Yuriy Rotenfeld

The article substantiates the necessity of a transdisciplinary language — the Philosophical Matrix — built on a system of categories of pure mind (the identical, the different, the correlative, the opposite, the orthogonal). It is shown that quantitative concepts, contrary to R. Carnap [4], do not constitute an independent type but are a subtype of comparative concepts that use numbers as a substrate. A distinction is introduced between reason (as the operation of classificatory concepts) and mind (as the operation of comparative concepts). It is argued that animals possess mind (non-verbal thinking) without consciousness, whereas consciousness arises in humans with the appearance of names and classifications. Based on the distinction between two types of exchange — entropic (inanimate nature, a converging pair of opposites as the source of development) and negentropic (the living world and society, a diverging pair as the source of development) — an evolutionary model is constructed of the succession of four forms of resource exchange: from tyrannical through feudal and liberal to servistic. This evolution is presented as a trend figure of history, where the "price of the human personality" steadily rises despite wave-like declines. The Thucydides Trap is analyzed as a mechanism of class struggle in immoral (tyrannical and feudal) forms of exchange. The error of K. Marx is criticized: he declared the productive forces primary in relation to the relations of production and pitted opposite (friendly) classes against each other in a fratricidal war. Two paths of social development are proposed: the path of material growth with an expanding spiral and the path of moral education with a spiral contracted into a single turn, oriented toward an unattainable but regulative ideal.

The article substantiates the existence of a universal language – the Philosophical Matrix – based on a system of comparative concepts (the identical, the different, the opposite, the correlative, the orthogonal, and others). It is shown that the archetypes of this language were first recorded in the first chapter of the Book of Genesis (the word Elohim): light and darkness as opposites, day and night, morning and evening as a relation of two pairs of opposites, termed orthogonality. Subsequently, the baton is passed to ancient and Eastern philosophers: the Milesian school, Heraclitus, Laozi, and Aristotle. The distinction between classificatory and comparative concepts allows for the identification of reason (understanding) and two forms of mind (intellect) thinking: practical mind as particular comparative concepts and pure mind as maximally general comparative concepts – categories. The Philosophical Matrix – a set of categories of pure mind – becomes a language for interdisciplinary, intercultural and interfaith dialogue. Using the example of Russia as a multiconfessional country, the possibility of joint education for children of Jews, Christians, Muslims and Daoists based on a common language of wisdom is demonstrated. The educational cluster "Wise School" (kindergarten – school – university) is presented, where from early childhood thinking through comparative concepts, originating in the Word of God, is laid.

The article proposes a transition from classical panpsychism, which postulates universal animation, to the concept of Panmindism — the doctrine of the universal rationality of the world. Drawing on the ideas of contemporary philosophy of mind (David Chalmers) and the tradition going back to Aristotle, the author distinguishes between reason (understanding) and mind thinking, introduces the concepts of practical mind and pure mind. The Philosophical Matrix, as a set of categories of pure mind, acts as a universal metalanguage for describing nature, society, and thinking. Mind is interpreted not as a subjective human capacity but as a universal principle of organizing reality through relations. On this basis, a new understanding of wisdom is proposed as knowledge of the universal, linking together all levels of being through the understanding of transdisciplinary categories of pure mind.

The article addresses the problem of the absence of a common language in international communication. Using the example of the UN Security Council session of March 2, 2026, dedicated to children in armed conflicts, it analyzes a paradox: all participants speak about the same values but do not hear one another. As a solution, the Philosophical Matrix is proposed—a system of maximally general comparative concepts (the identical, the different, the correlative, the opposite, the orthogonal) that explicates a universal language of thinking, which the author calls the “language of Elohim”. The cultural-historical roots of this language are traced in the first chapter of Genesis, in Heraclitus, in Laozi, and in the Sefer Yetzirah. An analysis of the March 2 speeches allows us to diagnose at which levels of thinking (reason, practical mind, pure mind, wisdom) today’s educators and politicians operate. The conclusion proposes the “Wise School” project as a practical path for returning to the “language of Elohim” through education starting from early childhood.

