Ülo Vooglaid




The concerns relevant to the whole state are also the concerns of the people.
The people are capable of coping with concerns if the government creates the right conditions.



In Estonia, serious concerns and contradictions are often spoken of — those that are relevant to the whole state and its individual parts. Unfortunately, all of these conversations have one thing in common — they are just worried conversations that are not formulated as problems (see Figure 0.3.3.): poverty, low birth rates, emigration and immigration, lack of jobs and working hands, corruption, bureaucracy, demagoguery, etc. The problematic programs presented on the national broadcasting network have a format close to entertainment, while the problems themselves and their causes are not revealed.

The phenomena and processes mentioned as concerns cannot be eliminated or reduced directly. It is possible to change them by revealing the reasons for their emergence, deepening, and expansion. A system of measures could then be created to reduce (or eliminate) the causes and create as well as reinforce the necessary conditions.


What threatens the state and people?
FIGURE 13.0.1. What threatens the state and people?

In 2000, Estonian President Lennart Meri asked the question, “Why has our pace waned?” There was no answer then, and there is no answer to this day. In the same speech, President Meri noted, “The accumulation of national capital in Estonia has gone as sloppily as it did in the second half of the 19th century in Europe and in the United States. This process could not be balanced by civil society, the church, or love for one’s neighbor, or, what is most terrible, the realization that, in terms of its transparency, Estonia, along with the features of a state, has the features of a large family.”



Indeed, “doing something” is sometimes worse than doing nothing. “Doing something” can give the public the impression that their concern is noted and deemed so important that it will soon be behind them. In reality, empty activity will at best do no harm. Deliberations called “discussions of particularly important state topics” are especially empty and meaningless. They take up a lot of time and other resources. Polemics, instigated by people who are unable or do not bother to formulate a problem (see Figures 0.3.3. and 0.3.4.), are useless and bring disappointment, and it is only a matter of time before citizens get tired of such polemics.

A social science analysis is needed in order for the state, citizens, and society to achieve the necessary clarity. That involves some preparation. You can talk as much as you like about settling on Mars or the possibilities of preserving life on the Moon, but if something really needs to be done so that, for example, in Estonia itself the possibility of life in the villages is preserved in the future, then it is worth first modeling life and the living environment, outlining the features of life in a village and in a city, and then publicizing the identified causes of contradictions. Only after that is it possible to begin thinking about what should be done about these causes. It is necessary to take the system as a basis and consider it sufficiently systematically and comprehensively at all levels of regulation and management (see 7.2.).


  • The question is not what to do, who will do it, when will it start, how much will it cost, etc.
  • The question is what con-ditions and situation must be achieved, what system of measures must be created so that appropriate self-regulatory processes can begin.


Discussions whose goal is to leave an impression, where the apparent takes precedence over the real, are not satisfactory.

Something effective can be achieved if the causes of concerns are known (a system of functional and causal connections). The question is not what to do, who will do it, when will it start, how much will it cost, etc. The question is what conditions and situation must be achieved, what system of measures must be created so that appropriate self-regulatory processes can begin. Consequently, in addition to identifying the causes of the shabby condition, it is necessary to create a vision of the aim and a satisfactory condition, considered as a goal. As long as concerns — whether of village life or anything else — are not articulated as a problem, both statically and dynamically, it is impossible to create a program to reduce these causes and model the condition actually needed.

Next, we will thoroughly consider only a few concerns as examples, and each citizen can think for themself and look for ways to identify other concerns clearly enough.

The government and parliament cannot, in principle, resolve the contradictions that have formed in the state. It is only possible to create a system of necessary prerequisites for overcoming such contradictions and to ensure that these measures are actually applied. The people have concerns that they can deal with if they are framed as a problem, and the government creates the conditions to address the causes of these problems.



Poverty is a phenomenon that has an extremely complex mechanism of origin and impact. For clarity, at least the following questions should be answered:

  • What is poverty in the material (object) and immaterial (spiritual, intellectual, social) sense?
  • What characterizes poverty, wealth, and prosperity as phenomena, states of being, and processes?
  • What characterizes a poor person?
  • How and under what conditions could poverty be viewed in such a way as to gather reliable information about the causes of poverty and the conditions that contribute to wealth (prosperity)?
  • What, in turn, are the consequences of poverty?
  • What can be accompanied by an increase in prosperity?

