What are the main features of big science?
- existence of division and cooperation of scientific work;
- availability of scientific institutions, experimental and laboratory equipment;
- availability of research methods;
- the presence of a conceptual and categorical apparatus (each science has its own concepts and categories);
- the presence of a coherent system of scientific information;
- availability of a base of previously obtained and accumulated scientific knowledge.
Big science is oriented towards the fundamentally new; blind worship of the old is alien to it. It has a clear understanding that the existing knowledge is correct within certain limits and is not absolute. It is not focused on momentary profit.
Big science deals with global, not minor issues. Achievements Big Science are not always applied immediately after opening. Sometimes years of preparation may be needed for implementation.
I believe the main features are as follows.
Firstly, the so-called Big Science is the locomotive for all science as a whole, it opens up new horizons for applied science.
Secondly, it requires considerable financial injections and is usually financed by the state or venture funds.
Thirdly, the results of fundamental research are more inertial and less subject to conjuncture and dynamic changes.
Big science is characterized by the fact that it is speculative in the first place, that is, a lot of theoretical reasoning, hypotheses, theories. And only after some time, some moments go down to the application level.
Big science is not limited only to the collection of scientific material: this material is systematized, hypotheses are put forward, if necessary, mathematical models are built, hypotheses and mathematical models are tested experimentally.
science deals with the fundamental questions of the universe. Its achievements, unlike applied science, can be applied in practice both in a year and in a century. And some never. For example, string theory.
Big science, it seems to me, is those scientific fields that are directly capable of changing the world. For example, work on alternative energy resources, the search for antimatter, the search for the end of the universe or the root cause of all existence.
In the concept of big science you can make an ambiguous meaning. Probably, each person understands it in his own way. If we consider this term as a combination of many sciences, then the main features include a detailed or superficial study questions of those sciences that are included in the so-called big science. And if we understand this term as something archaic, then the main features of big science are a deep study (in every sense) of questions, with the resulting answers to the tasks set, using all kinds of methods and previously accumulated knowledge
Big science, if we consider it not from an organizational point of view, is the foundation, the basis from which new scientific directions grow further, which, in turn, are of an applied nature and can be closely related to the life of people.
Great scientific discoveries are the goal of great science.
Concepts such as small science and big sciencequot ;, were first considered in the course of lectures by the American scientist at Columbia University Derek John de Solla Price, who published a book in 1963 called Small Science, Big Science at Columbia University Press. This book laid the foundation for science of science - the science of science.
The main idea of the book is that there were two periods in the history of science: small science since ancient times and big sciencequot ;, when scientific societies, scientific schools and scientific institutions appeared, and science became a professional activity.
Science is a sphere of human activity aimed at the continuous collection of facts about reality, critical analysis, the development of theoretical knowledge, their systematization and constant updating.
The main features of big science could be seen in modern society from the beginning of the 20th century.
The main feature of big science is the presence of scientific societies and scientific institutions. Science has become a controlled professional process of human activity.
Truth is something that can be tested and confirmed in practice. Experiment, practice are the criterion of truth. One experience is no experience. To confirm the truth, at least three experiments are required.
To standardize the scientific method, it is necessary to reproduce the developed methodology in different laboratories and by different experimenters.
The main features of modern big science:
It can be said about such a multifunctional phenomenon as science that it is: 1) a branch of culture; 2) a way of knowing the world; 3) a special institute (the concept of an institute here includes not only a higher educational institution, but also the presence of scientific societies, academies, laboratories, journals, etc.).
For each of these nominations, science is correlated with other forms, methods, industries, institutions. In order to clarify these relationships, it is necessary to identify the specific features of science, primarily those that distinguish it from the rest. What are they?
1. Science is UNIVERSAL - in the sense that it communicates knowledge that is true for the entire universe under the conditions under which they are obtained by man.
2. Science is FRAGMENTAL - in the sense that it studies not being as a whole, but various fragments of reality or its parameters, and is itself divided into separate disciplines. In general, the concept of being as a philosophical concept is not applicable to science, which is a private knowledge. Each science as such is a certain projection onto the world, like a searchlight that highlights the areas of interest to scientists at the moment.