Abstract for the Article "On the Rational Understanding of Science" This article explores the fundamental problem of initial idealizations in the development of scientific knowledge, arguing that without them, a general concept of the evolution of cognition cannot be formulated. The author critiques the anti-fundamentalist, pluralistic view of rationality that denies the existence of "beginnings" in knowledge, suggesting that this approach, while gaining traction, does not necessarily negate the importance of foundational principles. Drawing on Thomas Kuhn's concept of paradigms, the article highlights the role of similarity relations in scientific revolutions and the grouping of objects and situations into systems based on these relations. The author proposes that the initial logical paradigm of cognition can be represented by the concepts of abstract identity and abstract difference, which serve as the basis for understanding qualitative and quantitative relations in science. The article traces the historical development of scientific paradigms, from the qualitative concepts of ancient philosophy to the quantitative methods of modern science, emphasizing the transition from Aristotelian physics to the mechanistic worldview of Galileo and Newton, and finally to the relativistic and quantum-field theories of the 20th century. The article argues that the evolution of science is characterized by the ascent from abstract to concrete forms of identity and difference, with each stage of development building upon the previous one. The author introduces the concept of an integral dialectical-logical paradigm, which integrates relations of abstract and concrete identity, symmetry, and asymmetry, providing a framework for understanding the unity and diversity of the material world. This paradigm, the author suggests, can help bridge the gap between different scientific theories and contribute to the development of a unified theory of all interactions. In conclusion, the article emphasizes the importance of identifying and distinguishing relations in the rational understanding of science, viewing the historical process of scientific development as a series of revolutionary transitions from one logical picture of the world to another, each more complex and comprehensive than the last. The principle of correspondence, which ensures the commensurability of scientific theories, plays a key role in this process, allowing for the comparison and integration of theories across different scientific disciplines.

The aggressive intrusion of science, technology and technology into the space of children as the least protected social group requires their protection from aggressive anthropologically-oriented practices. However, regularly conducted theoretical discussions of this problem do not lead to the solution of the problem of the ecology of childhood, since only one of the possible forms of understanding reality has been fixed within the framework of the international humanitarian and scientific community. We are talking about conceptual reasoning thinking, which is based on classification concepts and provides for a pluralism of opinions, the multitude of which does not lead to unambiguous scientific humanitarian knowledge for everyone. The created conditions do not contribute to the emergence of an interdisciplinary research methodology, the formation of which is associated with the need for a fundamentally different way of thinking – thinking in comparative terms, which, unlike the natural sciences, is absent today in humanitarian knowledge. Whereas the new thinking proposed in this article, consisting in the ability to identify the different and distinguish the identical (one) within the natural range of comparative concepts, on the contrary, is a tool for integrating knowledge, therefore, in my opinion, it should be introduced into the sphere of traditional school education. In this connection, the main academic subjects will be reorganized around each of the comparative concepts and constructed in a certain order. As a result, students – schoolchildren or students - will learn to see the same content behind different physical or social phenomena, so the problem of memorizing large volumes of educational material disappears. The new approach will accelerate the process of formation of an interdisciplinary methodology of socio-cultural analysis, will contribute to the implementation of a comprehensive state policy, will give a new impetus to socio-cultural and anthropo-pedagogical practice.

At the heart of one of the many problems concerning consciousness, there are flaws in our thinking that impede a philosophical understanding of the world. At the same time, I understand philosophy as a rigorous science aimed at “knowledge of the general”, reflecting the most fundamental and universal relations of reality, meaningful thanks to two types of comparative concepts. One of them is specific-scientific comparative concepts of different types, reflecting the beginnings of natural scientific knowledge, while the second type is specific-general comparative concepts of different types. Without creating a concrete-universal theory, with the generally recognized philosophical language of comparative concepts, it is impossible to explain one of the fundamental difficulties: with the help of what linguistic means can consciousness be entered as a subjective reality into the physical picture of the world, how to fill this “gap in explanation”? In my opinion, this is the language comparative concepts of different types.