Let’s try to clarify what this phenomenon called poverty is. Then let’s look at what causes poverty. It cannot be argued that such attempts have not been made before. But we can say that the picture is still hazy.

If the people possessed information, meaning professionally thoughtout answers to these questions, they could model a system of measures to reduce (or eliminate) the causes of poverty and to strengthen (or build) the factors of prosperity and wealth.


Poverty cannot be reduced by dealing with it.


In fact, there is also an urgent need to identify, formulate, and publicize the factors of family, regional, and social impoverishment, as well as the factors of development and flourishing, which we do not examine separately in this book.

People are equal only in the area of human rights. In every other sense, people are not equal. Everyone is unique and special — each person can be quite happy for some common reason and unhappy for some other reason, rich in some ways and poor in others, capable and helpless, sometimes worthy of admiration and, unfortunately, sometimes greedy, arrogant, indifferent, or worthy of censure and contempt. What does impoverishment or the growth of prosperity depend on?

  • Innate preconditions and abilities (inherited qualities) play a role.
  • The same role is played by at least:
    • the upbringing environment and the attitudes formed in its context;
    • habits, cognition, and recognition;
    • the thinking abilities and modes of thinking of those closest to you;
    • faith, hope, and love;
    • strength of emotion and willpower;
    • the state of the world;
    • confidence.

Poverty can be:

  • a consequence of the system of education and upbringing;
  • a consequence of the blindness of a particular individual;
  • a consequence of indifference (“let go” feeling) prevailing in society, the community, and the family;
  • a consequence of using insidious (addictive) “aid programs”;
  • a consequence of a natural, military, or political catastrophe;
  • a consequence of some ideological current or other false teaching;
  • a consequence of estrangement and/or alienation.

Poverty is also a person’s inability to cope in given circumstances and conditions, an assessment of the subject’s state of being and potential, etc.


Poverty factors
FIGURE 13.1.1. Poverty factors


Depending on the point of view, we see that poverty is (can be and seems to be) a consequence of long-standing unfair relationships (legal, political, ideological, cultural, etc. regulation). A child lagging behind begins with the fact that the child does not form feelings in a timely manner, feelings which should be formed according to the laws of nature. It is difficult to avoid a state of poverty if the elementary knowledge, skills, and experience that should appear by a certain age are not mastered and are not affixed in the form of a chain of connections, if the child’s vocabulary remains limited, there is no development of speech and independent thinking.

It would be inappropriate to say that nothing can be done about it in such a case. There’s always an opportunity to fix something! It is also true that some children mature differently than most. Recall that Albert Einstein, recognized as the man of the 20th century, was still in such a condition at the age of 9 that his parents were weighing the possibility of sending him to a special school for children with developmental disabilities.



The factors of poverty are:

  • fear of all life and of tomorrow, weak faith in oneself, the vagueness of the basic idea of life;
  • wrong reference points and a sloppy, careless attitude towards the use of time;
  • inability to set aims and goals, choose means, and establish rules for oneself;
  • habit of avoiding difficulties and living in captivity to alcohol, drugs, or other surrogates;
  • pessimism syndrome, the habit of looking at everything through dark glasses;
  • habit of not looking for opportunities for activity and achieving success, but looking for reasons for inaction or for deferring decisions and activities to the future or shifting them to others;
  • weak motivation for achievement. People brought up as objects of manipulation are dominated by a motive to avoid failure instead of striving for achievement, and everything they do is done superficially, somehow, in passing. Such people have neither the desire nor the opportunity for an in-depth relationship with anything;
  • an inadequate view of life. It recently became clear that there are more than 30,000 young people in Estonia who do not work or study, living off their parents without knowing what they really want or need. Most of this group have formed an inadequate idea about themselves, about life and the living environment, about the activity system and the cognition system, human relationships and interaction;
  • inability and unwillingness to work. Many are poor and are likely to remain poor because
  • they do not know how to work hard and do not want to work. All labor skills training in Estonia is shamefully weak and unsystematic;
  • erroneous self-identification and the resulting infantilism combined with low stress tolerance;
  • inability to decide. Many remained poor because they were incapable of making decisions as someone else always decided instead of them, and they themselves grew up as executors. Some hesitate and doubt, some do not dare to decide anything because they do not want the responsibility that comes with the decision and are used to postponing decisions or shifting them to other people;
  • inability to understand. Some people have such “long views” that they cannot figure out what to do, or why and how to do it; they are unable to anticipate in a reasonable amount of time what might accompany the execution of this or that decision;
  • inability to value time. The earlier a person understands that time is the greatest asset, and every day and hour disappears from us irrevocably, the more likely it is that the person will not lose their way;
  • poor health;
  • mental stress (tensions). Poverty can also be caused by a person’s psyche being out of order. What is meant here are, so to speak, borderline cases in which a person is not yet sick, but is no longer healthy. Such people often have anxiety attacks and mood swings, burnout, stress, depression, etc.

