomas or delimitation disciplines. Prohibited him only one thing: not to be aware of what has been done to it in any matter for which he undertook. Of course, no one can have a thorough awareness even in the same specialty. But from the scientist another is required: good to know the borders of his knowledge. This means - to have enough information outside their narrow specialty, to know that that's what you do not know. This is called orientation. Modesty doesn't disturb daring. Once you see clearly the limits of knowledge, and a course of research needs to step to the "foreign land", you do not think too much of it, "nobody's", and increase the ratio of awareness. Thus you see the far boundaries and contours of what lies behind them. If, on the one hand, this book offers an alternative to the widespread view of the origin of human, on the other hand, it is an alternative to eliminate the trend historicism in the sciences about human. Whether can not interfere, in fact, the science of historical becoming, change and development of human to include it as being constant with the animals and machines in the laws and generalizations of a higher order? This trend means striving to statics, the maximum elimination of the genesis and chronology of dynamics. In this sense we can talk about achronistic or agenetic thinking.

The idea of development by some bourgeois scholars now seem heritage XIX century, departing during the XX century on the warehouse and the repose of the arsenal of "big ideas". The release of the categories of development see a known cogitative prize - in the level of generalization, since this reduces the tendency of scientific thought, first of all, the genesis generalizable phenomenon, and thus the "substrate". In other words, out of sight is eliminated the variability of phenomena in the name of their formalization and modeling. In the foreground here is a big extension of the application of mathematics and mathematical logic, a huge technical results. But in the background there is a revision of the human problem. Cybernetics enormously enriched the technology, and its collateral fruit, “cybernetics” claims in psychology impoverish the sciences

about human. All the "great flood" can be expressed negative thesis: history does not exist, or rather, the story is not important. And because the history of people is most historical, the modern "big idea" is making an extraordinary effort to deprive her of that awkward quality - historicism. Made a lot of proposals on how to cut up a human history to any structure, substructure, types, models as they are not portrayed as a necessary sequence in time. Accordingly, the notion of progress in bourgeois literature expelled from the theory of history as a sign of old-fashioned, almost the savagery⁷. The campaign against the idea of ​​progress should be thought of as a logically necessary component of the upcoming front against genetic. Saving the same category of progress (or, in theory, let's regress) as a mandatory continuity periods and as a general vector of change would be the separation of this front.

The essence of this line of scientific thinking in the XX. is as follows: achieved great progress and expansion of the application of mathematics and abstract logic by formalizing knowledge, but at the expense of the victims of the two objects of knowledge, beyond the mathematics - the time and man.

As for the time, the very theoretical physics vainly besieging this category. Time in general while remains blank and unchanging, it is represented a constant coordinate the world, even if in it would occur nothing, and today's scientific picture of the world avenges him for that - if possible get rid of him, achieving a logical right shift phenomenon over time, how to rearrange things in a fixed indoor space.

Refusal of the genetic answers not only a vision of this or that subject, but also to determine the physical and philosophical ideas of the time. Subjects may remain immutable at any point on the timeline as being seen as indifferent and external to it.

To refusal of a genetizm trend corresponds to distract from substrates, i.e. consider them interchangeable, and to compare among themselves subjects of the most various levels of evolution of the formalized schemes of their functioning. In fact, as their substrates - it materialized their origin, is that they belong to a particular era of development of matter. The war over time gave birth to a scheme of "black box": we know and want to know only that "information", which was included in or introduced into the device, do not know and don't want to know what it would be like in the tightly sealed device occurred, because it is just absolutely various depending on its material nature, finally, we know and want to know that as a result of such processing came out. We are not interested in a box, we are only interested in what is going on at the entrance and exit. Therefore its modeling is possible:

⁷ On combating the idea of ​​progress in the modern American and British philosophy of history, see: Y. Semenov Social progress and social philosophy of the modern bourgeoisie. A critical study of the American and British theory. M., 1965 (in Russian: Семенов Ю.И. Общественный прогресс и социальная философия современной буржуазии. Критический очерк американской и английской теории. М., 1965).

making it out of any material on other internal circuitry or - in the abstract - without any substrate, but with preservation of the characteristics of the input and output. Thus possibly its formal, that is, purely mathematical modeling. And then these mental operations are tested practice - turn into an unprecedented new technical devices, very often highly effective.