The article "Philosophia of Pure Mind: Declassification of the basic Biblical Mysteries" offers a tool for solving biblical mysteries — this is the philosophy of pure mind, which brings to life conceptual thinking with private and extremely general comparative concepts — concepts of practical mind and categories of pure mind. From these positions, an active study of the fundamental biblical mysteries is carried out, and not just their description or discussion. The investigation implies their comprehension related to the understanding of reality, which we find in the first lines of the Torah, in which comparative concepts are represented by gradation (light and darkness, day and night) and orthogonal views, i.e. the relationship between two pairs of opposites (day and night — evening and morning): "And there was evening, and it was morning: day one." Thus, through the concepts of practical mind, the author reveals the general idea of the Creator, reflecting the harmony of nature in Words, each of which is a comparative concept of one kind or another. This is the key to uncovering the Biblical mysteries, namely: how the Word of God relates to the mystery of the fall, to the mysteries of the Book of Creation (Sefer Yetzira), the mystery of the Holy Trinity and the Sign of the Cross. Finally, how the proposed thinking helps to understand and gain a more complete understanding of the essence of these mysteries within the framework of one more general problem. Moreover, the root of all these problems, in my opinion, is that the mind thinking of people, given to them, as well as to all living things from nature through sensations, was supplemented by a person with a multi-valued reason thinking with classification concepts of natural language. In this connection, the natural human mind, through unambiguous comparative concepts, was supplanted by reason, apparently absent in animals. All of this unfolds against the background of three successive Reformations, which gave rise to three Abrahamic religions dating back to the patriarch of the Semitic tribes, Abraham. Whereas the beginning of these reforms is associated with the struggle of Moses for faith in the invisible God Yahweh, perceived as a civil war between the supporters of Moses as one part of the Jews with another part of them worshipping the God of their ancestors, the creator of all things — Ilohim. The article concludes with an understanding of the 4th Reformation, which aimed to create a modern synthetic religion with the help of AI.

The article "Philosophy is the unborn child of science: in search of a universal commonly used language" explores the problem of creating a universal philosophical language that includes not only the language of classification concepts of natural language that define people's reasoning thinking, but also the language of comparative concepts, which is the basis their mind and wisdom. At the same time, the author divides comparative concepts into two parts, the first of which is determined by particular concepts – concepts of practical mind peculiar to natural and exact sciences, while the second part is determined by extremely general concepts – categories of pure mind, which were supposed to become the beginnings of philosophy as a verifiable rigorous science. Along with the majority of thinking people, the author sees that as a cumulative rigorous science, philosophy has not taken place, and therefore considers it an unborn child of science. In this regard, he analyzes various philosophical traditions and comes to the conclusion that "everything is known in comparison." Therefore, the basis of a language that would facilitate effective communication between different philosophical directions, as well as between natural and humanitarian disciplines, can only be the language of comparative concepts. As a result of using the four types of opposition identified by Aristotle as the principles of philosophy: "contradictory", "correlated", "opposite", "deprivation and possession", the author built a philosophical Matrix from which he approaches the creation of such a universal language. At the same time, the Matrix includes other more complex comparative concepts than those of Aristotle – concepts of pure mind found by the author in the teachings of outstanding thinkers of the past: Lao Tzu, Pythagoras, Heraclitus and K. Marx, but today misunderstood or forgotten. The comparative concepts returned from oblivion, in the author's opinion, represent a valuable contribution to many areas of philosophy and linguistics, and can be useful for philosophers, psychologists, educators, linguists and anyone interested in the problem of language in philosophy and their undeniable role in the development of mind and wisdom.