It is not uncommon for people to remain poor because of a poor environment growing up, a very average upbringing, improperly organized education, and lack of experience. That’s the conventional wisdom. But if you look at the specific cases people are concerned about, it turns out that it’s not a matter of lack of knowledge and proficiency at all. Knowledge is present, but it is unsystematic and not connected to the belief that it is a precious possession to be truly considered throughout life outside of school and constantly replenished.


People brought up as objects of manipulation are dominated by a motive to avoid failure instead of striving for achievement, and everything they do is done superficially, somehow, in passing.

There is a perception that research on poverty can help understand the causes of poverty and create methods to prevent poverty, as well as to reduce poverty that has already been created. It is believed that the result of such research could be simultaneously applied to the growth of prosperity. But this is not necessarily the case.

Instead of researching poverty, research should have been conducted on people and human communities, life and living environments, interhuman relations, the prerequisites for communication and treatment, the strength and significance of social and cultural connections, and community and family connections.

In considering poverty and impoverishment, it is necessary to find enough points of view to see a person, communities of people, their relationships, and their lives.

To reduce poverty, everything (!) on which the process of impoverishment and people living in poverty depends should be dealt with. The same applies to regions and states.

In order for the population to begin to build prosperity, it is necessary to spark fundamental changes in the educational system and in the way of thinking! In the end, we must get rid of these ridiculous simplifications that limit the scope of education to attending kindergarten and school, as if learning, which does not cease throughout life, and competency were not needed.

Citizens must come to an understanding of whether it is worth putting up with this or whether changes should finally be made to the established concepts, because this is the only way to get rid of poverty.



Considering poverty as a problem, it is first necessary to identify, formulate, and publicize both direct and indirect causes of poverty, as well as the prerequisites for the growth of prosperity. In order to discern poverty as a problem, it is necessary to model the living conditions and potential of people or a region both statically (as a phenomenon) and dynamically (as a system of processes).

Unsystematic, superficial, and undifferentiated interpretations, lacking social and cultural context, are suitable only to illustrate certain factors of poverty. Research is needed (see Figure 8.2.1.) that collects data which can be summarized as information and used to augment social regulation.

It is possible to talk about the factors of poverty and prosperity separately, but they function as a syndrome with a volatile structure. At all levels of regulation and management, each syndrome has different content and meaning. It makes no sense to look for something that is “most important” always and everywhere.


  • The factors of poverty can be talked about separately, but they function as a syndrome with a volatile structure: that is, in interaction.
  • The composition and impacts of each syndrome should be carefully identified, articulated, formulated, and publicized in all countries, regions, and communities.


If we were to search for what is most important, we would have to agree with the maxim: the most important thing is that we would not consider anything in this life to be unimportant and we would try to be as systematic as possible in our interpretations.

The composition and impacts of each syndrome should be carefully identified, articulated, formulated, and publicized in all countries, regions, and communities. Otherwise, all the talk around poverty will have no meaning or importance at all.

Although the syndromes of poverty and prosperity factors are subject to change, some cross-cutting traits can still be detected. There are no average factors, but there are general, special, and single factors, some of which express the essence and some of which express the appearance.

Now, in order to formulate poverty as a problem, it is necessary, taking all factors into account, to compare the current state of being with our idea of what it really should be. And in order to set a goal, it is necessary on the same basis to form a vision of the near (5 years) and distant (15 years) future.



