Interrelationship between the concepts of vector of evolution and management of sustainable evolution

. Within the framework of the system of categories and principles of the St. Petersburg scientific school of social synergetics, problems of relationship between managing the course of history and determining its main vector, as well as freedom and responsibility, "correctness" and "success" of a subject choosing options for social evolution, are involved in research. People through whom "evolutionary mechanisms" are realized as the main carriers of evolutionary changes, significantly modify "causal factors" due to their consciousness and freedom, which, being in a synergistic sense, are defined as a specific analogue of casualty, as a factor that changes the ratio of evolutionary opportunities of system. Freedom only arises in the conditions of super selection, that is, it occurs in the conditions of control, on the part of a subject, over the variety of selection forms, where "slyness" of human mind manifests itself. The degree of choice "correctness" is determined subjectively on the basis of proximity to the dominant social ideal. The criterion of stable reproduction of the social ideal can be an optimal amount of sacrifices made in the name of its realization. The objective aspect of choice is related to the concept of "luck", and is determined by the proximity to the super attractor — the unique set of evolutionary opportunities concerning developing the social system.


Introduction
There is a limit relating to the complexity of socio-cultural systems, which bears, within the concept of the St. Petersburg scientific school of social synergetics [1], the name of super attractor, acting as a kind of "global limit of self-organization, characterized by achieving the measure of global system synthesis focused on chaos (freedom involving violation of social norms), on the one hand, and on order (responsibility including observance of social norms), on the other hand" [2], as well as the limit of technical and artistic development of mankind. The presence of the super attractor, operating as a unique set of opportunities prepared for the existence of humanity, objectifies the deep meaning of social evolution which consists in supermanesis -formation of a superman and supermanhood. The movement to the super attractor is carried out through social selection -the self-organizing mechanism which includes such selection factors as the thesaurus, detector, and selector. This is the main regulating law of social evolution, the highest form of self-organization of matter, which manifests itself in the form of super selection including choosing selection factors in relation to all other trends and regularity that represent lower levels of self-organization. The bifurcation point is the key element of the whole process, namely the transition from order to chaos and from chaos to order. "The exit to the (simple or strange) attractor is determined by bifurcation, a zone of system instability, but mainly by selecting and implementing one of a finite number of possible directions" [3, p. 19], where selection and implementation of one opportunity occur, being taken from the limited thesaurus of opportunities formed by bifurcation. The role of the detector performing such a selection shows the "internal interaction of many system elements" (V. P. Bransky). The detector, in turn, is guided by the selector, a factor that ultimately comes down to the principle of maximal stability. Thanks to the acting super selection which in the first approximation can be understood as a creative scrutiny of historical lessons made by humanity; the process of social self-organization moving towards the super attractor acquires the asymptotic (potentially infinite) character; at the same time, it becomes possible to stay "one step ahead" of critical aggravation of global problems and civilizational crises. Based on this information, the concept of global progress will meaningfully correlate with the concept of super attractor.

Materials and methods
The ideas presented above may seem unconvincing and declarative. But this is only partly true. The doctrine of the super attractor is quite scientific. It is well known that the fundamental law is the system-forming core of any scientific theory. In our case, such a law is the super selection. Self-organization acting as a process of mutual transitions of order and chaos appears at the observed level as a balancing part between simple and strange local attractors. Such balancing takes on a certain tendency, namely direction towards the global attractor, in other words, to the unique set of opportunities. It is super selection (not simple selection) that makes existence of the super attractor necessary. Super selection perfects simple selection by making it more constructive and radical, while creating a new thesaurus, i. e. producing new chaos, changing and improving the detector and selector. As a result, the degree of chaos and order synthesis increases within social self-organization, focusing on the system aiming at the maximal stability. At the elementary levels of matter, there is already a periodic change of chaos and order. But only in the conditions of system hierarchy it is possible to synthesize order and chaos, in which the increase of complexity covers order and chaos. Chaos is not always elementary -each level of system complexity has its own limit of chaotization; this can be expressed by formation of organization levels. Thus, in the conditions of improving a mechanical assembly, blocks are created from individual details, or even blocks from lower-level blocks, on the basis of which the complete mechanism is assembled much faster. Any complex self-organizing system as a whole is a unity of at least two levels where the macro level is significantly different from the micro level, which can be characterized as an extremely non-equilibrium state and as a source of constant fluctuations. The micro level chaos periodically "breaks through" the macro level, causing a cyclical change of chaos and order in it. The increase of order and chaos synthesis degree is associated both with the increase at the level of order, and with the increase of the stable limit until which the system is considered chaotic every time. Therefore, it makes sense to talk about increasing levels of system evolution which are affected by both more complex simpler attractors characterizing the evolutionary level of order, and more complex strange attractors that characterize the evolutionary level of chaos. The unity of different forms of selection expressed in super selection is especially noticeable in distributing functions of social selection (in the form of an acting cause and a managing cause in social processes); in it, the causal factors (sources) and the driving forces (mechanisms) of evolution act as contradictory, but interrelated sides: the sources initiate, stimulate and encourage production (such are the needs -social and personal), and the driving forces fulfill selection not only of needs (realizable -unrealizable, expedient -impractical), but also the selection of social production methods (ways of human activity), determining the successful ones that won a competition. The people through whom the "evolutionary mechanisms" are realized, as the main sources of innovation, significantly modify the "causal factors" due to the presence of freedom. Affecting the sources of evolution by social production, people also change mechanisms themselves (spheres of social production). This is the specificity of social selection. Selection operating as a driving force of social evolution and its basic, fundamental law ensures its tendency and accumulation of useful innovations.