Along with these utilitarian and theoretical winnings from ignoring the time (evolution) falls in science meaning of "lower" and "higher" even seemed uncomplicated sense of "simple" and "complex". The main thing now is not a row from the lower to the higher, from simple to complex, but common, that might be found at all levels - is a series of one and the same. From the concept of "complexity" is just multiplication or exponentiation: for example, the "machine created by other machines".

As for the human, as a phenomenon, the most tightly connected with time, i.e. with change and development over time, it has undergone the greatest devastation. Bourgeois science revived most simplistic view. Old view of the church, that the essence and nature of human can not be changed from the time of its creation and the fall until doomsday, uncritically existed yet and progressive historians and philosophers of the XVIII century, died there, but spread into new guises, including even interpretation of some geneticists. It is easy to see that the flip side of all the concepts of multiple synchronous or no required sequence of cultures, civilizations, social types is this decrepit religious postulate of similarity of their vehicle - a human; because it eliminates the question of change, transformation.

It does logically possible and transition to the representations of the fundamental identity of the human, on the one hand, with the machines, on the other - with the animals. It is true that in reality there is no such animal and such a machine. But after all they can be imagined! Imagine the same of the same dolphins that in all essentials, including a speech activity, they are essentially similar to humans. The more possible to imagine a machine that functions in all respects like a human, and this machine really unavoidably lives in the imagination of his contemporaries. In addition, there are two mental conditions: first, our brain is widely likened complicated calculating-machine logic, and data processor - the human brain. Secondly, universal character was gained by idea of modeling: everything in the world can be modeled as an abstract and materially (i.e., to create, whether it be from another, whether it be of a similar material, the precise functional similarity); therefore, ideally, can be modeled and artificially reproduce including humans.

When this possibility protect as almost the cornerstone of modern scientific thinking, there is a counter question: and why it was necessary to reproduce the person or his brain, even if it were feasible? Cars still didn't reproduce any function or a human organ, but grandiosely strengthened and transformed: bucket of the excavator doesn't reproduce our handful, but rather it overcomes. Assume that the complex

functions of the brain, including the creation, have separated into the simplest elements, and each of them in the same way to strengthen and transform with a machine - in front of us just set very special vehicles. Let's say they are integrated into a united system - easy to see that this is something infinitely far away from the human.

No, his dream to artificially reproduce (at least in theory) not with practical, but with a negative philosophy purpose: finally removed from the emerging "cybernated" system of science this hindrance. Of course, there's a kind of ecstasy mixed with new technology, like the medieval alchemists were chasing the homunculus, synthesized in the retort, as the mechanics of the XVIII century worked on the spring-jointed man, as engineers in the XIX - over the steam man. But the main thing - a victory over the mystery human. Once a person can disassemble and reassemble - then there is no mystery.

However, without the idea of development the materialism could be in the XVIII century. Now without the idea of development - is not materialism.

It is enough to ask: what kind of man you are going to build - what rights era, what country, what class, what the mental and ideological state? People all the time are not the same, all of them are deeply changed, except the anatomy and physiology of the species Homo sapiens. And before this kind of ancestral species have other anatomy and physiology, including the brain.

As you can see, the legacy of the "old” XIX century - before the challenge. The idea of ​​development was the basis and Darwinism and Marxism. It is a question not simply of defending these great scientific theories, born one hundred years ago. Should be tested further constructive force in the battle for the idea of ​​development.

In other words, for the triumphant return of the time in science.

How to achieve this? Precisely through further study of human.

• • •

Necessary to say a few words pro domo sua. For many years I hear criticisms of caste: Why did I do this set of problems, when my direct specialty - European History XVII - XVIII centuries. I take this opportunity to correct a misunderstanding: the science of the beginning of human history, and first of all paleopsichology is my main specialty⁸. If in addition to her, I was engaged in the life of a lot of history, as well as philosophy and sociology, and political economy, that did not discredit me in this main area of my research. But questions of prehistory stand before me in those aspects in which they do not study my colleagues related specialties.