According to many, the indicators of poverty and prosperity are things, real estate, money, and other equivalents that the subject can use at their discretion. However, the matter or material part makes up no more than a quarter of this challenge.

Lack or scarcity of things and money is considered poverty by those who think wealth is the goal and do not notice or do not care about the fact that they themselves have become only a means to achieving a goal.

There are peoples and regions of the world where the dominant view is that a person is rich if they have a more luxurious home, more things, jewelry, shoes, clothing, vehicles, food, etc., than others. But there are also regions and people who believe that the accumulation of things is a sign of stupidity, greed, and feeble-mindedness.

Often the root of evil is incorrect stereotypes. Prosperous people sometimes begin to feel as if everything is not enough for them. Consumerism (based on unlimited production and demand) has led to a wasteful and polluting way of life. A person who has enriched themself at the expense of other people, nature, and culture rarely cares that it is largely because of their actions that others around them are poor and unhappy. It often turns out that those enriched at the expense of nature are themselves contemptuous of nature. It is a rare case when such people really do not see the consequences of their activities and do not understand the inter-relationship. They see and understand, but cognitive dissonance intervenes to justify immoral behavior (see 2.5.). Those who have acted immorally explain to others that nothing terrible has happened, everything should be so, and in general, it could be much worse, and the poor themselves are to blame for poverty. They say it is a consequence of their laziness and an indicator of stupidity.


The matter, or material part, makes up no more than a quarter of the challenge of poverty.


As with poverty, each person has a different idea of the significance of the criteria of wealth. In our view, health comes first, followed by time, interpersonal relationships, freedom and confidence, poise, orientation in spiritual values, respect, status in vital roles, dignity, perseverance, intellectual and physical abilities, and wisdom that combines all of these.

Virtues are also factors of wealth (see Figure 5.3.4.): moderation, dignity, humility, courage, consistency, and faithfulness to one’s word.

It has long been noted that the feeling of happiness is not connected to the possession of things.

A survey conducted by the sociological laboratory of Tartu State University in 1974 produced a rather evocative result. Respondents were asked to imagine that four magic boxes were placed before them: one box contained infinite power, the second had an infinite amount of money, the third had a perfect intellect, and the fourth had hands that could handle any task. They were to choose the box whose contents seemed the best. In the Caucasus, the younger and the older generations preferred money; in Central Asia, they chose power; in Estonia, the younger generation chose intellect and the older generation, for the most part, chose skillful hands. As a justification for the choice, it was pointed out that the hands are the only thing that make it possible to become and be happy. Everything else makes people unhappy. One Russian grandmother behaved in an unusual way. She did not choose any of the options offered, but asked if a fifth box could be added. When the fifth box was mentally added, she said she would take it because it was empty. And she explained that, during her long life, she had come to realize that any change is only for the worse.



By dealing with poverty as a phenomenon and process at all levels of regulation and management, it seems possible to arrive at a more or less adequate description of it. However, descriptions precede research and are only necessary for formulating the problem.

Both poverty and wealth have their own characteristics everywhere. People’s satisfaction and sense of happiness depends primarily on their perceptions: what should be had, what should be possessed, what should be governed. Let this statement be illustrated by the fact that you will seldom find a happier and more joyful person than nuns who do not have any things and do not want to possess them. They are spiritually rich and happy with this, and also happy about the absence of circumstances that might cloud their happiness.


First of all, it is necessary to get rid of the way of thinking that contributes to poverty and denies the chance to get out of it.


The main cause of poverty was, is, and will continue to be poverty — primarily intellectual and spiritual poverty, lack of willpower, indifference, etc.

It is hard to get out of poverty. Empty talk about the fight against poverty may seem interesting, but it only suits those who are not really interested in the result. It is necessary to have a conversation that identifies the system of causes of poverty, and to create a program to address those causes.

Society, as well as the leaders of the country and local self-governance, need to know the factors not only of poverty, but also of prosperity. Without this, it is impossible to take aim at everything that reduces independence and increases dependence, suppresses confidence, interest, will, and faith. Individually, each detail may seem like nothing, but all together they function in such a way that a significant part of the population is already impoverished and is now getting poorer and poorer.

Something can always be done, but only a systematic interpretation can achieve a satisfactory result. There is always work on the farm, but only those who can embrace the whole get a good harvest.