This article explores the concept of the "Word of God" from three perspectives: the perspective of classification concepts inherent in natural language with its reasoning thinking (rassudok), and the perspective of mind thinking (razum). At the same time, mind thinking in comparative terms is divided into two fundamentally different parts, limited by particular and general concepts. The former arise from nature through our sense organs, for example, light and darkness, day and night, heavy and light - these are practical mind concepts, the foundations of natural sciences. Whereas the latter are categories of pure mind, such as identity and difference, oppositions - the product of our conceptualizing thinking, providing the foundations of philosophy, understood as a rigorous Divine science. The author analyzes the text of the Torah and concludes that the words of the Almighty: light and darkness, day and night, evening and morning, and others - are accessible to universal understanding as particular comparative concepts of a gradational nature. Furthermore, the Torah presents another, more complex type of particular comparative concepts - concepts of an orthogonal nature, describing all six days of creation as the transition from day and night to evening and morning - "And there was evening and there was morning: the first day." At the same time, it is known that the words of God the almighty express his actions, and not so much in the form of their specific manifestation – they relate to the general principles of the Universe, which require extremely general comparative concepts far from the sensory world. The task of creating a science that reveals the mind and wisdom of the one and invisible God was taken up by the ancient Greek philosophers - lovers of wisdom. Unlike the reasoning thinking of most people, they comprehended the diversity of reality not only from the standpoint of particular comparative concepts - concepts of practical mind, but also from the standpoint of extremely general comparative concepts - categories of pure mind, revealing the universal design of the Creator. By separating from religious and emotional prejudices, the author comprehends forgotten or misunderstood thoughts of famous thinkers of the past, revealing the essence of comparative concepts, and collects them according to their rank into a verifiable cumulative philosophical Matrix - a panlogical paradigm of knowledge. As a result, the author concludes that these insights can be used not only for a correct understanding of biblical texts, particularly the Words of the Almighty, but also to bridge the gap between theology, humanities, and natural sciences, which is determined by the fundamental divergence between reasoning, mind, and wisdom.

Animal mind philosophy and the related philosophy of language are rich and developing fields of philosophy. Enriched with the language of comparative concepts, they can become the threshold of a cumulative, verifiable strictly scientific "philosophy of pure mind", asserting a fundamentally new view of the problem of society, man and his place among other beings. My understanding of the mind through the prism of nonverbal and verbal thinking allowed me to get an idea of three completely different stages in the development of the mind – reason, mind and wisdom. I understand reason as thinking by classification concepts of natural language, mind – as thinking by concrete scientific comparative concepts verified with the help of the senses. Whereas wisdom, understood by me in the light of "pure reason", is connected with the generalization of many particular comparative concepts. At the same time, I proceed from the fact that we are all perceiving beings, and our brain, being formed in the light of the relations of similarity and difference, perceives (comprehends – grasps) the energy present in the environment (energy in general), and converts it into sensory data. Presented by the Aristotle-Rotenfeld philosophical Matrix, in the form of concrete universal concepts of different types, they expand its cognitive capabilities step by step. Thus, with the help of spatial representations and integral visual images – drawings used by me, I show how to make nonverbal rational thinking of humans and animals verbal, expressing it in comparative terms.

A new method of adult and children mental development is investigated – the trilogy of mind, which basic operation is the logic operation of comparison. This method was created considering Aristotle's understanding of philosophy as “the science about the first reasons and origins” of cognition, the beginning of presocratic cognition of the surrounding world. This new method is an effective mean of mental thinking development that is oriented at the understanding of natural and social processes with the help of general scientific comparative notions – kinds of opposition, worked out in ancient times.

Since its inception, philosophy has been engaged in comprehending the unity of the world, and its main focus was determined by the intention to reduce to a single basis all the changing diversity of not only natural, but also social phenomena. But that didn't happen. Thus, the search for grounds for the integration of natural science and humanities knowledge is currently a rather serious problem, which has no theoretical solution yet. To solve the problem of integration of knowledge, I propose a new conceptual apparatus of philosophy in the form of a cumulative series of comparative concepts lying between the ultimate abstractions of identification and distinction, which are the concepts of "identity" and "difference".

Just like Rudolf Carnap, but in a slightly different composition, I divide language into three types of conceptual means: classification, specifically scientific and specifically general comparative concepts of different types. I associate classification concepts with the ability to reason on any topic, that is, with reasonable thinking. Concrete scientific comparative concepts determine the comprehension of natural and social processes, their objective cognition in the form of rational thinking (reason), while concrete universal comparative concepts define philosophy (wisdom), understood as knowledge of the universal. Based on three types of thinking (prudence, reason, wisdom) in 2010 at a symposium in Greece, I presented the ideas of morality in the context of human development in the form of a proposed article.