In human society, the action of selection -the mechanism of social production -most clearly demonstrates the branch of the progressive direction of Universum`s evolution. The point is that in the evolution of complex systems, opportunities of macro jumps periodically arise and are realized. The complexity of system is determined by its ability to realize many opportunities concerning the factor of "noisy reproduction" (M. Eigen): complex systems are reproduced with a greater number of errors than simple ones, and therefore they have more evolutionary prospects. At the same time, minimizing manifestations of complexity -as one of the conditions for system stability -is noticed in the way of co-existing with other similar systems. The cooperative behaviour of such systems makes them relatively one-sided and simple in terms of functioning; thus, an entire culture is formed, based on collective life activity, for example, social production among people or a swarm of bees. Selection and super selection distribute their influence to the evolution of system, as follows: simple selection affects on the hierarchical structure "horizontally", and super selection -"vertically"; selection has one scale of change (weakly intense and short-term), and super selection has another scale of change (more intense and long-term); the long-term perspective "straightens" numerous zigzags and errors of the short-term perspective.
In socium, freedom manifests itself in the form of control over the processes of natural selection; there is a superstructure over natural and biological life shaped in the form of social production. Social selection involves a subjective choice which, being in the process of anthropogenesis, inevitably leads to super selection. The objective aspect of choice is related to the concept of "luck" (Fortune), and is determined by the proximity to the super attractor (a global trend of human development, a unique set of opportunities). The subjective aspect of choice is related to the concept of "correctness" (morality), and is determined by the proximity to the ideal which an individual or a group serve, obey, and which "illuminates" a certain aspect of social entity. Implementation of the "golden rule of morality" which is close to the ideal served by the ancient sages (Confucius, Buddha, Socrates, Plato) can also be associated with the meaning of life in its modern meaning. We associate the meaning of life and death with the movement to the super attractor. Pefroming in the role as a super attractor, various constructions of "ideal future" have acted and still act -these are the "kingdom of God", "communism", "Shambhala", and various utopias of social thinkers and preachers. It may be quite legitimate to ask, "What kind of relation can dystopias, i.e. models of undesirable future characterized by global chaos (a catastrophe), have with the idea of a super attractor?" Progress is not guaranteed: the challenge requires an adequate response. What if humanity is unable to respond successfully to the challenge -over and over again -with a consistent decline in the level of abilities, in the conditions of degradation of human nature and human spirit? Then the global crisis and transition to disaster can be irreversible, and everything will end in global collapse. In relation to separate civilizations, as history shows, this case is quite possible and has more than once been recorded by historians. Has humanity never been on the edge of abyss and on the verge of extinction? There were such moments.