Of course, wishing to deal with all the factors of poverty and prosperity can make a person shrug their shoulders. For those without social science preparation, it may seem too complicated. It really is not easy, but it is worth striving for systematicity, and one should not be surprised that without preparation to think and act systematically enough, the result will be unsatisfactory.


If the preparation does not yet allow one to think and act systematically enough, then the result will not be able to satisfy anyone.


To reduce poverty, it is necessary to deal not only with one of the factors of poverty, but with the whole system of factors.

Also, for the growth of prosperity, it is necessary to engage in all those things on which prosperity depends. That kind of state strategy can function in practice only if the people’s level of education allows for concluding a social contract, according to which:

  • No one has the right to regard any of the paragraphs of the Constitution as an empty phrase.
  • Measures will be taken at all levels of management and regulation to ensure that all citizens can truly use their constitutional rights.
  • The principle of personal responsibility will be established in society.

Poverty is just like any other problem: it cannot be solved directly; it is possible to devise a system of measures that is self-regulating. The figure will help to understand this (see Figure 13.1.1.).


Model of preservation and change
FIGURE 13.1.2. Model of preservation and change


It is always worth remembering that no problem is solved at the level of regulation where it is found!

Here we have discussed primarily the factors of individual poverty and prosperity, but, as emphasized above, we should consider these challenges much more thoroughly at the family, community, regional, national, institutional, and organizational levels. An academic environment, or at least a sociological laboratory like the one that worked in the first half of the 1970s at Tartu State University would be useful for this.


When viewed from a governmental perspective, only an interpretation that includes a system of factors at least at five levels of management and regulation can be expedient and effective.


When viewed from a governmental perspective, only an interpretation that includes a system of factors at least at five levels of management and regulation can be expedient and effective. Poverty and prosperity have different factors at each level, but no one level of regulation has all the necessary factors to eliminate poverty or achieve prosperity.

There are other paradoxes: none of the factors of poverty is so strong that eliminating it makes it possible to avoid poverty and open the way to prosperity; yet each factor of poverty is strong enough to cause impoverishment and make prosperity impossible.

Efforts should be made to formulate principles that would be appropriate to follow in this search. Without scientific research, this search so far, unfortunately, has been mostly intuitive. In addition to the principle of dividing and establishing connections at the levels of regulation and management discussed above, all the other components of the methodology must be taken into account (see 8.3.).


To paraphrase Leo Tolstoy: All happy people, for the most part, are alike. Each unhappy and poor person is unhappy and poor in their own way.


Life is much more complicated than any teaching about life could tell us. Life is full of unexpected conditions, opportunities, and dangers never before encountered, and about which no one can teach in a lesson. In order to navigate in life, to be ready to make decisions and be active, a person should be able and dare to think independently with their own head and be (rather than appear to be) businesslike, demanding, correct, and consistent.




In Estonia, the birth rate has been below replacement level for many years. A crisis commission on population affairs was formed in parliament, and population growth was declared a government priority. But, despite this, nothing has changed so far. Why hasn’t it changed? In principle, we are in the same position as described in connection with the challenge of poverty.


  • Birth rate is a characteristic of the population process.
  • Birth number is the statistical generalization of that process.


There are many statistics on demographic behavior in Estonia, but neither the parliament, the Office of the President, universities, nor the political parties have knowledge of the causes for the low birth rate. Therefore, there was no talk of a system of measures that would be effective and have a significant impact on the population’s sense of security, including the moral foundations that are reflected in behavior and attitudes toward the family.

The birth rate cannot be increased with the help of any “events.”


The birth rate is a function of the quality of life and a feeling of confidence.


It is impossible to order that the dignity of men and women, their legal capacity, and responsibility be increased.

Awareness and honest disclosure of the causes of a low birth rate is the first prerequisite for setting population-related processes in the right direction. We could have an impact on the birth rate if we knew what it depended on and why it was so low. To know this, one should describe the birth rate as a problem statically and dynamically.


  • The population crisis is not an objective inevitability; it is a consequence of mistakes made at the level of management and governance, including incorrect orientation.
  • Although the birth rate cannot be directly and immediately influenced, it can still be guided and empowered.


