Наука, техника, общество — современные формы интеграции познания

Андрей [Andrey] Леонидович [L.] Андреев [Andreev]; Эдуард [Eduard] Юрьевич [Yu.] Калинин [Kalinin]

doi:10.24160/1993-6982-2019-4-153-161

Андрей [Andrey] Леонидович [L.] Андреев [Andreev]
Эдуард [Eduard] Юрьевич [Yu.] Калинин [Kalinin]

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24160/1993-6982-2019-4-153-161

Keywords: intra-scientific reflection, idealized model, integration of science, technology and production

Abstract

The emergence of early modern time science was marked by further making of its disciplinary organization. Along with the emergence of interdisciplinary interactions, the methodology of science appeared in both philosophical and intra-scientific forms. Intra-scientific reflection tries to solve the problem of normalizing the real course of a cognitive process through elaborating idealized models of scientific knowledge and scientific research. But the methodological idealization, in the framework of which these problems exist on their own, and scientists and methodologists should only reveal them and/or solve them in some way or another, is too strong in a number of aspects. According to a more realistic point of view, it is admitted that these problems relate to the cognition subject itself.

The efforts taken to integrate science, technology and production within the framework of the scientific and technological revolution have revealed a number of essential problems, one of them being discrepancy between the disciplinary organization of science and the nature of tasks that it must solve at the present stage of its development. This discrepancy can be eliminated by expanding and deepening interdisciplinary investigations. In the modern scientific and technical and social space, various integration processes take place, and new postclassical types of disciplines emerge. In the era of globalization, a new global responsibility for the consequences of human actions is also required. Socio-humanitarian expertise and evaluation of technology in the global post-classic perspective serve both as realization of the needs of the society as a whole and of separately taken individuals in assessing not only the conventional technology, but also socio-economic and socio-political projects, technologies, and practices. The modern post-classic practice reveals that ethical neutrality, which is one of the classical science ideal’s main aspects, is vanishing.

Information about authors

Андрей [Andrey] Леонидович [L.] Андреев [Andreev]

Dr.Sci. (Philosop.), Head of Philosophy, Politology, Sociology Named After G.S. Aref’eva Dept., NRU MPEI, e-mail: Sympathy_06@mail.ru

Эдуард [Eduard] Юрьевич [Yu.] Калинин [Kalinin]

Senior Lecturer of Philosophy, Politology, Sociology Named After G.S. Aref’eva Dept., NRU MPEI

References

1. Аршинов В.И. Синергетика как феномен постнеклассической науки. М.: ИФ РАН, 1999. С. 99—116.
2. Гаврилина Е.А. Эксперимент в социально-гуманитарном познании: становление и трансформация // Философия науки и техники. 2017. Т. 22. №1. С. 30—45.
3. Андреев А.Л. и др. Введение в социологию техники. Системы, проектирование, модели образования. М.: Изд-во МЭИ, 2017.
4. Ключарев Г.А. и др. Образование, наука и бизнес в создании интеллектуалоемких сред. СПб.: Нестор-История, 2016. С. 17.
5. Горохов В.Г. Эволюция инженерии: от простоты к сложности. М.: ИФ РАН, 2015.
6. Горохов В.Г. Технические науки: история и теория. М.: Логос, 2013.
7. Алексеева И.Ю., Аршинов В.И. Информационное общество и НБИКС-революция. М.: ИФ РАН, 2016. С. 123.
8. Латур Б. Наука в действии. СПб.: Изд-во Европейского ун-та в Санкт-Петербурге, 2013.
9. Столярова О.Е. Исследования науки в перспективе онтологического поворота. М.: Изд-во Русайнс, 2015. С. 146—175.
10. Стёпин В.С. Теоретическое знание. М.: Прогресс-Традиция, 2000.
11. Биоэтика и биотехнологии: пределы улучшения человека / под ред. Е.Г. Гребенщиковой, Б.Г. Юдина. М.: Изд-во МосГУ, 2017. С. 209—237.
12. Горохов В.Г. Основы философии техники и технических наук. М.: Гардарики, 2007. С. 270—301.
--
Для цитирования: Андреев А.Л., Калинин Э.Ю. Наука, техника, общество — современные формы интеграции познания // Вестник МЭИ. 2019. № 4. С. 153—161. DOI: 10.24160/1993-6982-2019-4-153-161.
#
1. Arshinov V.I. Sinergetika kak Fenomen Postneklassicheskoy Nauki. M.: IF RAN, 1999:99—116. (in Russian).
2. Gavrilina E.A. Eksperiment v Sotsial'no-gumanitarnom Poznanii: Stanovlenie i Transformatsiya. Filosofiya Nauki i Tekhniki. 2017;22;1:30—45. (in Russian).
3. Andreev A.L. i dr. Vvedenie v Sotsiologiyu Tekhniki. Sistemy, Proektirovanie, Modeli Obrazovaniya. M.: Izd-vo MEI, 2017. (in Russian).
4. Klyucharev G.A. i dr. Obrazovanie, Nauka i Biznes v Sozdanii Intellektualoemkikh Sred. SPb.: Nestor-Istoriya, 2016:17. (in Russian).
5. Gorokhov V.G. Evolyutsiya Inzhenerii: ot Prostoty k Slozhnosti. M.: IF RAN, 2015. (in Russian).
6. Gorokhov V.G. Tekhnicheskie Nauki: Istoriya i Teoriya. M.: Logos, 2013. (in Russian).
7. Alekseeva I.Yu., Arshinov V.I. Informatsionnoe Obshchestvo i NBIKS-revolyutsiya. M.: IF RAN, 2016:123. (in Russian).
8. Latur B. Nauka v Deystvii. SPb.: Izd-vo Evropeyskogo Un-ta v Sankt-Peterburge, 2013. (in Russian).
9. Stolyarova O.E. Issledovaniya Nauki v Perspektive Ontologicheskogo Povorota. M.: Izd-vo Rusayns, 2015: 146—175. (in Russian).
10. Stepin V.S. Teoreticheskoe Znanie. M.: Progress-Traditsiya, 2000. (in Russian).
11. Bioetika i Biotekhnologii: Predely Uluchsheniya Cheloveka / Рod Red. E.G. Grebenshchikovoy, B.G. Yudina. M.: Izd-vo MosGU, 2017:209—237. (in Russian).
12. Gorokhov V.G. Osnovy Filosofii Tekhniki i Tekhnicheskikh Nauk. M.: Gardariki, 2007:270—301. (in Russian).
--
For citation: Andreev A.L., Kalinin E.Yu. Science, Technology, and Society: Modern Cognition Integration Forms. Bulletin of MPEI. 2019;4:153—161. (in Russian). DOI: 10.24160/1993-6982-2019-4-153-161.