The Appointment of the History Philosophy in Comprehending Modern Civilizational Challenges in a Post- Pandemic Society

1 Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine nationaluniversity_11@yahoo.com 2 Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine novonovoselhyi@i.ua 3 Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine melnechuuuk_vas@i.ia 4 Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine, choroooy_vasyl@i.ua 5 Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine kira2007mail@i.ua Abstract: A retrospective look at social theory shows that the need for philosophical and historical research arises at the junction of significant historical events when qualitative changes in social processes occur. At the beginning of the emergence of bourgeois social relations, when old ideas about society and people were destroyed, when instead of a religious understanding of the world, completely new views on the surrounding social environment were needed, it was philosophical and historical concepts that could help society find the desired confidence in the future. Such a function of the philosophical and historical worldview can be extremely relevant even in the conditions of the crisis phenomena of the present, when in the era of a pandemic, society is stratified and a global crisis is emerging in all its manifestations. Modern globalization, covering all spheres of public life economics, politics, culture, has forced mankind to once again find itself in the wirl of a historical turn, during which contradictions between different states, peoples and civilizations have intensified and deepened. The main objective of the study is to characterize the purpose of the philosophy of history in understanding modern civilizational challenges in a postpandemic society.


Introduction
Understanding the contradictions and new realities between countries is the central task of the philosophy of history. A detailed consideration of the problem and the development of an algorithm of actions to solve the problem are possible only under the condition of a rational, that is, a scientific approach to the study of human society. It is worth noting that rationalism is sharply criticized by postmodernists, as they oppose the Enlightenment philosophy and against the rational means of cognition of objective reality. One of the most American postmodernists, Rorty (1981), in the Introduction to his book Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, writes: "This book is an overview of the development of recent philosophical studies, especially in the field of analytical philosophy, from the point of view of the anti-Cartesian and anti-Kantian revolution. The purpose of the work was to undermine the reader's trust in the "mind" as something like that, for which you need to have a "philosophical" look, to "know" as something like what the "theory" should be about and has a "foundation", as well as to "philosophy" as it has been perceived since the times of Kant ". However, the understanding of the complex processes of the modern world in a post-pandemic society and forecasts regarding the future are possible only on the basis of Reason and Science. So, the philosophy of history is a science in the true sense of the word.

Characteristic philosophical views.
Forecasts regarding the future of mankind can only be made through recognition of the unity of world history, the causal relationship of all social phenomena and processes. In the words of Marx, one should look at the development of society as a natural-historical process, and not as a mechanical and random accumulation of historical facts and events. A large number of social scientists are categorically opposed to social determinism, historical necessity and social forecasting. The author Popper (2013) in the book "The Poverty of Historicism" set out to criticize the materialistic understanding of history, discovered by Marx, the inevitability of the transition from one socio-economic formation to another. The term "historicism" is used by Popper (2013) to denote those philosophical and historical theories that believe that society has its own inherent laws of development and functioning, according to which certain forecasts can be made regarding the future society. Popper (2002), as Aron (1981) put it, "tends to reject historical prophetism, replaces it with social technology based on the thesis of the fundamental similarity of the natural and social sciences".
In the book "Open Society and Its Enemies," Popper (2002) gives a more open assessment of the phenomenon of "historicism." He writes: "The future depends on us; no historical necessity dominates us. However, there are influential socio-philosophical teachings that adhere to the opposite point of view. Their supporters argue that all people use reason to predict new events, the commander should try to predict the outcome of the battle and the boundaries between such predictions and deep and comprehensive historical prophecies are not well defined. They insist that the task of science in general is to make assumptions, or, more precisely, to improve our usual predictions, to build more solid foundations for them, and, in particular, the task of the social sciences is to provide us with longterm historical forecasts. They also insist that they have already discovered the laws of history, allowing them to predict the course of history. A lot of socio-philosophical teachings that hold such views, I have designated the term historicism ". So, Popper (2002) does not recognize any laws of the development of society, he categorically rejects the historical need and ability to predict the future of human society.
The French philosopher of history Callot (1962) believes that there are two ways to predict the future and predict social processes. The first is the study of past events and the derivation of future ones, and the secondin the actions and acts of the subjects of history. In the first case, the scientist is outside historical facts, taking the position of an observer, and describing what is happening, and then using the logical methods to deduce the future. In the second case, he himself is an actor, and his actions, like the actions of other people, lead to certain consequences, to a certain future result. The first method is declared a thought process, and the second -a practical one.