⁸ See: Porshnev B.F. [Physiological aspects of the transition from animal to man. Speech] / / Philosophical Aspects of the physiology of higher nervous activity and psychology. Moscow, 1963; he is. Paleopsihologii problems / / Proceedings of IV All-Union Congress of the Society of Psychologists. Tbilisi, 1971 (in Russian: Поршнев Б.Ф. [Физиологические аспекты перехода от животного к человеку. Выступление]// Философские аспекты физиологии высшей нервной деятельности и психологии. М., 1963; он же. Проблемы палеопсихологии // Материалы IV Всесоюзного съезда Общества психологов. Тбилиси, 1971); related works to paleopsihologii identified below in the text.

The problem of this study - the ability to dramatically shorten human history compared to the common views. If it helps make to see more correctly history as a whole, thus would increase the predictability factor. After all, history, intentionally or not, looking for ways to become a science of the future. However, the history would be more historical. The author is committed to the rule: "If you want to understand something, find out how it arose". But as you will understand the history of mankind, if the origin is lost in the depths of her, unknown to the accuracy or paleoarheologii or paleoanthropology, goes into the blackness of the geological past. Under this condition, it is impossible to portray the history as a trajectory, for each point on the path you ought to be set aside from the beginning. Every fact in the trajectory of world history should be characterized by its remoteness from scratch, and then the fact would carry in his description and explanation, like the tail of a comet, this segment is a "learn how it arose"¹.

Empirically, our contemporary knows how quickly there is an updating of the historical environment in which we live. If he is now 75 years old and if his life is divided into three twenty-fifth, they clearly show that each piece is much richer with innovations, than previous. But for the life of his ancestor on similar time had considerably less historical dynamics, and so on in depth of times. In the Middle Ages, in antiquity, especially in the Ancient East individual human life in general was not a suitable measure for the flow of the history: it measured by dynasties - whole chains of lives. On the contrary, the person who starts his life now, for the future 75 years, no doubt, will experience much greater changes of the historical environment than experienced our seventy- five-contemporary. Everything suggests that the next technical, scientific, and social change will accelerate and consolidate throughout his life.

¹ Books Yu.I. Semenov’s and A.G. Spirkin’s illustrate that the question remains open. See Y.I. Semenov Yu.I.. How arose a mankind. Moscow, 1966 Spirkin A.G. The origin of consciousness. Moscow, 1960 (in Russian: Семенов Ю.И. Как возникло человечество. М., 1966; Спиркин А.Г. Происхождение сознания. М., 1960).

The fundamental thesis, which will form the basis of further discussion is the idea that human history is a progressive being accelerated process and accelerating and out of it can't be understood. We shall not deal with the vast problems, not be whether to enter the dynamics of human history in a more extensive line-up: in a possible law of acceleration history of the Universe, the acceleration of Earth's history, the acceleration history of life on Earth². It would mean sealing time innovations (cumulative and irreversible), and in this sense his quickening. This concerned a very general problem of acceleration of world time, in other words, its all the more fullness innovations. Human history would look like segment of the curve is characterized by the highest speed, more precisely, the greatest acceleration. Although the Tertiary and Quaternary periods of geological development of the biosphere reaches maximum acceleration, we can still human social history to start from scratch, as it were: acceleration continues, but it is only possible thanks to the fact that in this world there is a new and higher form of motion, in which the previous form, the biological transformation, may already be equated with immobility. And in fact, Homo sapiens during the history of body does not change.

Different historical processes historians are divided into periods. Periodization - the basic method of ordering all, whether short, whether it is a long, public process in the history of cultural and political development of a country, in the history of the party, the war, in the biography of the historical character, in the change of civilizations. And here I reviewed dozens of private historical periodization different end segments. Conclusion: any periods of any historical process, though relatively short, if it is more or less objectively, i.e. grasps its own rhythm process is acceleration. This means that the period for which he shared the historians, not of equal, opposite, usually, one by one everything is shorter in time. The only exceptions are those series of dates that are not periods, but the simple chronology of events, such as the reigns, etc.

In the lengthy period, for which divide world history, acceleration always expressed clearly. Stone Age long century metal, which in turn is longer than the machine age. In the Stone Age the Upper Paleolithic is longer than Mesolithic, Mesolithic is longer than Neolithic. The Bronze Age is longer than the Iron. Ancient history is longer medieval, medieval - longer new, new - longer than the latest. Periodization adopted in any of them, in turn, draws acceleration.