What has changed in us, and can we call these changes fundamental, since they guarantee sociogenesis from such catastrophes? The level of chaotization and decay is determined by the strange attractor, and it is different for each individual case. But if we look at the evolution of Universum through the prism of the growing degree of order and chaos synthesis, it turns out that this principle has the nature of law and expresses something repetitive, that is, it has a direct relationship to reality. Taking into account the sufficiently high degree of order and chaos synthesis exisitng in the complex self-developing system, particularly in the human society, threat of disaster is increasingly levelled, although it is present as an important element of synergy development. It is told not only about the evolution of order, but also about the evolution of chaos. "The threshold of death that took place in the conditions of proximity of a man to an animal is far behind -in the past. The degree of decline and the level of "bottom" are now completely different than before" [4]. Growth of "top" and "bottom" synthesis degree is managed by the super attractor in accordance with the anthropic principle. We ask you to accept this thesis on faith: the anthropic principle, like any other principle of existence and cognition, limits options for a set of conditions necessary for existence of an observer. On going beyond these limits, it is impossible for an observer to arise in the Universe, namely for complex stable structures in general, and particularly for structures that are favourable for human life and development of consciousness. However, even if we are already in the zone of the super attractor`s influence, and it indirectly confirms the fact of resolving the Caribbean Сrisis of October 1962, yet the movement towards it is not programmed, but it is quite controlled and connected with our desire for the ideal in conditions of "peeling the hard core from the fragile shell", the panhuman ideal from the set of private human ideals. Formation of the hyperessence -the extremely complex spectrum regarding possibilities of the superman and superhumanity being emerged -indirectly determines the unpredictably tortuous trajectory of human development. Existence of the social self-organization stable ideal that requires optimal, not excessive, sacrifices, which would serve as a guide for people in life, in our opinion, is quite feasible. To do this, first of all, it is important to form a stable balance of freedom and responsibility at all levels of society. Such a balance is necessary in order to correct the process of social self-organization, which, as history shows, is mainly spontaneous, unmanageable. Human intervention in the evolutionary process is comparable to Hegel's "tricks of the world mind" formulation. The category of responsibility is still understood according to the Hegelian scheme as the opposite of arbitrariness, more precisely, as freedom limited by bounds of morality. The refore responsibility often acts as a purely ethical category, which is a reduction in its status. Its ontological essence should not be deduced speculatively, on the contrary, it ought to be based on the experience of science and socio-historical practice. To rise above the Hegelian speculative creativity of the world spirit (order, progress), which finds the definition of freedom as a conceived necessity in it, one must plunge into creativity, the goal of which is de-hierarchization (chaotization) that is controlled when freedom is defined as conceived randomness. This is the strong feature of "evolution management" which allows one to "prick the right spot of environment at the right time", however, full (absolute) control over the course of history is hindered by uncertainty of future. It is impossible to manage the process of self-organization to the end, although it is possible to determine its main vector.

Results
From what has been said, it is clear that the essence of social reality development is reduced to neither unilateral increase of order (totalitarianism) nor unilateral increase of chaos (anarchism), on the contrary, there is an increase of order and chaos synthesis degree that tends to reach maximal stability. Dialectic of freedom no longer appears as a contradiction between arbitrariness and responsibility, but it appears as a contradiction between a E3S Web of Conferences 258, 07008 (2021) UESF-2021 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202125807008 conceived necessity (freedom) and conceived randomness (responsibility). The latter is feasible only when a personality mainly chooses from those opportunities that have arisen with his participation and are controlled by him. Thus, making the system incur new disintegration every time, creating new chaos full of new possibilities, a personality creates a meta level of self-organization and meta capabilities, the unique set of which can be interpreted as a super attractor. Here, activity of subject is truly creative; when there is a game of randomness, it includes not only chaotization, but also ordering (transition from chaos to new order).
The vector of social evolution and the course of history are determined by interaction between the ideal (ideology) and the thesaurus of evolutionary possibilities. The thesaurus, as a rule, does not depend on the will of subject -the so-called "butterfly effect" is worth mentioning, whereby small fluctuations can provoke the most serious structural changes in the system. On the contrary, the selector (the principle of stability) is very dependent on the subject, and history shows how different, sometimes opposite, variants of evolution can be selected from the same thesaurus with the help of different selectors. Many examples tell us not only that there is no predestination, but also how great the role of personality in history is. In the end, it is discovered that "luck" depends on a person's attitude to the super attractor, although people cannot guess it. Unsuccessful choices at this level join the money box containing "mistakes of the past"; thus, they form the selector. There is no doubt that it is possible to direct the course of history both in the direction of disaster and in the direction of progress. Triviality of such a conclusion is obvious, but the thesis about objective existence of a super attractor is not banal, which inclusion in the ideology makes it the "golden branch" of culture.