From the point of view of Callot (1962), the precursor problem is a problem of history. The need for foresight arises due to the fact that a person living in the present tries to find out what our reasoning about the past is, how correctly they derive one event from another, on what basis one event is a harbinger of another, common between them. The Harbinger "means that precedes something else, announces its arrival, foresees it during subsequent events, clarifies and develops. A harbinger may be an action, thought, individual, group of individuals, any human element that can meet in history an illustration and confirmation of its role. " Callot (1962) prefers it to a man, since she, according to the author, carries a message that previous generations did not understand, but which is confirmed by the next May, 2020 Openings Volume 11, Issue 1, Supl. 2 course of history. He wrote: "It can be said that Rousseau and Voltaire are the forerunners of European unity, because they stipulated that othersrevolutionaries, modern chemists, supporters of European unityconsidered or are considering how ideas are finally consolidated and successfully impose them on others". In his writings, the philosopher tries to establish a connection between the alleged events and the result, that is, between what was supposed and what happened (Mironov, 2019). The object of interest from Callot (1962) has always been the question of why researchers independently come to the same conclusions, why people of different eras are worried about the same problems, and where to find their roots. The author seeks constancy in the human mind, plays a decisive role between the harbinger and the facts and events that have come true, but at the same time shares them. According to Callot (1962), they are separated by certain ideas, technical and other means that characterize at one stage or another the development of science and culture in general, and their identity is identical intellectual processes, that is, thoughts that excite scientists of different eras and different times.
The basis of the prediction according to Callot (1962) is a constant, which can be a connection between objects, or the object itself. Constants are sociological and historical. "A study of the past of humanity, writes Callot (1962), -reveals in individual phenomena a certain duration, some more or less pronounced permanence". Any phenomenon, -continues Callot (1962), takes a certain place among other phenomena. It is with them in certain relationships and relationships. These connections and relationships are as stable and constant as the phenomena themselves. They are called causal relationships. Their historical character is what they construct in the past. Therefore, in the analysis of certain events, philosophy must go beyond the past. And this means that it must postulate a new principle: that which is permanent in the past must remain in the future.
Regarding the sociological constant, Callot (1962) believed that it plays a connecting role between various constant objects. The scientist noted: "... A fact is constant when it acts as the only manifestation of a phenomenon, that is, as a stable connection of many stable objects". According to the author, the sociological constant characterizes the current state of phenomena, while the historical constant is the past. It deals with experience, which makes up the daily life of society, so with its help you can build short-term forecasts. Combining the two constants, Callot (1962) comes to the conclusion: "The prediction of the future is the more probable, the more it correlates with the main cause and with a close consequence".  Callot (1962) believes that if a researcher aims to predict the future, then he must find in the past and present a constant that would make it possible to predict what will happen in the future. He objects to those who present the world as separate fragments that are not related to each other, and does not find anything permanent in it. "To postulate the absolute and complete variability of the supermarket," writes Callot (1962), "in particular the variability of the social world, to state a complete gap between all the facts that make up its formation, means a priori to prohibit any possibility of prediction". Callot (1962) writes that any prediction is probabilistic in nature, but the degree of probability is different, it can be sociological and philosophical-historical. In his opinion, sociological probability requires a specific analysis of facts, and the philosophical-historical one operates with logical categories, abstracting from concrete reality. Unlike Popper (2013), Kahlo believes that it is better to use the philosophical-historical method to predict the course of the historical process. Popper (2013) does not see the difference between natural and social phenomena. A large number of social scientists, including Popper (2013), do not recognize the laws of society on the basis that supposedly there is no repeatability in history, no causal relationship, everything happens in it once in a certain place and at a certain time. Thus, they represent the historical process as a process consisting of separate, unrelated fragments.
The concept of law denotes objective, internal, necessary, repeating, stable connections of phenomena and processes of natural and social reality, therefore, no scientist denies the existence of laws of nature (Whitehead, 1948). They all understand that natural processes and phenomena are interconnected, that these connections are translated differently, that thanks to them, all parts of the natural world interact, a transition from one state to another takes place. But when it comes to society, many researchers categorically exclude these connections and relationships. The question is not at all that social scientists deny social laws because of opportunistic considerations, since the matter lies primarily in the specificity of social cognition itself.
Firstly, society is not only an object of study, but also a subject. A physicist, for example, deals with nature, that is, with such an object that opposes it and always, so to speak, "submissively obeys". A sociologist deals with the activities of people who act consciously and create material and spiritual values.