Of course, every scheme of periodization may reflect a subjective interest in closer. One can also argue that we just always better to know what chronologically closer to us, and therefore the amount of information makes highlight such irregular intervals. However, the search for periods not motivated even distribution of educational or research material to

² See: Pajitnov A.M. The Dialectics of accelerating the progressive development (to the statement) / / Works of Irkutsk polytechnical institute. Irkutsk, 1966. Vyp. 29 . Series of social sciences. Philosophy (in Russian: Пажитной А.М. О диалектике ускорения прогрессивного развития (К постановке вопроса) //Труды Иркутского политехнического института. Иркутск, 1966. Вып. 29. Серия общественных наук. Философия).

let unequal chronological boxes, and qualitative change in the course of a development. And given the objections can not be attributed to the distant ages, studied by archeology, which can not significantly affect preferential affinity of this or that culture to our time.

In short, we see that the river of history accelerates its pace, even by studying some of its jets. These or those processes running out, end the cycle limit acceleration, because he - a convergent series, but in the meantime others already are gaining higher speeds. But is there in general a history of the world as a single process? The first to suggest an affirmative answer was Hegel. However, until it already existed theory of human progress, for example Condorcet scheme^3*. It was a straight-line evolution, "gradual" growth of civilization. Hegel's scheme of world history for the first time presented it as a dynamic echeloned entity with quality fractures and mutual negation of the eras, in moving the center of world history from one country to another, but with a single vector of the total traffic. The essence of the world, according to Hegel, - progress in the consciousness of freedom. Initially, the prehistoric tribes reign general lack of freedom and injustice. With the emergence of the state progress embodied in the change of state and legal foundations of society: in ancient despotism - the freedom of one under slavery the rest, later - freedom minority, then - the freedom of all, but only in the Christian principle, but not in practice. Finally, the French Revolution begins the era of true freedom. Five great eras, the five spiritual and political formations and deny one another, and at the same time forming a whole.

Marx and Engels, saving idea, turned it upside down. State-legal content they replaced economic formations: basis of social formation is a certain way of production; its innermost essence - the relation of working people to the means of work, the way they connect, as we see them in the past history is always separated.

The similarity to the Hegelian world historical periodization progress remained in the Marxist scheme in many ways, starting with the fact, that, as there, the first link - the realm of complete lack of freedom, because the absence of private ownership and exploitation, classes and the state does not mean that even in prehistoric humans as insignificant measure power over things and their actions; people there are many more slave than slavery^I.

In vain, some authors attributed to Marx and Engels any backward glance at the primitive society. Among their various statements dominant motive is just the idea of the absolute lack of freedom of the individual in prehistoric tribes and communities. They stressed that there is no possibility of a person to take whatever a decision, because any decision was beforehand predetermined by patrimonial and tribal custom. Marx wrote about it in "Capital": "... single individual is so strong attached by an umbilical cord to the family or community, as a single bee to bee hive"⁴. Returning to the

^3* Condorcet J.A. Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the human mind. Moscow, 1936 (in Russian: Кондорсе Ж.А. Эскиз исторической картины прогресса человеческого разума. М., 1936).

⁴ Marx K. Capital, Vol 1 / / Marx-Engels Collected Works. Edition 2. T. 23. Moscow, 1960, p. 346 (in Russian: Маркс К. Капитал, т. 1 // Маркс К., Энгельс Ф. Сочинения. Издание 2-е. Т. 23. М., 1960, с. 346).

idea, Engels wrote: “Tribe, clan and their institutions were sacred and inviolable, were naturally higher authority, which the individual is certainly remained subordinate their feelings, thoughts and actions. No matter how imposing look in our eyes, the people of that era, they are indistinguishable from each other, they do not come off yet, in the words of Marx, from the umbilical cord of the primitive community”⁵. "Idyllic," Marx ironically, rural communities “limited human mind the narrowest limits, making it a docile instrument of superstition, imposing on him chains of slavery traditional rules, depriving it of all grandeur, any historical initiative"⁶.

On opposite, a progress pole, at communism - the triumph of reason and freedom.

Like Hegel, between these two extreme states is a transition in its opposite, i.e., the absolute lack of freedom for absolute freedom in three progressive era, but the era is not primarily self-awareness, but economic formation of society, i.e. through the development of forms of ownership. All three, according to Marx, are based on the antagonism and struggle. Slavery begins with the fact that age-old, primitive, primordial submission of man to unfreedom is replaced let deaf and helpless, but the resistance; not just slaves to fear the Lord, but the Lord - slaves. Production history with the history of antagonism goes in the line of ascent at feudalism and capitalism.