In many situations, humanity faces need of determining the measure of order and chaos synthesis. This need can be expressed in different ways: "if you want peace, prepare for war" or "a bad peace is better than a good quarrel", etc. But it is especially important to digress into the natural science field of knowledge, in particular, into physical synergetics. Let us define the concept of "measure of chaos". Measure, being used as a philosophical category, is determined by boundaries of quantitative changes that determine preserving this quality. Many scientists directly correlate the concept of "measure of chaos" with "quantity of entropy". One can disagree with this. S. D. Haitun substantiates the approximate and even unscientific interpretation of entropy as a "measure of chaos" by proving the extreme difficulty and complexity of attempts to scientifically express the complete coincidence between the quantity of entropy and the measure of chaos [5]. There are many scientific facts that show how the second law of thermodynamics does not prevent growing complexity of systems and their progress. At the same time, this law is responsible for steady disorganization and destruction of the primary structure. The contradiction is obvious. If the measure of system disorganization directly depends on the quantity of entropy, then there should be formally and logically no possibility of complication and ordering. Let us note that the physical value of entropy is expressed in reducing all types of energy to thermal energy, therefore the value of growing thermal energy is described within the system, which is equivalent to the value of "entropy production". Hence one can make the well-known conclusion which name is "entropy is a measure of chaos". However, it is also known that entropy is produced both in the case of structure simplification and in the case of its complication; one can watch the process of growing thermal energy everywhere, but in the first case, the phasic transition from order to chaos occurs, and in the other case, one can observe the phasic transition from chaos to order; however, provided that the part of entropy can be exported into the environment, which directly indicates legality of the concept of "measure of chaos". It is necessary to figure out what the measure of chaos is in the complex open system, which is capable of exporting entropy. "The Prigozhin school" has successfully researched the spontaneous emergence of complex structures located far from thermodynamic equilibrium. If classical thermodynamics states that energy and entropy are functions of system state that uniquely determine the condition, then the theory of dissipative structures for open systems exchanging matter and energy with environment shows the ambiguity expressed in the behaviour of chaos. Classical interpretation demonstrates the increase in entropy which is equivalent to the increase in the probability of thermal equilibrium of system. However, there are different possible prospects for self-organization in open systems: transitions from order to chaos and from chaos to order. The main condition of such an ambiguity should be considered as evolution of initial conditions, assuming different scenarios regarding transition to chaos or order, and other different entropies. By the way, the expression "evolution of initial conditions" substantially coincides with such formulations as "evolution of evolution" (E. Yanch), "evolution of evolution laws" (J. Simpson), as well as with the concept of super selection (V. P. Bransky). As for the different types of entropy, such as "Clausius` entropy", "Boltzmann`s entropy", "Shannon`s entropy" or "Kolmogorov`s entropy" are widely known. Every phasic transition in the evolution of systems includes bifurcations or special zones where randomness is dominant. The complex dynamics of system can be described by using a small number of order parameters that satisfy equations of deterministic chaos. Describing the gas laser, G. Haken focuses on the "deterministic chaos" at the "point of instability", when "there are not only one, but several order parameters, and their behaviour determines the entire conduct of the laser" [6, p. 110]. In our opinion, the German scientist`s arguments explain the idea that reveals the content of the concept of "measure of chaos", namely it concerns the quantity of order parameters arising in the bifurcation zone. The order parameters ("modes" or "waves" named in the language of physical synergetics), which are translated into the language of social synergetics, are the very possibilities that fill the thesaurus. Deterministic chaos implies the state of system where there are a number of inconsistent, but internally consistent, zones. The illustration describes the army facing the attack during which emerged groups move in different directions and maintain the internal consistent behaviour; one can notice the obvious state of general disorder which, however, has order within individual parts. The measure of deterministic chaos is the quantity (number) concerning its separate order zones. The disintegrated empire, which is a space of separate states that have preserved their integrity, illustrates such deterministic chaos. Let us note that the terminology of natural science synergetics (chaos, order, bifurcation, fluctuation, order parameters, etc.) can be applied in the field of sociohumanitarian knowledge only with certain conversion of terms. Within the "V. P. Bransky school", the Gestalt method is one of the conversion ways. Its essence is as follows: the empirical representation of object, i.e. the Gestalt, has its own elements which are to be replaced by idealized objects, in particular, by elements of organizational structure of socium; thus, we get the speculative model of socium where the desired ideal object (socium) functions according to the logic of the Gestalt. For example, a laser can be used as a gestalt method. Let us recall the extrapolations into the various