People change their views, their attitude to certain historical facts and events, and, in addition, each person is individual and by virtue of this May, 2020 Openings Volume 11, Issue 1, Supl. 2 79 has his own point of view on all issues of life. It is very difficult to establish the true opinion of people about a particular phenomenon of social reality. For example, an experimental physicist can repeat experiments until he is convinced of the correctness of the results obtained, and the sociologist is deprived of such an opportunity, because, unlike nature, society is changing faster. A physicist can hope for the "sincerity" of nature, and a sociologist cannot be completely sure that people answer his questions sincerely (Ankersmit, 2003). Secondly, social relations that develop in the process of joint human activity are more complicated than natural processes and phenomena, since they consist of material, political, social and spiritual relations that are closely interconnected (Pin-Buzgalina, 2018). Studying this whole complex of issues is a delicate and complicated matter. But besides the macro level, there is also a micro level of public life (for example, student groups, sports teams, etc.), where the connections and relations of various elements of society are even more confused and contradictory, and their disclosure has many difficulties and difficulties ().
Thirdly, the social reflection of society is not only direct, but also indirect in nature (Carroll, 2000). So, some phenomena are reflected directly, others -indirectly. For example, political consciousness reflects political life directly, fixing attention only on the political sphere of society (Segal, 2018). Philosophy indirectly reflects political life in the sense that politics is not an object of research for it, although in one way or another it affects one or another of its aspects. Art and literature are completely connected with the indirect reflection of public life.
Fourthly, social cognition can be carried out through a number of indirect links. Thus, spiritual values in the form of certain forms of knowledge about society are transmitted from generation to generation, and each generation uses them to clarify certain issues (Carr, 1986). So, for example, a modern physicist cannot use the physical knowledge of the seventeenth century, but without them there would be no modern physics; not a single historian of antiquity can ignore the historical works of Herodotus, Plato, Aristotle, because based on the study of their works, we create our own idea of the distant past from us.
Fifth, people create and create material and spiritual blessings together, and belong to certain groups, classes and classes. So, each individual is formed not only personal, but also class, class, caste consciousness. Therefore, in the study of society, it is necessary to take into account the interests of people, their social status, social role.
Sixth, society is changing and developing faster than nature, and our knowledge of society is rapidly becoming obsolete, so they need to be constantly updated and enriched. If you do not follow this, you can lag behind life and science and subsequently slide into dogmatism.
Seventhly, the knowledge of social phenomena is directly related to the practical activities of people, with their interest in using the results of scientific research in their lives. Such sciences, as, for example, sociology, jurisprudence, political science, are directly of practical importance, since they serve society, offer various models and schemes for improving social and political institutions, and increase labor productivity. Even such an abstract discipline as philosophy associated with practice, because it forms a person's worldview, orientates him in a complex network of social life, helps to overcome difficulties and find his place in the world (Savelyeva, Poletaev, 2017).
Thus, the study of public life is more complicated and harder than natural processes and phenomena. It should be noted that the social world should be viewed in the same way as the natural world, without mystification (Danto, 1962). The scientific view indicates that people who create their history are able to know what they are creating, they are able to discover complex relationships and relationships, they are able to predict the future of the historical process, its development trends.

The Appointment of the History Philosophy
The inextricable connection of the past, the present in a postpandemic society and the future testifies to the unity of history, "there is nothing but a successive change of individual generations, each of which uses materials, productive forces transferred to it by all previous generations; because of this, this generation, on the one hand, continues the inherited activity with absolute changes, and on the other hand, it modifies the old conditions by means of a completely changed activity. " The modern young generation prolongs life in the future, but subsequently it turns into a mature generation, and instead a new generation appears that will live in the future (Frye, 1957). This chain of the historical process is the civilization of mankind.
Predictions regarding social processes are closely related to the dynamic and statistical laws of objective reality. By dynamic we mean such causal relationships when a certain state necessarily has clearly defined consequences, and statistical ones are explained as regularities of mass phenomena. In fact, most of the laws are statistical in nature, since the world May, 2020 Openings Volume 11, Issue 1, Supl. 2 around us, including society, is a very complex and diverse phenomenon, therefore no dynamic laws can encompass it. Predictions of social processes and phenomena are based on data from history, sociology, statistics, demography, politics, philosophy and other humanities, which implies the complexity of social foresight and the emergence of utopian theories and concepts. The "City of the Sun" by the Italian thinker Campanella, the views of Saint-Simon, Fourier, Owen are considered vivid examples of utopian theories, since they approached the studies of social life superficially, did not engage in deep development of class relations and did not reveal the laws of human development, although sometimes they put forward brilliant ideas (Efremov, 2018). Consequently, these views were not based on a strictly scientific analysis of social phenomena and processes.
Reality manifests itself in two forms: in the form of essence and in the form of a phenomenon, where the first concept is a set of immanent connections and relations of objects and processes of the objective world, and the second is explained as a manifestation of essence. "The essence must be. Her appearance in her is her withdrawal into immediacy, which as reflection -"in-itself" is a stable existence (matter), while form is reflection -"in-another", devoid of a stable existence. Visibility by that definition, due to which the essence is not being, but essence; developed visibility phenomenon. Therefore, the essence is not behind the phenomenon or on the other side of the phenomenon, but precisely because the essence is that which exists, existence is a phenomenon".