3. Science is GENERAL - in the sense that the knowledge it receives is suitable for all people, and its language is unambiguous, since science seeks to fix its terms as clearly as possible, which contributes to the unification of people living in various parts of the planet.
4. Science is IMPERSONAL - in the sense that neither the individual characteristics of the scientist, nor his nationality or place of residence are in any way represented in the final results of scientific knowledge.
5. Science is SYSTEMATIC - in the sense that it has a definite structure, and is not an incoherent collection of parts.
6. Science is INCOMPLETE - in the sense that although scientific knowledge grows without limit, it still cannot reach absolute truth, after which there will be nothing to investigate.
7. Science is CONTINUOUS - in the sense that new knowledge in a certain way and according to certain rules correlates with old knowledge.
8. Science is CRITICAL in the sense that it is always ready to question and revise even its most fundamental results.
9. Science is RELIABLE - in the sense that its conclusions require, allow and are tested according to certain rules formulated in it.
10. Science is OUT-MORAL - in the sense that scientific truths are morally and ethically neutral, and moral assessments can relate either to the activity of obtaining knowledge (the ethics of a scientist requires him to be intellectually honest and courageous in the process of searching for truth), or to the activity of its application.
11. Science is RATIONAL - in the sense that it receives knowledge on the basis of rational procedures and laws of logic and comes to the formulation of theories and their provisions that go beyond the empirical level.
12. Science is SENSITIVE - in the sense that its results require empirical verification using perception, and only after that they are recognized as reliable.
These properties of science form six dialectical pairs that correlate with each other: universality - fragmentation, general significance - impersonality, systematicity - incompleteness, continuity - criticality, reliability - out-of-morality, rationality - sensibility.
In addition, science is characterized by its own special methods and structure of research, language, and equipment. All this determines the specifics of scientific research and the significance of science.
Science and religion
Let us dwell in more detail on the relationship between science and religion, especially since there are different points of view on this issue. In atheistic literature, the opinion was propagated that scientific knowledge and religious faith are incompatible, and each new knowledge reduces the area of \u200b\u200bfaith, up to the assertion that since the astronauts did not see God, therefore, he does not exist.
The watershed between science and religion runs in accordance with the ratio in these branches of the culture of reason and faith. Mind predominates in science, but faith also takes place in it, without which knowledge is impossible - faith in sensory reality, which is given to a person in sensations, faith in the cognitive capabilities of the mind and in the ability of scientific knowledge to reflect reality. Without such faith, it would be difficult for a scientist to embark on scientific research. Science is not exclusively rational; intuition also takes place in it, especially at the stage of formulating hypotheses. On the other hand, reason, especially in theological studies, was used to justify faith, and not all church leaders agreed with Tertullian's aphorism: "I believe because it is absurd."
So, the realms of reason and faith are not separated by an absolute barrier. Science can coexist with religion, since the attention of these branches of culture is focused on different things: in science - on empirical reality, in religion - mainly on the extrasensory. The scientific picture of the world, being limited to the sphere of experience, is not directly related to religious revelations, and a scientist can be both an atheist and a believer. Another thing is that in the history of culture there are cases of sharp confrontations between science and religion, especially in those times when science gained its independence, say, at the time of the creation of the heliocentric model of the structure of the world by Copernicus. But it doesn't have to be that way all the time.
There is also an area of superstition that has nothing to do with either religious faith or science, but is associated with the remnants of mystical and mythological ideas, as well as with various sectarian offshoots from the official religion and everyday prejudices. Superstitions, as a rule, are far from both true faith and rational knowledge.
Science and philosophy
It is also important to correctly understand the relationship between science and philosophy, since many times, including in recent history, various philosophical systems have claimed to be scientific and even to the rank of “higher science”, and scientists have not always drawn a line between their own scientific and philosophical statements.
The specificity of science is not only that it does not undertake the study of the world as a whole, like philosophy, but is a private knowledge, but also that the results of science require empirical verification. Unlike philosophical statements, they are not only confirmed by special practical procedures or are subject to strict logical derivation, as in mathematics, but also admit the fundamental possibility of their empirical refutation. All this makes it possible to draw a demarcation line between philosophy and science.