fields of knowledge including society, which are made by G. Haken on the basis of the "laser paradigm" which was created by himself. "I tried to show how the same principles could be applied in diverse disciplines dealing with processes of self-organization which occur in the complex systems. The studied systems range from physics to sociology" [6, p. 121]. Such approaches allow us to detect trends and regularity in the development of real systems, carried out by means of the ideal model. In such models, bifurcation process manifests itself in two directions: complication and simplification, hierarchization of system and its de-hierarchization (deterministic chaos). If we apply the concept of entropy in social sciences, then, at first, it is necessary to know what kind of entropy is close to the concept of deterministic chaos inherent in social processes, and secondly, if entropy is associated with the increase in the probability of transition to the final state of system, then the increase in the possibilities, or, better to say, in the future options, is associated with the decrease in the probability of the final state, and therefore with the decrease in entropy, and vice versa, the decrease in options, and therefore the increase in the probability of outcome, lets entropy grow. In this case, entropy is not literally a measure of deterministic chaos, although its application is not devoid of a certain meaning. Regarding social synergetics, we talk about social chaos and social order. Here entropy in its classical sense, for example, "Clausius` entropy", is not applicable, because it involves the reduction of all energy types to the thermal one which becomes the most probable in the physico-chemical sense. At the same time, the second law applies to all movement types including the social form of movement, and assumes the increase in the entropy of system, eventually leading it to death.
Human activity can be described in the form of bifurcation chains. Conventionally, in each bifurcation point, a person is forced to make a choice, using the objective set of scenarios formed against his will -which can be possible ways of his future life. The moment of choice at the previous point clearly affects the subsequent moments of choice, increasing or, conversely, reducing the number of options. The measure of chaos that fluctuates in this way, including the scope of the thesaurus of possibilities, corresponds to the fluctuating measure of human freedom in the changeable social world. The cycles found in such self-oscillations directly tell us about the presence of certain regularity and trends in lives of personalities and society. The unity of freedom and necessity is revealed to us, which is described by the synergetic theory of social selection. At the same time, the possibility of choice is a necessary, but not sufficient, sign of freedom for which two more conditions are needed: autonomy and awareness of an act of choice. Awareness of choice just assumes that the individual is able to comprehend the "measure of chaos" of system which, in our conception, corresponds to the concept of the thesaurus of possibilities, correlating it with the "measure of order"; within our concept, it acts as a selector or a norm, as will be discussed below, and thus determines under what conditions transition to the desired future is possible. The creative approach to managing chaos, expressed in art, science and philosophy, is quite possible, because Nature can do it -but is man capable of it? The long-standing dream of "Western" mentality covering chaos management and its defeating has recently become more and more persistent. In our opinion, the primary task is not to make chaos subordinate to man (in the near future it is hardly possible), but to learn how to direct social self-organization, and the vector of this direction is defined by the "V. P. Bransky school" as a "super attractor". However, it is often correlated with the ideal, which is not quite true, since the super attractor is a material essence which is not ideal. "The global future of society without violence lies precisely in the formation and realization of the universal (intersubjective) ideal (the super attractor)" [7]. The well-known statement of Karl Marx describes ideas that have taken possession of masses, becoming a material force, which can be interpreted in different ways, but this process is still peculiar to the selector. The important condition for freedom of a person who is guided by such an ideal in managing his own evolution is the knowledge of the measure of the chaos and order synthesis. Freedom serves as the main step to happiness and well-being not only for one person, but also for many other people, which creates the synergistic effect in society. N. F. Rakhmankulova has written: "Happiness and freedom of one person are favourable for happiness and freedom of others" [8]. But first, let us decide on the interrelationship between the measure of chaos and the measure of order. Complexity of open system consists primarily in its multilevel. Chaos at the micro level manifests itself at the macro level in the form of process including the sequential change (alternation) of chaos and order. Following the above-said thesis which reduces chaos to the bifurcation process, the quantitative characteristic or measure of which correspond to the number of possible outcomes (thesaurus), one can conclude that human influence on the vector of evolutionary process is reduced to the conscious impact on the structure which is commonly called the norm. The concept of the norm, especially the social norm, is an expression of the measure of order operating in the form of regularity and reproduction of characteristics touching stability (homeostasis) of system. Too many evolutionary possibilities threaten the crisis of system (for example, the crisis of overproduction), and too few ones threaten it with "need which will grab you by the throat" -and a man will submit to circumstances.