Science is studying the essence, not the phenomenon, since in the phenomenon you can see the internal, objective, stable and necessary connections and relations of objects of natural and social reality. In modern social science, for example, there is a lot of fair criticism of globalization, but since research on globalization processes is carried out at the level of the phenomenon, criticism is superficial. Real science is not limited to the study of the phenomenon, it penetrates the essence of things, reveals their underlying causes. Reality is a realized opportunity. Opportunity is that which may or may not be realized. As Hegel said: "Not everything that is possible is really." He wrote: "It is possible that tonight the month will fall to the ground, the month is a body separated from the earth, and therefore it may also fall down like a stone thrown into the air; it is possible that the Turkish sultan will become the Pope, because he is a man and can convert to the Christian faith, become a Catholic priest, etc. " (Karpov, 2019). In his own words, the philosopher showed that there is no reality without possibility and possibility without reality.
In his books, Popper (2002) ignores the dialectic of reality and possibility, so he only has reality. Meanwhile, if there were no opportunity, then there would be no reality. The list of examples is endless -starting from the Earth, if it were not suitable for human existence, it would be just a planet, ending with the fact that if there were no possible conditions for the emergence of social life, then there would be no society.
Thus, social foresight is nevertheless realized on the basis of reality and on the basis of opportunity. The prediction of the future has unquestioningly based on scientific data, on real facts, on trends in the development of human society (Hegel, 2007). The decisive methodological role is played by the materialistic understanding of history, the essence of which is that "the mode of production of material life determines the social, political and spiritual processes of life in general." Material production is an important element of any story, and it must be continuous. Mankind needs material wealth to satisfy its own needs, but satisfied needs lead to new ones, because new production also causes new needs. Such is the dialectic of production and consumption according to Marx. People must first of all satisfy their material needs, and for this they need to enter into certain production relations and use the productive forces that, as Marx (1992) writes, form the basis of their history. The main principle of forecasting is the analysis of the development trend of material social relations. When predicting certain processes, one cannot ignore the roles of political, religious, ethical and other factors. It is necessary to take into account such a seemingly insignificant factor as the mentality of the people. A lot depends on this mentality, which manifests itself in the code of conduct. And the code of conduct, in turn, is determined by the "inner spirit" of the people. If this "spirit" is irrational, then the people have one future, and if rational, then another.
We live in an era of globalization in all spheres of public life, in an era of integration processes, when there is a breakdown of national cultures and national traditions, when national branches of the economy virtually disappear. The origins of globalization go back to the distant past of mankind. K. Marx (1992) wrote about this phenomenon, but without using the concept of "globalization". The English researcher of the work of Marx (1992) writes: "Current scholars and politicians tend to consider themselves thinkers of the present, like to utter the word" globalization "out of place and out of place, without having the slightest idea that Marx was engaged in at least in 1848 this question would not have surprised him at all at the global dominance of the McDonald's network. The transfer of the activity center from the Atlantic to the Pacific region -thanks to the economy of May, 2020 Openings Volume 11, Issue 1, Supl. 2 the "Asian tigers" and the silicone boom in the cities of the western coast of America -was provided by Marx more than a hundred years before the birth of Bill Gates". According to the researcher, Marx predicted this through a scientific analysis of bourgeois society. Marx wrote: "By exploiting the world market, the bourgeoisie has made the production and consumption of all countries cosmopolitan. Much to the chagrin of the reactionaries, it wrested national soil from under the feet of industry. Aboriginal national industries are destroyed and continue to be destroyed every day. They are being supplanted by new industries, the introduction of which is becoming a matter of life for all civilized nations. Instead of the old needs that could be satisfied with domestic products, new ones arise, to satisfy which the products of the most remote countries and the most diverse climates are required. The old local and national isolation and the existence of products of our own production are being replaced by a comprehensive connection and a comprehensive dependence of nations on each other. This applies equally to both material and spiritual production. The fruits of the spiritual activities of individual nations become the common property". This analysis was made on the basis of the disclosure of the laws of development of human society, which reached the bourgeois stage.

Conclusions
During the years of Marx's life, integrative processes were not as intense as they are today, but he predicted many aspects of globalization even then, because he proceeded from the unity of the past, present and future, with the immanent logic of the development of the historical process.
The modern era demonstrates all the pros and cons of globalization, all the challenges and risks posed by it, which makes it possible to make forecasts in general terms about the future of mankind. For example, current globalization trends, uneven economic, political and spiritual development can lead to the self-destruction of modern civilization. To avoid this, it is necessary to predict the future and adjust the present, because only people can create their own history in this world in a timely manner to resolve social conflicts.