The topic is a new method of children intellectual development – trilogy of intellect, the basic thinking operation of which is the logic operation of comparison. The method was created on the basis of Aristotle’s understanding of philosophy as “the science about first reasons and origins” of cognition that must be the starting point of the surrounding world’s cognition at school. In addition to the generally accepted teaching schoolchildren reasonable and mental thinking, a new method is an effective mean of advanced mental children thinking development with the help of general scientific comparative notions – kinds of opposition, that were created in ancient times. Key words: philosophy for children, cognition, intellect, reason, mind, trilogy of intellect, logic paradigm, identical, different, corresponding, opposite.

A new method of mental development of children (and adults) is considered, the basis of which is the logical operation of comparison. The method was created taking into account the Aristotelian understanding of philosophy as "the science of first causes and beginnings." It can act as a fundamentally new pedagogical approach to school education, since comparative concepts make it possible to demarcate between reason, two forms of intelligence and wisdom. Therefore, the new thinking proposed in this article, which consists in the ability to identify the different and distinguish the identical (same) within the framework of a cumulative series of comparative concepts, is a tool for integrating knowledge, which, in my opinion, should be introduced into the sphere of traditional school education. In this connection, around each of the comparative concepts, the main subjects will be reorganized and lined up in a certain order. As a result, behind different physical or social phenomena, students - schoolchildren or students will learn to see the same content, so the problem with memorizing large amounts of educational material disappears.

The history of European civilization is a clear evidence of cultural split into two parts: scientific-technical and humanitarian, which are determined by two types of thinking – mind and intellect. The development of natural and technical sciences, which are based on reasonable thinking, has resulted in rapid development of techniques and various technologies for the past 500 years. Whereas humanitarian sciences with their intellectual thinking fell behind the demands of time for hundreds of years. The precipice, which occurred between two parts of a single culture, could be surmounted only with the aid of improving humanitarian thinking, moving it up into the position of mind and alongside the development of ethics as a strict theoretical science about morale. This in general outline can be presented with the example of mind-intellect interrelation in the history of antique philosophy and their influence on morale development. Distinguishing feature of ancient Greek philosophy is discovery of mind comprehended not so much as the ability to think but rather as ability to cognize the world from objective, identical for everyone, points of view, as resolution to consider knowledge, received by these means, as the highest instance in debates. Neither religion, nor intellectual subjective opinion of wisdom-fanciers was put into the first place by ancient Greek culture, but rather the knowledge, received in its rational-scientific form and radically different from opinion. However, contemporary humanitarians are unable to see the difference between mind and intellect, as far as their thinking does not exceed the limits of mind. The reason of created thesis is that philosophy yet in ancient times lost the essence of intellectual development trend and gave the way to intellectual thinking. Platon and Socrates had already taken intellect for the manifestation of mind. The last, who made an attempt to ground the difference between these two forms of thinking, was Aristotle who made it possible to identify the laws of formal logic, formulated by him, with laws of mind. Whereas in fact these were the laws of intellectual thinking. Since then humanitarians have not returned to the path of mind, paved by the first Greek Ionic thinkers. While possessing intellectual thinking and getting mixed up in the notions of «intellect» and «mind», caused by logical and causative-effective relations, contemporary humanitarians are unable to lead their sciences out of a dead-end, where ancient Greek philosophy got into after Heraclitus.

At the heart of one of the many problems concerning consciousness, there are flaws in our thinking that impede a philosophical understanding of the world. At the same time, I understand philosophy as a rigorous science aimed at “knowledge of the general”, reflecting the most fundamental and universal relations of reality, meaningful thanks to two types of comparative concepts. One of them is specific-scientific comparative concepts of different types, reflecting the beginnings of natural scientific knowledge, while the second type is specific-general comparative concepts of different types. Without creating a concrete-universal theory, with the generally recognized philosophical language of comparative concepts, it is impossible to explain one of the fundamental difficulties: with the help of what linguistic means can consciousness be entered as a subjective reality into the physical picture of the world, how to fill this “gap in explanation”? In my opinion, this is the language comparative concepts of different types.