On the value of science (a reply to Alexander Nikiforov) | Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science. 2018. № 42. DOI: 10.17223/1998863Х/42/25

On the value of science (a reply to Alexander Nikiforov)

The course of modern science to pure truth is a reaction to the excessive moralizing and social determinism of the era. It is the desire of certain cultural industries to regain their specific functions and develop freely, without the total influence of the Church or the State. Science sought autonomy, which it had for centuries fought for in the struggle with the authoritarian mindset. If one interprets modern science as technoscience, it assumes that it has not sought to give its answers to existential questions. Its tasks lie in a different plane. Technoscience develops specific elements of life. However, their development would not have been possible if technoscience had not relied on the existential horizon in understanding man and culture. The existential-cultural context justifies the fact that technosci-ence is engaged in the development of human life and society. To provide means of human transformation, it is necessary to believe in it as a value. Modern natural science is a platform for the development of social and human sciences and plays an important role in the spiritual development of man and society. This development is the result of the humanistic and romantic mood of culture, on the one hand, and the experience of "homelessness" of secular culture, on the other. Spiritual development does not appear as distancing from the "ignoble" biological nature. Influenced by the ideology of the Middle Ages, the body and physical, biological needs were related to the sphere of shame in man and culture. Over time, these views have changed and physicality today is presented in different concepts as an integral part of spiritual development, as one of its bases and specific incarnations. Human phys-icality is included in spiritual formation, it is the result of ontogenetic, personal development manifesting its meaning and cultural components. Modern science has created the image of a scientist who works, explores and enters into communication nowadays. While treating science as technoscience, it is necessary to take into account a wide range of social-humanitarian research which studies humans as bearers of "human specificity" due to the modern view on personality.

Download file
Counter downloads: 155

Keywords

наука Нового времени, ценность науки, технонаука, modern science, value of science

Authors

NameOrganizationE-mail
Kasavina Nadezhda A.Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Scienceskasavina.na@yandex.ru
Всего: 1

References

Гвардини Р. Конец Нового времени // Вопросы философии. 1990. № 4. С. 127-164.
Whewell W. Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, Founded upon their History // Epistemology & Philosophy of Science. 2016. Vol. 49. Iss. 3. P. 198-215.
Stoliarova O.E. Technoscience as an Experimental Environment and Experimental Methodology // Epistemology & Philosophy of Science. 2016. Vol. 48. Iss. 2. P. 40-44.
Kasavin I.T. History of Science a la Belle Lettre: a Case of Laura Snyder // Epistemology & Philosophy of Science. 2016. Vol. 48. Iss. 2. P. 233-237.
Lektorskiy V.A. et al. Humanities and Social Technologies // Voprosy filosofii. 2013. Iss.7. P. 3-30.
 On the value of science (a reply to Alexander Nikiforov) | Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science. 2018. № 42. DOI: 10.17223/1998863Х/42/25

On the value of science (a reply to Alexander Nikiforov) | Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science. 2018. № 42. DOI: 10.17223/1998863Х/42/25

Download full-text version
Counter downloads: 1575