The childhood of science has passed irrevocably | Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science. 2018. № 42. DOI: 10.17223/1998863Х/42/20

The childhood of science has passed irrevocably

The article aims at a critical analysis of a thesis that science satisfies solely human biological needs through its technical applications beginning with its rise in the 17th-century Europe, while the cultural and spiritual development remains primarily the function of religion and morality. In contrast to this, the author demonstrates the limits of the utilitarian interpretation of science and technology which disregards their role in shaping the modern worldview. The article justifies an opposite understanding of science and technology as a valuable source of the general worldview and even the common sense features (the sphere of unquestioned foundations) of the contemporary generation. In this context, the sharp division between the biological (animal) and cultural (specifically human) needs appears obsolete for the modern society currently determines and even construes both of them. Science and technology receive here a particular and paradigmatic function. They serve as advanced cultural practices: selected and elaborated designs for the development of the individual and society based on the values of rationality, tolerance, reflexivity.

Download file
Counter downloads: 189

Keywords

утилитаризм науки, культурная ценность науки, техника, истина, этика, utilitarian understanding of science, cultural value of science, technology, truth, ethics

Authors

NameOrganizationE-mail
Kasavin Ilya T.Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Science; Nizhny Novgorod State University. N.I. Lobachevskyitkasavin@gmail.com
Всего: 1

References

Feyerabend P. Against Method. Outline of an anarchist theory of knowledge. New York : Verso books, 1975. 339 p.
Pruzhinin B.I. et al. Communications in Science: Epistemological, Socio-cultural and Infra-structural Aspects. Materials of the Round Table // Voprosy filosofii. 2017. Iss. 11. P. 23-57.
Merton R.K. The Sociology of Science. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1973. 605 p.
Stoliarova O.E. Technoscience as an Experimental Environment and Experimental Methodology // Epistemology & Philosophy of Science. 2016. Vol. 48. Iss. 2. P. 40-44.
Маркс К., Энгельс Ф. Сочинения. 2-е изд. Т. 23. М. : Госполитиздат, 1960. 907 c.
Кутырев В.А. Время mortido // Вопросы философии, 2011. № 7. С. 18-29.
Antonovskiy A.Yu. Evolutionary Approach to the Development of Science // Epistemology & Philosophy of Science. 2017. Vol. 52. Iss.14. P. 201-214.
Системная компьютерная биология / отв. ред. Н.А. Колчанов, С.С. Гончаров, В.А. Ли-хошвай, В.А. Иванисенко. Новосибирск: Изд-во СО РАН, 2008. 769 с.
Тирас Х.П. Этика и практика биологического исследования: 200 лет эволюции // Философия науки и техники. 2015. Т. 20. С. 144-168.
Lektorskiy V.A. et al. Humanities and Social Technologies // Voprosy filosofii. 2013. Iss. 7. P. 3-30.
Callon M. Is Science a Public Good. Fifth Mullins Lecture, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, 23 March 1993 // Science, Technology and Human Values, 1994. 19 (4). P. 395-424.
 The childhood of science has passed irrevocably | Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science. 2018. № 42. DOI: 10.17223/1998863Х/42/20

The childhood of science has passed irrevocably | Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science. 2018. № 42. DOI: 10.17223/1998863Х/42/20

Download full-text version
Counter downloads: 1575