Scientists have sometimes been presented as so-called "spontaneous materialists" in the sense that they have an inherent belief in the materiality of the world. Generally speaking, this is not required. It can be believed that Someone or Something transmits sensory information to people, and scientists read, group, classify and process it. Science rationalizes this information and issues it in the form of laws and formulas, regardless of what lies at its basis. Therefore, a scientist may well be both a spontaneous materialist or idealist, and a conscious follower of some philosophical concept. Scientists such as Descartes and Leibniz were also prominent philosophers of their time.
Science has always existed, just up to a certain point in time, people did not attach much importance to the experience and knowledge that were acquired in the process of being. It is difficult to name the moment when the systematization of knowledge became the norm and directions for the development of social consciousness were formed in philosophy, mathematics, diplomacy, military affairs, sociology and other areas. But some researchers sometimes took on such responsibility.
Another thing is more important - there is a system of established directions for the development of knowledge. There are not only established layers of knowledge and the exact direction of development, style of thinking, logic and concept, but also a significant number of schools, institutions and understanding in the public mind, equivalent in different countries and languages.
Basic sciences
What are the main features of big science? Philosophy, mathematics, natural science and other scientific disciplines can undoubtedly be attributed to the concept of "big science". Scientific activity in many such areas is not only actively conducted, but also developed in many countries of the world.
There is a constant exchange of opinions, the number of scientific conferences is growing, and there is an influx of personnel. Scientists write dissertations, and others consider them “not of this world” and attribute their work to the field of speculative reasoning, useless theoretical research, to the sphere of mythical hypotheses.
Meanwhile, research work leads to real results. If mathematics (at one time) had not begun to develop towards differential and integral calculus, it would not have been possible to launch a spacecraft, build an aircraft, or calculate a submarine with an atomic engine.
The fantasies of astronomers, the ideas of alchemists and the physical theories of particles, energy, gravitational fields are far from ordinary consciousness, but nuclear power plants work, and genetics has led to the creation of many useful cultures.
Even naturalists (lovers of butterflies, ants and migratory birds) with their private studies have prompted scientists from completely different fields of knowledge to unexpected and practical solutions.
Private research and fundamental background
Science does not lay claim to laurels and it is completely indifferent to what category a person puts it into at one time or another. It is human nature to develop, understanding today one event in this way, he already knows that tomorrow he may treat the result radically differently.
Scientific activity is work. It is no worse than the work of a nurse, cook or builder. Various people come to science who, outside of their work, encounter the opinions of others who do not understand anything in the work of people. Far from every worker becomes a scientist, far from every scientific center is one.
The number of universities that train physicists or philosophers fall under the methods of mathematical statistics: the larger the initial mass, the more likely the result is the appearance of another unambiguously recognized scientist.
The appearance of a scientist can cause a new big phenomenon in science, but in essence this is a private research and local interest, which even colleagues at work may not be extremely interested in. Colleagues may consider any research that does not fit into the framework of the fundamental past as a waste of time.
Philosophy is a great science, but an even greater philosophical direction can be formed in it, just as limits, Laplace transformations, infinitesimal and infinitely large quantities appeared in mathematics at one time. The first is not zero, and the second is not infinity. But each of them tends to its own limits.
Fundamental physics could neither give rise to quantum theory nor lay the foundation for the theory of elementary particles. Science and scientific knowledge did not foresee the theory of relativity, did not imagine what kind of resonance the use of observational data from space satellites and flights to other planets would cause in science.
The impact of the small on the big
The scientist is like a flux. The completeness of his knowledge is limited, but there are only two completely different paths to recognition.
A person can come into science and exclusively carefully devote all his research in the context of established ideas, theories, and hypotheses. On this path, the birth of a big one is possible only if an amazing phenomenon, event, object that radically violates his picture of the world gets into his mind.
A person can come into science and, having grasped an idea, move on his own path, criticizing and analyzing the achievements of his predecessors and colleagues. This is a very good way, because it allows you to evaluate the reliability, practicality and quality of existing scientific ideas. The birth of a big one is less likely, but if one's own path was intuitively chosen correctly and a person resisted the temptations to follow traditions, the effect would be colossal.
In the 80s there was another boom, and even the public consciousness paid attention to the idea of artificial intelligence. Fantasists offered their ideas, programmers wrote their programs, scientists eventually retired. The boom ended, everyone went back to their normal work.