Then it would be possible to make a list of birth rate factors, conduct a matrix analysis (see Figure 11.1.11.) and identify the priority of these factors.

A national program for population recovery could already be drawn up as the next step.



Below are just a few examples of possible birth rate factors.


Birth rate factors
FIGURE 13.2.1. Birth rate factors


We know that the birth rate depends on a feeling of confidence. Consequently, it is necessary to make as complete a list as possible of the factors on which this feeling depends in girls and boys of different ages, in young women and men, adult men and women, in villages and cities, etc.

It should be taken into account that there is no such thing as “the average citizen!” Hence, it is necessary to identify the structure of the population and create a typology based on attitudes, relationships, virtues, values, norms, myths, and taboos, as well as connections and dependencies of real behavior (see Figure 5.3.3.).

The birth rate depends on the impact of the learning system and the upbringing system. Therefore, as holistic an enumeration of factors as possible is needed, listing everything that can affect the formation of boys and girls, young men and women, and adult men and women at different stages of development:

  • an individual, subject or object of manipulation;
  • a reasonable member of society, a representative of culture, a member and representative of a community, a member and representative of a family, etc.;
  • a person who wants to protect nature, the Creator, and creativity;
  • a person who wants to be educated, informed, and experienced; who wants to know something about everything and everything about something, and who is ready for work and cooperation;
  • a person who uses every moment for creativity, perceiving, and self-improvement, who wants to establish their own home and family, and to keep it all safe from danger;
  • a person who is open to the new and humane, but closed to everything unworthy, who understands that one can be happy only when everyone around is happy, etc.

The birth rate is harmed by postponing the birth of the first child. Therefore, it is worth considering a system of measures to reduce the risks associated with early childbirth. Young people with children should be given preference in admission to college and university, family dormitories should be built for them, and opportunities for childcare should be created at educational institutions (nurseries, kindergartens, etc.). It should also be determined what measures should be taken to make it easier for young people and young families to find housing, etc.

If enough reliable and systematic data can be collected on the factors that promote and hinder (harm) the birth rate, this will only be the first step. The next step is to think about how to upgrade the data gathered on the birth rate in a way that produces information. Then it is possible to proceed to the next steps.

A state institute of social affairs could be established in Estonia, where intellectual potential would be gathered to conduct scientific research on population issues and program development, as well as training, professional development, and counseling of civil servants, MPs, and advisers.


13.3. FEAR

A person is driven by needs and interests, which are also accompanied by fears. Fear means there is no feeling of confidence, but a lack of fear does not mean feeling confident.


Sources of Fear
FIGURE 13.3.1. Sources of Fear


In the past century, society has experienced so many horrific events that people still feel a sense of fear. Wars, mass exodus, deportations, the destruction of rural life, collectivization, etc., all left a deep mark on the national consciousness in Estonia and severely eroded the genetic code.


  • Fear means there is no feeling of confidence.
  • A lack of fear does not mean feeling confident.


Sources of fear can be:

  • Poor education, which leaves a person not understanding what is happening, unable to isolate the factors that are dangerous for, contributing to, or hindering life, and also not understanding how they function in interaction with each other (as a syndrome). Education aimed only at continuing studies is not conducive to developing the ability to anticipate the ups and downs of life, let alone recognize the causes of danger. Fear of the future can be passed down from generation to generation.
  • Poor awareness. The people cannot become a satisfactorily informed subject through random news and gossip. A partially informed person is deceived. Data may be available, but if a person cannot see the essence of it, cannot build a system around it, and cannot put it into context, then the data will not turn into information and will remain useless.
    Interpreting data requires a theory, thought models that form the basis for understanding different contexts and figuring out the meaning of the data. It is then possible to use the data to create models and formulate problems. Credible and systematic data are becoming more and more essential as lies and information wars become more prevalent again.


  • The people cannot become a satisfactorily informed subject through random news and gossip.
  • A partially informed person is deceived.


