Expanded Summary 

The whole history of development of philosophical, political, legal and economic thought, as well as modern views and approaches of scientists, politicians and so on towards problems of functioning and development of the society, the state and mankind as a whole, in my deep belief, were based and are based, as I call it, on the philosophy of the means.

Though these views and approaches – as the philosophical trend, as the philosophy of the means and as the philosophical system did not exist till me (before creation by me of scientific works on these problems).

Consequently, exactly for this reason even the term – the philosophy of the means – did not exist till me in the science, in the policy and in the practice.

It is necessary to pay attention here to the fact that, in my deep belief, the mentioned views and approaches, proceeding from interests of people, are obviously erroneous both from the methodological and the theoretical and practical points of view. However, despite it, these views and approaches, which really exist, require the corresponding scientific analysis, exactly what I tried to do.

In this connection, I consider it necessary to pay attention to the fact that under the philosophy of the means I imply the scientifically formed by me that philosophical system of views, which as distinct from created again by me the philosophy of the goal and the philosophy of the social goal considers as criterion of essence of social-state system not the goal, not the social goal and its realization, but the means.

It is necessary to particularly note that created by me the philosophy of the goal represents the fundamentally new scientific trend, which radically differs from the approach, based on the means, deep-rooted in the entire civilized world during the centuries.

On the basis of the profound analysis of the mentioned approach I created the scientific trend, which I called the philosophy of the means and through which (i.e. through this scientific trend) the theoretical bases of this approach were disclosed.

Hence, I created the scientific trend (the philosophy of the means) – as theoretical reflection, in this case, of the true reality existing during the centuries.

Though the scientific trend (and the scientific theory) in general should not only reflect the true reality, but should indicate the way to scientific researches and practice, to which, finally, in the certain sense this scientific trend serves, since the philosophy of the means not only reflects the real reality, but also proves incorrectness and unacceptability of the mentioned approach from the point of view of interests of people.

Thus, according to the philosophy of the means, the means represent the criterion of distinction of the social-state (social-political) systems, whereas, in compliance with the created by me the philosophy of the goal – the goal, in my deep belief, is the only true theoretical-methodological basis of distinction and classification of the social-state systems.

Besides, the true human philosophy of the goal in comparison with the philosophy of the means indicates the way to the theory and practice both in scientific researches and in management of the social-state system in the right direction.

Practical manifestation of the philosophy of the means are the facts, when the social-state systems distinguish from each other through the means, in particular, through technique, level of industrial development of the state and so on.

Examples of manifestation of the philosophy of the means represent also distinction of the social-state systems through forms of ownership, methods of management and so on.

And practical manifestation of created by me philosophy of the goal is distinction from each other of the social-state systems not on the basis of the means, but on the basis of the goal.

In particular, manifestation of the philosophy of the goal is distinction of the social-state systems on the basis of that goal, to which this or that social-state system serves: whether it serves the social goal – whether it serves realization of interests of people, or whether it serves the economic goal – money, profit, capital?!

Besides, created by me the philosophy of the economic goal in fact represents the philosophy of economic end in itself of the means that finally is again reduced to manifestation of the certain variety of the philosophy of the means.

It is necessary to mention, that the philosophy of the economic goal or the philosophy of the economic end in itself of the means differs from the philosophy called by me the philosophy of the means so, that as against the philosophy of the means, the philosophy of the economic goal implies distinction of the social-state systems not through technique, not through management methods and so on, but – through the economic goal, which in the true human society and state should represent only the necessary means of realization of the social goal, but in that social-state system, where the goal is economic, this goal is in fact reduced to end in itself of the economic means and exactly that is why the philosophy of the economic goal at the same time represents the certain variety of practical manifestation of the philosophy of the means.

As for created by me the philosophy of the social goal, it represents the system of philosophical views, which (i. е. the philosophy of the social goal) like as the philosophy of the goal considers as criterion of essence of the social-state (social-political) system not the means, but – the goal to which this or that social-state system serves.

At the same time, the philosophy of the social goal differs from the philosophy of the goal for the aspect that if the philosophy of the goal represents the criterion of distinction of the social-state systems and the theoretical-methodological basis of their classification, and if both the philosophy of the social goal and the philosophy of the economic goal, which, as it was already noted, is the practical manifestation of the certain variety of the philosophy of the means generally in fact relate to the philosophy of the goal, then the philosophy of the social goal at the same time is the fundamentally new scientific trend, which (i. е. the philosophy of the social goal) represents the philosophy of the goal of the true human society and state – represents the philosophy of the true human goal and which is the initial theoretical basis of formation and functioning of the true human social-state system.