But the big always brings the small to life. In those years, there were many theories and ideas that were not recognized or simply destroyed. It is possible that one of them is still alive, the person is alive, the idea is alive and the great science of artificial intelligence is just around the corner.
If this is so, then this is a new round in the development of philosophy, a radically new position in sociology and the division of public consciousness into those who are “for” robots and those who are categorically “against”.
Naturally, what kind of person wants to try the fate of the dinosaurs and leave the planet at the mercy of the robots?
Galileo and the Great Controversy
What are the main features of big science? First of all, the subject and depth of research. In the understanding of public consciousness and recognized scientists, the subject should be relevant and in demand, and the depth should be determined by the number of authoritative predecessors.
It is doubtful that Newton, Planck, Einstein, and even more so Galileo thought so. Many scientists who radically changed the structure and content of knowledge in a particular area paid the least attention to public consciousness and to the assessment of their work as a truly substantive and in-depth study.
Probably, people, like points in social space, flare up for a reason and stubbornly move towards the fulfillment of their mission. If such a "point" began to move, and it received really great opposition, but the "point" coped with it, and the idea outlived its author, formed the basis of a new scientific direction.
Death does not stop the movement of an idea, it is not necessary for an idea to have only one author and become large or significant during a particular lifetime.
The process of cognition of the world is heterogeneous and it is almost impossible to manage it. However, it is quite acceptable to perceive the surrounding reality, accumulate knowledge and follow a naturally conditioned, objective path.
Big science is not an ordinary research work, it is, first of all, a confrontation, but it is almost impossible to determine its level and strength, as well as the subject and depth of research.
Oracle and hundreds of thousands of skilled workers
The Internet is not science. A specialist (programmer, developer) is not a scientist. But information theory, algorithm development and programming are more and more often referred to as science, although with the prefix "applied". What are the main features of big science, if so far there has not been a single "big event" here?
The science of information is still in the status of "computer science". This word cannot even be put next to such monsters as Philosophy, Physics, Mathematics, Chemistry. These are really big and significant sciences. They have experienced so many cardinally powerful events that, according to an unspoken law, they are in the status of big science and, moreover, new big ideas are constantly being born in their depths.
It is not necessary to take this as an axiom, it is not necessary to believe it, but you can be completely calm about the fact that the big does not initially need recognition.
Undoubtedly, Oracle is the leader in the field of information, the line of their solutions is made up of hundreds of positions, and they employ hundreds of thousands of specialists distributed in numerous offices around the planet. It's been 38 years since the 1980s. In 1985, chipiotics was developed - a student impromptu that was not destined to conquer the world, but it could turn these 38 years into three years of work for a very small number of programmers.
The banal idea of active knowledge is still relevant, but not in demand. Programming is becoming more complex, more intricate every day, and the Internet has already become a self-functioning organism.
What are the main features of big science, a person determines. This person is the author. Not a single author of a new big idea in the bowels of the existing sciences or going his own way is alone.
Each new researcher relies on an arsenal of accumulated knowledge, and the greater their volume, the more closely he pursues his direction, the less he pays attention to opposition to his work, the greater the chances of success.
Creative development, the desire for knowledge and an adequate attitude to the path traveled are the right beginning of a new great knowledge. Whether this will be the beginning of a great science, descendants will say.
What are the main features of big science?
The main features of modern big science: 1)
existence of division and cooperation of scientific work; 2) availability of scientific institutions, experimental and laboratory equipment; 3) availability of research methods; 4) the presence of a conceptual and categorical apparatus (each science has its own concepts and categories); 5) the presence of a coherent system of scientific information; 6) the presence of a base of previously obtained and accumulated scientific knowledge.
1) Describe the social, national and confessional composition of the population in our country (Belarus).
2) What are the main features of the Belarusian socio-economic model of development. What are the priorities of the socio-economic development of the Republic of Belarus in the early 21st century? ? Name the main factors of sustainable development of our country.
3) what are the main directions of innovative development of the Republic of Belarus at the present stage? What factors ensure the successful innovative development of our country? Describe the contribution of science and education to the country's innovative development.