Like Hegel, five formations, five great periods, are necessary to follow one another. But what a contrast between the deepest philosophical intuition of Hegel and Marx's theory of scientific method inexorable progress!^7*

But here and there before us clearly supports idea of ​​world history as a single, whole process. Besides,^II peering into five successive socio-economic systems of Marx, we can easily find that, if we decompose the world history for the five segments, they make it possible to detect and quantify the total acceleration of the historical process.

Two themes - the growing role of the masses in history and an acceleration of history - were the two sides of the overall theme of the unity of the world-historical process and at the same time, the regular sequence of socio-economic systems⁸. Each subsequent mode of production is a step forward

⁵ F. Engels, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State / / K. Marx and F. Engels, ibid. T. 21. Moscow, 1961, p. 99 (in Russian: Энгельс Ф. Происхождение семьи, частной собственности и государства // Маркс К., Энгельс Ф. Там же. Т. 21. М., 1961, с. 99).

⁶ Marx K. British Rule in India / / K. Marx and F. Engels, ibid. T. 9. Moscow, 1957, p. 135 (in Russian: Маркс К. Британское владычество в Индии // Маркс К., Энгельс Ф. Там же. Т. 9. М., 1957, с. 135).

^7* See: Porshnev B.F. Periodization of world-historical progress in Hegel and Marx. Report submitted to the International Congress of Hegel (Paris, April 1969) / / Philosophy. M., 1969, № 2 (in Russian: Поршнев Б.Ф. Периодизация всемирно-исторического прогресса у Гегеля и Маркса. Доклад, представленный к Международному Гегелевскому конгрессу (Париж, апрель 1969)// Философские науки. М., 1969, №2).

⁸ See: Porshnev B.F. The increasing role of the masses in history / / Problems of Philosophy. Moscow, 1954, № 4, who also. Acceleration of the rhythm of history / / Problems of Peace and Socialism. Prague, 1961, № 12 (in Russia: Поршнев Б.Ф. Возрастание роли народных масс в истории // Вопросы философии. М., 1954, №4; он же. Ускорение ритма истории // Проблемы мира и социализма. Прага, 1961, №12); aka. Social progress in the light of modern historical science / / What does the future of mankind? Proceedings of the international exchange of ideas, organized magazine “Problems of Peace and Socialism” and the Center for Marxist Studies (RCMS) in Raymond in May 1961, Prague, 1964 (in Russian: Общественный прогресс в свете современной исторической науки // Какое будущее ожидает человечество? Материалы международного обмена мнениями, организованного редакцией журнала “Проблемы мира и социализма” и Центром марксистских исследований (СЕРМ), в Руайемоне в мае 1961 г. Прага, 1964).

in the emancipation of man. All methods of production before communism continued dependence of man - his slavery in the broadest sense. But how deeply changed the nature of this dependence! In the depths of the absolute identity of the individual to his hive or swarm; later the person or people is the main means of production, which is imposed on the property; then it becomes semiproper which already backs monopoly ownership of land; finally, the following property to the person apparently erased, but enormously inflated exclusive ownership of all other means of production, without access to the working man who all the same to die of hunger (the market or "economic" relationship).

Think about it, everyone will understand that the three-cut total emancipation era, these three shifts each other mode of social production is the extent to which they were steps in the emancipation of man, there were gains of the man made ​​in the fight. All three are full of antagonistic formations through struggle - let the formless and spontaneous at the beginning and at deeper layers - against slavery in all of its forms modernizing.

Hence it is clear, among other things, that the transition from each of the three antagonistic formations to the next could be nothing but the revolutionary explosion of the class contradictions that have accumulated and manifested throughout its previous historical takeoff^9*. They were very different, the social revolution. The storm in the last few centuries closed the heavens of antiquity, not all even agree to call a revolution, but it was still a real social revolution in the adequate form in which it could only then erupt - in the form of intermittent popular movements, invasions, the great resettlements and deep erosion. The second great epoch of social revolution - a classic pass from feudalism to capitalism. Third - proletarian assault capitalism, open the exit to the socialist era.