Thus, in the true human society and state, i. е. in the social-state system, which serves interests of people (which should serve interests of people), both in scientific researches and in the management of the society and the state, one should proceed from the social goal based on the philosophy of the social goal, and the assessment of results of functioning of this social-state system should be accordingly carried out according to the degree of realization of the social goal – according to the degree of realization of interests of people.

Hence, the philosophy of the social goal – is the philosophical system, which represents the theoretical-methodological basis of the purposeful direction of formation and functioning of the true human society and state – this is the philosophical system, which represents the theoretical-methodological basis of determination of the social purposeful direction of functioning of the true human social-state system, i. е. the philosophy of the social goal – this is the philosophy of the goal of the true human society and state.

From this it logically follows that the philosophy of the goal in the true human society and state – is in fact the philosophy of the social goal and in that social-state system, where the goal is economic – money, profit, capital, the philosophy of the goal represents the philosophy of the economic goal, i. е. represents the philosophy of end in itself of the economic means that in fact is an evident example of manifestation of the philosophy of the means.

Correctness of the above-mentioned confirms, for example, the fact that views of ideologists of capitalism and practice of development of the given social-state system always were based on the approach, called by me the philosophy of the means or the philosophy of end in itself of the means, since capitalism always assigned primary importance to getting the maximum profit, enrichment, gain – as the goal that in reality is the end in itself of the economic means – manifestation of the philosophy of the means in practice and that is basically peculiar to the intrinsic nature of capitalism, i. е. is peculiar to capitalism in the true value of this term.

And if capitalism serves interests of people, then it is not capitalism any more – it is not capital “ism” (not “ism” of the economic goal, not the domination of the capital), and, accordingly, it should have another name.

Besides, it is necessary to particularly emphasize that without getting of high profits at the enterprises, in the society and in the state, realization of the social goal – realization of interests of people, i. е. realization of that goal, which is peculiar (which should be peculiar) to the true human society and state is inconceivable. However, profit – getting of profit – in the true human society and state… should be considered only as a necessary condition of realization of the social goal and not as the end in itself of the economic means as it is peculiar to capitalism.

Thus, it is quite natural that the means of realization of the goal have great value, since the goal cannot be realized without the relevant means. However, while researching problems of functioning of the true human society and state, and more exactly in the process of management of this society and this state it is necessary to proceed not from the economic means – as from the end in itself, but it is necessary to proceed from the social goal and it is necessary to be based on this goal with regard to the corresponding real and potential means of its realization.

It should be particularly mentioned that of great importance is the level of development of the means of work, level of industrial development of the society, level of development of mass media in the society and so on, but all of them are (should be) only the means of realization of the goal, which depending on the purposeful direction of the social-state system, can be used both for enslavement or even for destruction of people, and for increase of their well-being and so on.

Hence, not the deep-rooted philosophy, called by me the philosophy of the means,  should be the initial and determinative scientific basis of construction and functioning of the true human social-state system – the social-state system serving interests of people, but created by me the philosophy of the goal – the philosophy of the social goal, which is reflected almost in all scientific works published by me from the beginning of the 70-ties of XX century and which should be assumed both as the basis of scientific researches and the basis of functioning of the society – as the basis of management of the society and the state, as well as the basis of the name of the given social (state, political) systems, since the name of the social-state system, in my deep belief, should point to the determinative purposeful direction of its functioning.

In this sense, the name of the social-political system – “capitalism” seems absolutely correct to me, since this is the social-political system that serves the determinative economic goal – serves the economic end in itself of the means – money, profit, capital, whereas the social-political system, serving the determinative social goal – interests of a person, interests of people, should be called the True Human – Humanosocial – the society and the state.

The scientific work emphasizes that the Philosophy of the social goal is not automatically realized, and therefore, along with the Philosophy of the social goal, principle importance has created by me – the Theory of the supremacy of the interests of the people, as the theoretical basis of social-economic progress, and the Theory of the balance of rights and responsibility of officials as a necessary theoretical basis for the practical implementation of social-economic progress, as a necessary theoretical basis for effective state management in the interests of each person – in the interests of the people.