1. About 9.6 million people live in our country. In terms of population, the Republic of Belarus ranks fifth among the CIS countries. The average population density is 48 people per 1 sq. km. km. - about the same as in many other European countries.
Approximately 74% of the population of our country lives in cities, respectively 26% is the rural population. The urban population is concentrated in 112 cities and 96 urban-type settlements. 13 cities have a population of more than 100 thousand people; about 1 million 800 thousand citizens live in the capital of our country, Minsk. There are about 1145 women per 1000 men; in groups older than 50 years, this difference increases.
Our country is ethnically heterogeneous. According to the 1999 census, representatives of more than 130 nationalities live in the country. 81% of citizens of the Republic of Belarus recognized themselves as Belarusians, 11% - Russians, almost 4% - Poles, 2% Ukrainians, 0.3% - Jews
. In what century did modern science begin? What sciences appeared then?
2. Classification of sciences
1-On the subject and method of cognition - the sciences of nature, society, cognition, technical sciences, mathematics
2-In connection with practice - fundamental (there is no direct orientation to practice) and applied (the results of scientific knowledge are used to solve industrial and social problems)
3. What, according to A. Smith, is the arbiter of all the actions of a scientist?
4. Give an example of the harm of a scientific discovery?
5. What are the main features of big science?
6. What is the connection between science and education?
7. The purpose of the national educational program in Russia at the beginning. 21st century
8. Why education is the national wealth of the country?
9. What is the peculiarity of continuous education?
!
4. An example of harm is the creation of an atomic bomb. On the one hand, it was a breakthrough in science, and on the other hand, this bomb posed (and still poses) a huge threat to all mankind.
8. An educated person in our time is a very important resource for the state. (Intellectual resource). An educated person is able, with the help of his abilities, to contribute to the development of any field of activity, for example, to science or economics, etc. And it is very bad for the state if educated people leave the country.
9. Continuing education is education throughout life. That is, in our time, education is not limited to school or university. Nowadays, a person has enough opportunities for self-education, so people can gain knowledge not only in their youth, but throughout their lives. Let's say attend some courses, learn a foreign language, etc.
1. What are the characteristics of a nation as the most developed form of a community of people?
2. What is tolerance in interethnic relations?
3. Expand the functions of historical memory and national identity in the formation and rallying in the modern life of the nation.
4. Describe the main features of modern interethnic cooperation.
5. What are the most typical causes of ethnic conflicts?
1) Indigenous territory, common language, culture, economic and political activities, similarity of mentality, self-awareness as a community.
2) acceptance, understanding of a different way of life, behavior, customs, feelings, opinions, ideas, beliefs without feeling uncomfortable
3) Look on the Internet, now I can’t find a book from where I would give an exact answer.
5) uneven development, mismatch of territorial boundaries, social contradictions, infringement of the rights of small peoples,
! Question: What is free trade and what are its main features.
Free trade - trade without import tariffs and quantitative restrictions, except for strictly defined cases when they can be introduced.
1) mass distribution of products.
2) range of any goods.
3) government intervention is not as big as in team trading.
What does free trade mean and what are its main features?
Free trade is a direction in economic theory, politics and economic practice,
proclaiming freedom of trade and non-interference of the state in the private-business sphere of society. In practice, free trade usually means the absence of high export and import duties, as well as non-monetary restrictions on trade, such as import quotas for certain goods and subsidies for local producers of certain goods. Supporters of free trade are liberal parties and currents; opponents include many left-wing parties and movements (socialists and communists), human rights and environmentalists, and trade unions.
2-as opponents of free trade, competition and policies to strengthen the domestic market. (import was
extremely limited)
3 The price is higher, the quality is better, the packaging is stronger and more aesthetic (goods not from China and Turkey). Preference-import.Free trade is a direction in economic theory, politics and economic practice,
Proclaiming freedom of trade and non-interference of the state in the private business sphere of society. In practice, free trade usually means the absence of high export and import duties, as well as non-monetary restrictions on trade, such as import quotas for certain goods and subsidies for local producers of certain goods. Supporters of free trade are liberal parties and currents; opponents include many left-wing parties and movements (socialists and communists), human rights and environmentalists, and trade unions.