Discussion
Let us briefly consider the regularity of formation of social norm. In the complex ethnic environment, there are situations when overcoming contradictions that have arisen, it requires formation of new ideals. The concept of the ideal is associated with the understanding of an object devoid of any contradictions, where essence coincides with existence, and this thing becomes an image of desired future. The ideal using activity of subject initiates emergence of hierarchy of values in society. However, its implementation eliminating some social contradictions generates other conflicts between fathers and children, a state and civil society, ethnic groups, etc. Society experiences a crisis when people who are guided by different value priorities are not able to agree with each other, because the ideals that have arisen "at the call of time" become independent, and their carriers are ready to make great sacrifices for their triumph. By the way, in this situation when there is an urgent need of a social norm that optimizes an amount of sacrifice, which sometimes saves the social system from going beyond boundaries of reasonable measure; and absence of such a universally recognized norm can lead to catastrophes (the Jacobin dictatorship in France, the era of "great terror" in the USSR, the collapse of the USSR, etc.). The continuous process of differentiation and integration of ideals, closely related to the dynamics of ethnic stereotypes of behaviour, eventually leads to the formation of a norm of social adaptation made by the regulatory action of the "law of relevance" (V. P. Bransky). The stereotype of behaviour expresses behavioural conformity, and the ideal, on the contrary, expresses transformative intentions of people. Both of the components are closely related to the needs of ethnicity. The sufficiently profound formulation of need is given in the article by G. D. Levin [9] who correlates it with activity of subject filling lack of something necessary for normal life. The concept of need thus combines the concepts of norm, ideal and stereotype of behaviour, filling the action of the law of relevance with content [10]. The series of repeated correspondences between ideals and stereotypes leads to the emergence of the stable dominant ideal that attracts an increasing number of supporters, which undoubtedly affects the formation of the stable social norm expressing the vital need; that, in turn, determines one or another direction of society development [11].
The historical and philosophical excursion into the genesis of the concept of social norm takes us back to antiquity [12]. Plato reduced the highest manifestation of morality to such a virtue as justice; Aristotle, in turn, derived the rule called the "golden mean" which, in fact, leads a personality to the development of genuine virtue; and let us note that the rule of Aristotle somewhat resembles the law of relevance [13]. The best example of the impact of norm influencing on modern life is traffic laws: first of all, on following traffic laws, we preserve life and health of our own and those around us; and, secondly, there is a harmonious process of meeting needs of all road users on roads [14]. Traffic regulations are organic to the large set of possible road situations, and the main thing is that drivers and pedestrians do not need to make excessive efforts to learn the rules. Such norms are present in all spheres of human life. But, as already mentioned, the ideals (with norms formed by their patterns) become obsolete, the norms themselves linked to some generations of people often follow them to the end of life; and new generations follow new ideals and form other norms. The task of maintaining the trend that increases the degree of social chaos and order synthesis, freedom and responsibility, as history shows, becomes harder; but during the progress of science and technology it gets even more difficult and more laborious, since the problem of "luck" and "correctness" of choosing a path for humanity becomes more and more serious over time [15].

Conclusions
In conclusion, we have formulated a number of theses that require further in-depth studying and development: 1. The subjective aspect of "correctness" of the choice of opportunities made by the subject of self-determination is determined by the degree of choice that corresponds to the dominant social ideal associated with attempts to"manage social evolution".
2. The criterion of sustainable reproduction of the social ideal is the optimal amount of sacrifices made in the name of its realization, which is determined by the social norm.
3. The objective aspect of choice is related to the concept of "luck" and is determined by the proximity to the global vector of human development (the super attractor is considered as a unique set of evolutionary possibilities).
4. The necessary condition regarding adequacy ("correctness" and "success") of choice made by the subject is to achieve the measure of social chaos and order synthesis as well as freedom and responsibility at all levels of socium, using the means of the stable social norm formed as a result of it.
5. It is impossible to govern history, but it is possible to direct its course by practising the science-based and philosophically correct project including the formulation of the universally valid social ideal and the theory of the super attractor.