INTRODUCTION

What is not called Sociology nowadays! The most stupid constructions, the most indefinite theories, any thing that is not considered, reconsidered and examined in depth, is sent indiscriminately to the spiritual market under the label Sociology".
Pitirim Sorokin "The System of Sociology"

Pitirim Sorokin's book "The System of Sociology" was published in the dark years of downfall following the Bolshevik revolution and the Civil War in Russia. The book was an attempt at creating Sociology; in the author's opinion, Sociology must be like all natural sciences.
In the thirties, as a Russian emigrant in the US, Sorokin wrote his 4-volume work "Social and Cultural Dynamics". In his book Sorokin described the fluctuating nature of social development which is characterized by very long cycles. The idea of the book was suggested by his friend N.D.Kondrat'yev who discovered the large conjectural waves in economic development. Sorokin indicates the part played by ideology in these cycles.

I consider myself a follower of Pitirim Sorokin both with regard to the building of a sociological system and in the elaboration of social dynamics. I have continued Sorokin's work by proposing what determines the fluctuations and showing that contemporary civilization is declining.

Can one predict people’s behavior? My answer to this question is YES and it refers to both individuals and to groups of people. I do not mean predicting the future by the stars or by the sediment in coffee cups.

In Sociology books one can find descriptions of animal behavior. Sociologists used animal behavior as models for human behavior. Economists make predictions on the economics of society based on their knowledge of the subject matter. Sometimes they are wrong. My idea is to create computer models of society and this is what the present book is all about.

Determinism in the behavior of individuals and of society is due to the fact that it is limited. It is built on instincts just like in dogs. “Common sense” is not a prerogative of too many people.

The more limited is human behavior and the more people are guided by instincts, the more accurate the prediction of their behavior. There is whole spectrum of human stereotypes and in some cases, behavior can be predicted with the same accuracy as in dogs or cats. The same applies to the behavior of society. The behavior of highly integrated societies is determined to a higher degree and its behavior can be more readily described.

Note the ‘instinct of the crowd’ that links people together in societies. Politicians and their talks are guided by it. The instinct forms social dynamics and it lies at the basis of this book.

Modern sociology relies on statistics. No sociological study to date is conducted without questionnaires and statistical processing. This is expensive. I believe that in some cases predictions about the behavior of society can be made on the basis of historical analogies.

The present study uses the results of experiments performed in the past by other investigators and does not rely on statistics.

The book summarizes the results of several years’ research. When I launched on this project, I did not assume that I should find solutions to all the problems discussed. Now I believe to have found many answers to questions relating to the behavior of individuals and of society. Among others I believe that human behavior is largely similar to that of animals in a herd.

I do not agree with the statement that people differ from animals because unlike them, they are capable of reasoning. Most people do not reason but rather are guided by instincts. On the other hand, we cannot be sure that animals cannot think “reasonably”.

People’s behavior depends largely on the behavior of their social/political leader. The astonishing fact is that society is led not by the most capable but quite to the contrary, by the least competent. Like in animal herds, the leader is the most aggressive and most powerful but not necessarily the cleverest and most capable. The reader will find explanations in the book. There are of course exceptions to this rule, but they are so rare as to be negligible.

In analyzing the behavior of society and of individuals I have shown and explained that it is far from optimal and even leads to the destruction of society. All this takes place under the priceless guidance of the leader who can make a society prosper or die.

Some ideas in the book may seem well-known and trivial to the reader, for example, the concept of hunger for society (HEVRAV) that is related to people’s herd feeling. People are ‘social animals’ and therefore it is only natural to have such feelings.

I have kept the level of the book ‘popular’ and have avoided using concepts of theoretical physics or automatic control.

In this manner, I wished to make it accessible to all. On the other hand, one cannot ignore basic science when dealing with contemporary sociology. One should not classify sciences into humanistic and natural sciences. Present day sociologists should be engineers. This is why I wish to mention, along with the well-known sociologists, people like Pitirim Sorokin, who made a significant contribution to sociology and like the famous physicist L. Brillouin. In my opinion, his book “Science and the Theory of Information” laid the basis of contemporary sociology.

My book is not complete and actually it should be thoroughly edited. In some places allusions are made and evidence must be gathered. True, the value of the study is not be affected by omitting those few controversial topics. My problem has been that I had no one to discuss my work with. No reply came from the many academic institutions that I wrote to, including Harvard where Pitirim Sorokin once taught.

Some of my reviewers criticize me personally rather than relating to my work. My study acquired a “political” character. For instance, the two points of view with regard to terrorism are the radical, which justifies terrorism because ‘the end justifies the means’, and the opposite point of view which condemns it. Mine is the latter point of view.

With regard to the Jewish religion, not only do I defend it from atheists; I also point out its benefits.

Democracy is not the best social system. What begins as a democracy often ends in anarchy and terrorism?

One person with whom I conducted frequent and long discussions is Prof. Hanoch Jacobsen from the Haifa Institute of Technology (Technion). His remarks and comments have been included in my study and I do hope that our cooperation will yield more fruits in the future.

The original language of the study is Russian. My plan was to translate it into both English and Hebrew but I renounced this plan. I saw no sense in going on with the translation as soon as I realized that I had no one to talk with. The four chapters that have been translated into English provide a sufficiently clear profile of the study. Of the chapters that have remained untranslated, the most important is the third chapter. This part of the study is based on the theory of the American psychologist A. Maslow. It explains both the origin of radicalism and its intellectual level.

Finally, I wish to communicate the name of another engineer who dealt with sociological topics, the Belorus professor A. Panasyuk.

My opponents appeared to be the most progressive and aggressive people. However, they were afraid to talk to me. Where is the freedom of opinion in science? Those few people who appreciate my work and see its merits are too afraid to talk to me for fear of reprisal.