ANSWER AT LEAST ONE. . VERY
1. Why is a person forced to choose ways to use resources to meet their needs?
3. What helps the manufacturer to rationally solve the main issues of the economy? What is the principle of the "invisible hand" of the market?
For question 4
The presence of the main share of private ownership of the means of production in the national economy of the country (more than 50%);
consumer demand for goods, products and services;
offer of goods, products and services by manufacturers;
free prices for goods and services;
competition based on the interaction of supply and demand;
legal (legislative) support of market mechanisms;
democratization of society, granting all citizens the right to entrepreneurial activity in any sphere of the economy.
1. Why is a person forced to choose ways to use resources to meet their needs?
2. Which economic system provides a more efficient allocation of limited resources and why?
3. What helps the manufacturer to rationally solve the main issues of the economy? What is the principle of the "invisible hand" of the market?
4. What are the characteristics of a market economy?
1. In order not to exhaust these resources, so that a person is not left without his portability. it is necessary to choose such methods so as to satisfy the human good and not to exhaust the resources. Thus, it turns out that special people have worked out such a trick: how to make some (which are really valuable) things expensive, so that not every person can afford it, and this is how resources are not exhausted.
2. Commodity economy
Russian historian and philosopher L.P. Karsavin on the philosophy of history.The philosophy of history is determined by its three main tasks. Firstly, it explores the fundamental principles of historical existence, which at the same time are the basic principles of historical knowledge, history as a science. Secondly, it considers these fundamental principles in the unity of being and knowledge, that is, it indicates the significance and place of the historical world in the whole and in relation to absolute Being. Thirdly, its task is to cognize and depict a specific historical process as a whole, to reveal the meaning of this process. Insofar as the philosophy of history limits itself to the first task, it is a "theory" of history, that is, a theory of historical being and a theory of historical knowledge. Insofar as it pursues the solution of the second task, it is the philosophy of history in the narrow and special sense of the term "philosophy". Finally, in the area defined by the third task, it appears before us as the metaphysics of history, and, of course, in the term "metaphysics" I do not conceive of an abstraction from concrete empiricism, but concrete knowledge of the historical process in the light of the highest metaphysical ideas.
At first glance, the deep organic, indissoluble connection between the problems of the theory of history and the philosophy of history is obvious. It is impossible to define the foundations of history otherwise than through their relation to the foundations of being and knowledge in general, and, consequently, without clarifying their connection with absolute Being. Any theorist of history, unless he artificially closes himself in the circle of questions of the so-called technical methodology, must inevitably find out: what is the specificity of historical being and whether this specificity exists, what are the basic categories of historical knowledge, basic historical concepts, are they the same, as in the field of knowledge of nature, or others, etc. All this makes it imperative to consider theoretical-historical and philosophical-historical problems in interconnection.
Questions and tasks: 1) What, according to the author, are the tasks of the philosophy of history? How do you understand the meaning of each of the tasks? 2) How do historical being and historical knowledge relate? 3) What task is the philosophy of history called upon to solve in the narrow sense? 4) Why does the author combine consideration of theoretical and philosophical problems of history? 5) What is the connection between the study of a specific historical process and the philosophy of history? 6) Which of the tasks of the philosophy of history can be attributed to the issues discussed in this paragraph?
To find out what it all started with, mentally decide to analyze the solution and give the truth as it really is and not from any points, the task of this is only for the fact that the world is so mixed up and not everyone will like it, but the truth is the truth, it does not change itself, it only changes reading it
Modern science, called "big science", characterized by the massive involvement of scientists in laboratories and design departments of industrial enterprises and firms. The activity of a scientist is built here on an industrial basis: he solves quite specific tasks dictated not by the logic of the development of a particular scientific discipline, but by the needs of improvement, updating of equipment and technology.
Features inherent in "big science": 1) a sharp increase in the number of scientists . At the end of the 18th century there were about a thousand of them, in the middle of the 19th century - 10 thousand, in 1900 - 100 thousand, by the end of the 20th century - over 5 million. About 90% of all scientists ever living on Earth are our contemporaries;
2) growth of scientific information, information explosion. In the 20th century, world scientific information doubled in 10 to 15 years. In 1800 there were 100 scientific and technical journals in the world, in 1850 - 1000, in 1900 - 10 thousand, in 1950 - 100 thousand, by the end of the 20th century - several hundred thousand. Over 90% of all the most important scientific and technological achievements fall on the 20th century.