If you mark the cutting edge of world history on this grand landmarks - from the emergence of the earliest slave states and three for each of the final formation of the revolution, it is found that very accelerating progression, which was discussed. Several authors believe that the duration of each formation or length is shorter than the previous one, about three or four times. Obtained a geometric progression, or exponential curve (see Figure 1).

At least in the first approximation, it is possible to calculate and draw. Consequently, there is the possibility of this very generalized logic of history the opposite way on a curve, at least approximately determine the start and the primary rate of movement of human history: the historical zero. But before you commit to such a reduction, it is necessary to consider another aspect of the general theory of history.

^9* See: Porshnev B.F. The role of the social revolutions in changing formations / / Problems of social and economic systems: historical and typological studies, Moscow, 1975 (in Russian: Поршнев Б.Ф. Роль социальных революций в смене формаций // Проблемы социально-экономических формаций: историко-типологические исследования М., 1975).

Since the slave mode of production we see on the map of the world people and countries advanced and backward, standing at the level of the new for its time the mode of production and as it is late, standing at previous levels. Now on the world map are all five methods of production. May have thought that, having started all together, people then moved at different speeds.

But if so, it would be impossible to talk about asking for some law-rate history in general. However, in reality before us is not independent of each other variables. Backlog of some nations is a direct function of the nomination ahead of some others. So the question is, throughout history all three antagonistic class formations. The more we examine the concept of a society based on the antagonism, the more it appears that the political economy of isolates with the "pure" mode of production, which stands at the "front line" of economic movement of human society. But in the realm of political economy did not include consideration of how a general antagonism may exist, as it does not devour itself, barely born, but soon explodes society based on this volcano its existence? The answer to this question is just a more general sociological theory.

Socio-economic systems that we observe on the "cutting edge" of mankind, exist and develop only through the absorption of additional resources and the fruits of the labor of the rest of the world and a way of depreciation of internal antagonism^10*.

This worldwide process of pumping in the era of slavery, feudalism and capitalism only sometimes (at the first and third) are in the form of direct bleeding by metropolitan and empires surrounding "barbarians," distant "natives" in the colonies^III. More often and more deeply - pumping through many intermediate peoples and countries as a cascade of steps, above which highly but high-antagonistic society leading edge. Below - different less developed, backward and mixed structures. And deep down, even if related to the outside world, including with the neighbors, most scarce transactions, but bail out to infinity and endless in its variety of nationalities from five continents almost unknown

^10* See: Porshnev B.F. Periodization of world-historical progress ... Pp. 63-64 (in Russian: Поршнев Б.Ф. Периодизация всемирно-исторического прогресса... С. 63-64).

base that generates dew or honey to the great civilizations held. Pump that continuously pumps the fruits of the labor of the whole planet up gateways - is the difference in the level of productivity and economic relations in the intercourses.

Such, in a few words the answer to the question whether moving to its solid mass of humanity in the course of world history, in the course of accelerating progressive changes committed in antagonistic class era at its leading edge. Yes, on account of the views history appears certainly as a single process^IV.

Let's return to his property - the acceleration. In the history of human liberation, we can clearly see, perhaps, only acceleration. We can not describe how the same people will be in the future. Meanwhile at reached speeds and capacities it is time to see far forward. And, it turns out, we do not have the other tools as seriously to look back. How there was a person in that not freedom which left by work, fight and thought? In other words, if there is a law of acceleration of world history, it is imperative to put the problem of new studies starting this process. That the law is, it can be illustrated visually once again with enclosed schemes (see schemes 2, 3).

In these schemes is given of the relative time (absolute time is measured in geological scale). The reader can mentally convert these schemes so that each division on the transport, say, every degree associate unequal amount of time. Let's say, taking the last degree per unit (all the same 200 it is years or 33 years), but one degree will count as two units, or four, or in some other progression, you can take on other mathematical laws. In such transformed scheme transformed eras will creep away evenly, i.e. they won't be condensed at the end, but the idea of accelerate world history will receive a new expression, closer to mathematical thinking.

However, for the first scheme hardly possible to pick up a chronological progression of the degrees, at which the epoch would have settled evenly. Here the "prehistoric times" completely crushed "historical time". Recently took a tiny fraction of the process, that visually Toynbee's mistake as though comes true: all fitted into a "historical time", can be considered "philosophically simultaneous " compared to the length of "prehistory"^V. In the second scheme for such aberrations have no place. Just also it is forthcome to us further to choice between them.

