The Myth of Science and Technogenic Civilization

The paper examines the myth of science as the basis of the new European civilization project, its main components and impact on the modern technogenic era. The authors demonstrate how, by transforming over time and adapting to various social circumstances, the myth of science retains its archetypal features, while remaining a purely humanistic project. The development of modern civilization is closely related to science and scientific progress. Actually, science, as a mathematized experimental knowledge, in many respects turned out to be a product of the new European civilization project. But what lies at the basis of the myth of science? The readiness of a scientist to unselfishly seek the truth and give it to others is the most important feature of this attitude. At the same time, this gift involves a critical attitude towards oneself. Criticism and constant doubt are a direct continuation of the myth of science. This is what makes it possible for scientists to strive to find something new, create original ideas and concepts, and transform the world. Expanding our understanding of the world, they create new realities and travel in them. As a result, the myth of science includes three components: gift, criticism, and migration. Since the middle of the 19th century, it has become quite obvious that only movement along the path of scientific and technological progress can make it possible to respond to the challenges of the spread of European empires outside Europe. The underlying values of science, which initially appeared in Europe, have gone beyond the science's limits and have been accepted by other cultures. Using the metaphors of the “myth of science”, we can say that it is in this interaction that migranttravelers bring their “gift” in the form of knowledge to the common table and find mutual understanding during the “critical” discussion. This is the coordination of different cultures, which now not only oppose each other, but also find a common language. Of course, in this case, the interacting scientists have a common background, which is associated with the simple fact that during their professional socialization they mastered and assimilated a common scientific ethos, got acquainted with scientific methodology, and strove to become scientists. By doing this, they can find a common language. Now science acts as a special cultural background for various states and cultural societies. Turning to scientific knowledge, the values of science, they can look for ways for mutual understanding and forging a dialogue. The dialogue unites different cultures and makes it possible to form a new technogenic civilization, which can be permeated with humanistic ideas of recognition of the importance of humans and humanity, dialogue and mutual understanding.

Keywords

Authors

References