3) changing the world of science. Science today encompasses a huge area of knowledge, including about 15,000 disciplines that are increasingly interacting with each other.
4) the transformation of scientific activity into a special profession. Until the 19th century, scientific activity was not the main source of their material support for the vast majority of scientists. In 2009, spending on science in Russia amounted to 21.7 billion dollars, in the US - 389.2 billion, which is 35% of the world's spending on science. Science is now a priority in the activities of the state, which provides it with all possible assistance. At the same time, science uses enormous pressure from society.
An important problem of modern science is the question of the responsibility of scientists to society. Supporters externalism (J. Bernal, T. Kuhn, A.A. Bogdanov, R. Merton) believe that science arises under the influence of external causes, it is determined by social, economic and technical factors. Indeed, the basis of knowledge, including scientific knowledge, is practice, the needs of material and spiritual production. Internalism (A. Koire, K. Popper, I. Lakatos) focuses on the internal factors in the development of science, its relative independence from external social circumstances. In the history of science, it is always necessary to take into account the interrelationship of both intrascientific and sociocultural factors in the development of scientific knowledge. Practice in the process of scientific knowledge performs the following main functions:- is source of scientific knowledge- acts as basis of scientific knowledge, its driving force. - serves purpose of scientific knowledge- is criterion of the truth of scientific knowledge.
28. Modern situation and problems of Russian science.
Science in Russia has come a long and difficult path. It developed as an integral part of world science. The beginning of scientific work in Russia was laid by the government of Peter I, who deeply understood the interests of the state. Special organizations for scientific work were created - the Academy of Sciences in 1724, the Public Library in 1714, the Kunstkamera - the first Russian museum of natural history in 1719, the first university in Russia in Moscow in 1755. The first academicians were invited scientists from Europe: physician L.L. Blumentrost, mathematicians J. Hermann, D. and N. Bernoulli, L. Euler, astronomer J. Delisle, physicist G. Bülfinger, etc.
Considering the science of Russia, it is impossible not to stop at its present stage of development. According to a number of scientists, post-Soviet Russian science is in a state of functional crisis. The symptoms of this crisis, according to A.V. Yurevich and I.P. Tsapenko are: 1) a rapid reduction in the number of Russian scientists. From 1986 to 1996, the army of scientists has more than halved.
2) a significant deterioration in the material, technical and informational equipment of Russian science. The Russian scientist is provided with the equipment necessary for research 80 times, and the information is 100 times worse than the American one.
3) decrease in the productivity of scientific research. The number of discoveries and inventions patented annually decreased from 200,000 at the end of the 1980s to 30,000 in 1994, and the economic effect of their introduction also decreased.
4) intense brain drain from Russian science. Every year 5-6 thousand scientists leave our country. Since the beginning of the 1990s, 150,000 scientists have gone abroad, mostly physicists, chemists, biologists, and programmers;
5) a sharp drop in the prestige of scientific activity and a crisis in the professional self-awareness of domestic scientists. The reason for the crisis of Russian science is its poor funding. If in the Soviet years the share of science was 5-7% of the total gross product, then in 1996 - 0.42%, in 2003 - 0.31%, in 2009 - 0,17 %.
The deeper reasons for this state of affairs in Russian science lie in the serious functional crisis of world science. In the latter, a large backlog of fundamental science has been created, which applied science does not have time to digest, to practically master. Russian science is experiencing a twofold functional crisis - both as a component of world science and as a substructure of Russian society.
The social functions of domestic science were very specific and expressed the characteristics of Soviet society. The main social function of Soviet natural science was to strengthen the defense power of the state, and social science - to "brainwash" and strengthen the Soviet ideology.
The functional crisis has not affected all of our science. Against the background of the crisis of natural science, such disciplines as sociology, psychology and political science began to flourish. More than 100 new sociological centers have emerged, the number of political scientists has exceeded 50 thousand, psychologists - 30 thousand. These sciences serve the political and economic elite of our society. For the development of science, the domestic scientific community should have a greater influence on the policy of the authorities and public opinion. This presupposes the ideological and organizational unity of scientists, the defense of their collective interests.