So far, we restrict few conclusions from the above. If there was no acceleration, can be mentally imagine certain logic of history, quite abstracting from any duration, i.e. length of time of each interval between social revolutions, sharing formations: could ignore the empirical fact that the life of any mode of production took some time; because it changes in circumstances could prove to be shorter, and do not know how much. But no, even in complete abstraction can not be distracted from time, because there will be

1 - First freezing; 2 - Second freezing; 3 - Third freezing; 4 - Fourth freezing; 5 - First interglacial; 6 - Second interglacial; 7 - Third interglacial; 8 - Historical time; 9 – Günz; 10 – Mindel; 11 – Riss; 12 – Würm; 13 – Donau; 14 - Lower Paleolithic ; 15 – Middle; 16 – Upper; 17 - pebble tools; 18 – bilateral tools; 19 - tools from the slivers and sometimes bilateral; 20 - tools on the plates; 21 – Oldowan; 22 – Abbeville; 23 – lower; 24 – Acheulean; 25 – upper; 26 – Mousterian; 27 - tools from the slivers; 28 - ? 29 - ? 30 – Levallois; 31 – Perigordian lower; 32 – Orynyak typical; 33 – Perigordian upper; 34- Solutrean; 35 – Madeleine; 36 – Mesolithic; 37 - neolithic, bronze.

time in the form of acceleration, in other words, the duration will declare itself in the form of inequality duration^VI. Similarly, each antagonistic formations held in turn by accelerating subsections - formation, maturity and decline. If we embrace the whole problem of acceleration of human history as a whole, followed by the conclusion: in the history factor dynamics acted, i.e. history has been progress, but acted and return factor - inhibition, the latter became relatively weaker in competition with factor in the dynamics, which is expressed by the acceleration of history. But only under communism dynamics invariably has the advantage over the brake.

Initial segment of the history was the most slowly current, therefore, on it braking had overweight over dynamics. But this initial segment is a necessary member of the trajectory, which, as we already know, will be characterized by the type of exponential acceleration.

Finally, we state again that our entire curve, and thus the initial segment of history - it is not the sum of a number of curves, that is, not the history of tribes and peoples, but the history of humanity as a single object.

It is difficult even to imagine a storm in the minds of 60 - 80 years of the XIX century on the origin of man. She has reached the limit and peak in 1891 - 1894 years - at the time of opening the remains of Pithecanthropus in the island Java. It was truly a great event, and perhaps the most attractive exhibit at the International Exhibition in Paris in 1900 was reconstructed life-size figures of the Javanese Pithecanthropus.

Prominent ally of C. Darwin - T. Gekcli called human origins "question of all questions". And these words are often repeated another equally eminent colleague of Charles Darwin - E. Haeckel. Invited in 1898 to speak at the International Congress of Zoology in Cambridge on any of the great general questions, exciting zoology and putting it in relation to other branches of knowledge, E. Haeckel began his speech by saying^I: “From these questions any doesn't represent such greatest general interest, such a deep philosophical meaning, as the question of the origin of human - this huge "question of all questions"”¹. Really, at that time the religion and natural sciences, belief and science here faced. Mankind has suddenly seen the light: it was almost blinded erupted knowledge of their biological origins, which the previous generation did not think. From now on, people thought of myself in a new way – natural-science "transformism" at the same time transformed his view of human.

Passed hundred years. Indirect effects of the coup spread in breadth. But the storm of the "origin of man from apes" swept somehow amazingly fast. Of course, the "monkey trial" recently befell here and there, but this belated rarities. The return is characteristic: problems of anthropogenesis occupy generally only narrow circle of experts. The general public is not worried. Attenuates the influx of young scientists. Theme seems exhausted.

And in special scientific magazines, and on the international congresses now study not so much an origin of the person in a broad sense, how many one aspect

¹ Haeckel Current knowledge of the phylogenetic development of man. SPb., 1899, c. 4 (in Russian: Геккель Э. Современные знания о филогенетическом развитии человека. СПб., 1899, c. 4; in German: Häckel Е. Über unsere Gegenwärtige Kenntnis vom Ursprung des Menschen. Stuttgart, 1898).