  • Insufficient experience. If a person does not have enough experience, they do not know how to anticipate and recognize. The ability to anticipate is formed in the unity of education, informedness (being informed), and experience.
  • Ignorance of systems and codes. (see 2.3.) If a person cannot see themself and the environment as a whole, cannot create models statically and dynamically in order to learn to understand the factors of development, functioning, and change of both regulated and self-regulated systems with their help, then the prerequisites for conscious activity are not yet good enough. With regard to regulated systems, it is necessary to understand who or what regulates them and how, what accompanies this, and what happens if they are left unregulated or done in the wrong way.
  • Confusion about the meaning of words (unsatisfactory validity). Participating in discussion and understanding the meaning of speech (rheme, aim and goal, subtext, etc.) is possible only if a person can learn the meaning of words in a particular context with sufficient accuracy (see Figure 6.0.2.).


Data may be available, but if a person cannot see the essence of it, cannot build a system around it, and cannot put it into context, then the data will not turn into information and will remain useless.


  • Ignorance of people. Those who have no idea what other people are striving for, or why they behave in one way or another, are often concerned about their own status and safety. There are countless behavioral factors. A person who has only experienced life in a stable, actual, or game environment has no idea how life can be lived in other circumstances and conditions, and what people can aspire to in such cases. That is why many people do not dare to do anything at all.
  • Distrust of outsiders. Being afraid of people whose behavior is unpredictable and of whom it is difficult to believe that any kind of mutual understanding and adaptation is possible.

It is worth remembering that no one can be integrated. It is possible to create and maintain cooperation, the prerequisite of which will be the unity of language and sentiment. To begin with, it is necessary to create conditions for adaptation, then for socialization. Only after that can we talk about integration or assimilation (see 2.2.).


A division in society is not necessarily a confrontation, but, above all, a fragmentation: that is, a lack of contacts, relationships, connections, and a sense of cohesion.


  • Force majeure circumstances. Lightning, drought, storms, floods, etc. have been a cause of fear throughout human history. Both those who are familiar with the laws of nature and those who do not yet have an idea of the laws of their manifestation are afraid.
  • A situation of absurdity. If a person feels that this cannot continue any longer, but there is no satisfactory way out, then fear may arise, leading even to suicide. (see 3.3.)
  • Grave events, violence, or destruction, such as war.
  • Loneliness.
  • Behavioral disorders and depression. The various -manias, -isms, -enias, -oses, in turn, produce fear.
  • Mental disorders. In connection with fear, it is especially important to understand paranoia (an unhealthy sense of danger) and apathy. (see 3.3.). Often the cause could be that life becomes either too routine or so intense that the difference between swinging and hitting disappears: that is, the individual minute (see 2.0.) is stretched or shortened so much that it is no longer possible to concentrate.

Life is frightening if it is not diverse and interesting enough. If there is nothing to think about, searching seems superfluous, creativity seems impossible, and idleness seems immoral, a person may begin to fear life and themself.


Those who have no idea what other people are striving for, or why they behave in one way or another, are often only concerned about their own status and safety.


The further the mental disorders go, the less a person reacts to them. The psyche is fragile and delicate, and should be protected. Often the cause of mental disorders is not lack of knowledge — alcoholics are also aware that they damage their liver and cause grief to those around them, but still continue to abuse alcoholic beverages, because otherwise there would be nowhere to escape to and, at least for a while, feel outside the zone of the usual dangers, ridicule, and moralizing.



It is not enough to change one detail or another in order to achieve societal change. The “3+5” law was already in effect in ancient Rome, 2,000 years ago. Even back then, it was known that if you needed to get rid of a flaw and achieve a satisfactory result, you need to have at least three prerequisites and change at least five factors.

Three necessary prerequisites:

  1. You have to be smart enough to detect the causes, to find out why things are bad.
  2. You should have enough skill to formulate these causes concisely, clearly, and correctly.
  3. You should be brave enough to make these causes public, to announce them out loud or write them down.

Five factors that should be changed to achieve change.

  1. Composition: the person who messed up; let them try somewhere else in the future.
  2. Structure: the arrangement of people, organizations, units, etc., relative to each other.
  3. Goals (system of goals).
  4. Activity principles.
  5. Assessment criteria.

Since two millennia is quite a long period of time, today each citizen could see whether to limit themself to these five points or add to this list. For example, it should be considered that a change of goals may lead to a possible change in the means.

It is probably also worth considering that efficiency in society is a function of infrastructure. If the infrastructure as we understand it today is not systematic enough, then no matter what you do, you could end up among the losers.