Science as a profession and a public institution. Social philosophy and social science

Science as a social institute- sphere of people activity, the purpose of which is the study of objects and processes of nature, society and thinking, their properties of relationships and patterns, as well as one of the forms of general. consciousness.

The very concept of "social institution" began to come into use thanks to the research of Western sociologists. R. Merton is considered to be the founder of the institutional approach in science. In the domestic philosophy of science, the institutional approach for a long time was not developed. Institutionality involves the formalization of all types of relations, the transition from unorganized activities and informal relations by the type of agreements and negotiations to the creation of organized structures that involve hierarchy, power regulation and regulations.

In Western Europe, science as a social institution arose in the 17th century in connection with the need to serve the emerging capitalist production and began to claim a certain autonomy. In the system of social division of labor, science as a social institution has assigned specific functions to itself: to be responsible for the production, examination and implementation of scientific and theoretical knowledge. As a social institution, science included not only a system of knowledge and scientific activity, but also a system of relations in science, scientific institutions and organizations.

Science as a social institution at all its levels (both collective and the scientific community on a global scale) presupposes the existence of norms and values that are obligatory for people of science (plagiarists are expelled).

Speaking about modern science in its interactions with various spheres of human life and society, we can distinguish three groups of social functions performed by it: 1) cultural and ideological functions, 2) the functions of science as a direct productive force, and 3) its functions as a social force associated with the fact that scientific knowledge and methods are increasingly being used in solving a wide variety of problems that arise in the course of social development.

Science as a social institution has its own branched structure and uses both cognitive and organizational and moral resources. The development of institutional forms of scientific activity involved the clarification of the prerequisites for the process of institutionalization, the disclosure of its content, and the analysis of the results of institutionalization. As a social institution, science includes the following components:

The totality of knowledge and its carriers;

The presence of specific cognitive goals and objectives;

Performing certain functions;

Availability of specific means of knowledge and institutions;

Development of forms of control, examination and evaluation of scientific achievements;

The existence of certain sanctions.

E. Durkheim emphasized the coercive nature of the institutional in relation to an individual subject, its external force, T. Parsons pointed out another important feature of the institution - a stable set of roles distributed in it. Institutions are designed to rationally streamline the life of the individuals that make up society and ensure the sustainable flow of communication processes between different social structures. M. Weber emphasized that an institution is a form of association of individuals, a way of inclusion in collective activity, participation in social action.

Features of the development of science on present stage:

1) Wide dissemination of ideas and methods of synergetics - the theory of self-organization and development of systems of any nature;

2) Strengthening the paradigm of integrity, i.e. awareness of the need for a global comprehensive view of the world;

3) Strengthening and ever wider application of the idea (principle) of co-evolution, i.e. conjugated, interdependent;

4) The introduction of time into all sciences, the ever wider dissemination of the idea of development;

5) Changing the nature of the object of study and strengthening the role of interdisciplinary integrated approaches in its study;

6) Connection of the objective world and the human world, overcoming the gap between the object and the subject;

7) An even wider application of philosophy and its methods in all sciences;

8) Increasing mathematization of scientific theories, increasing level of their abstractness and complexity;

9) Methodological pluralism, awareness of the limitations, one-sidedness of any methodology - including rationalistic (including dialectical-materialistic).

The functioning of the scientific community, the effective regulation of relations between its members, as well as between science, society and the state, is carried out with the help of a specific system of internal values inherent in this social structure of the scientific and technical policy of society and the state, as well as the corresponding system of legislative norms (patent law, economic law, civil law, etc.). The set of internal values of the scientific community, which have the status of moral norms, is called "scientific ethos". One of the explanations for the norms of scientific ethos was proposed in the 1930s. 20th century founder of the sociological study of science Robert Merton. He believed that science, as a special social structure, relies in its functioning on four value imperatives: universalism, collectivism, disinterestedness and organized skepticism. Later B. Barber added two more imperatives: rationalism and emotional neutrality.

Imperative of universalism affirms the impersonal, objective nature of scientific knowledge. The reliability of new scientific knowledge is determined only by its correspondence to observations and previously certified scientific knowledge. Universalism determines the international and democratic nature of science. Collectivism imperative says that the fruits of scientific knowledge belong to the entire scientific community and society as a whole. They are always the result of collective scientific co-creation, since any scientist always relies on some ideas (knowledge) of his predecessors and contemporaries. The right of private ownership of knowledge in science should not exist, although scientists who make the most significant personal contribution have the right to demand from colleagues and society fair material and moral encouragement, adequate professional recognition. Such recognition is the most important stimulus for scientific activity.

The Imperative of Selflessness means that the main goal of the activities of scientists should be the service of Truth. The latter should never in science be a means to achieve personal benefits, but only a socially significant goal.

The imperative of organized skepticism implies not only a ban on the dogmatic assertion of truth in science, but, on the contrary, makes it a professional obligation for a scientist to criticize the views of his colleagues, if there is the slightest reason for this. Accordingly, it is necessary to treat criticism addressed to oneself, namely, as a necessary condition for the development of science. A true scientist is a skeptic by nature and vocation. Skepticism and doubt are just as necessary, important and subtle tools of a scientist's activity as a scalpel and a needle in the hands of a surgeon. The value of rationalism asserts that science strives not just for objective truth, but for a proven, logically organized discourse, the supreme arbiter of the truth of which is the scientific mind.

The imperative of emotional neutrality forbids people of science to use emotions, personal sympathies, antipathies, etc., resources of the sensual sphere of consciousness when solving scientific problems.

It must immediately be emphasized that the approach to scientific ethos outlined is purely theoretical, and not empirical, because here science is described as a certain theoretical object, constructed from the point of view of its proper (“ideal”) existence, and not from the standpoint of being. Merton himself understood this very well, as well as the fact that it is impossible to distinguish science as a social structure from other social phenomena (politics, economics, religion, etc.) in a different way (outside the value dimension). Already the closest students and followers of Merton, having carried out extensive sociological studies of the behavior of members of the scientific community, were convinced that it is essentially ambivalent, that in its daily professional activity scientists are constantly in a state of choice between polar behavioral imperatives. So, the scientist must:

Communicate your results to the scientific community as soon as possible, but not obliged to rush publications, beingware of their "immaturity" or unscrupulous use;

Be receptive to new ideas, but not succumb to intellectual "fashion";

Strive to acquire such knowledge that will be highly appreciated by colleagues, but at the same time work without paying attention to the assessments of others;

Defend new ideas, but do not support rash conclusions;

Make every effort to know the work related to his field, but at the same time understand that erudition sometimes inhibits creativity;

Be extremely careful in wording and details, but not be a pedant, for this is at the expense of content;

Always remember that knowledge is international, but do not forget that everything scientific discovery does honor to that national science which representative it is made;

To educate a new generation of scientists, but not to give too much attention and time to teaching; learn from a great master and imitate him, but not be like him.

It is clear that the choice in favor of one or another imperative is always situational, contextual and determined by a significant number of cognitive, social and even psychological factors that are “integrated” by specific individuals.

One of the most important discoveries in the study of science as a social institution was the realization that science is not a single, monolithic system, but rather a granular competitive environment, consisting of many small and medium-sized scientific communities, whose interests are often not only do not coincide, but sometimes contradict each other. Modern science is a complex network of collectives, organizations and institutions interacting with each other - from laboratories and departments to state institutes and academies, from "invisible colleges" to large organizations with all the attributes of a legal entity, from scientific incubators and science parks to research and investment corporations, from disciplinary communities to national scientific communities and international associations. All of them are connected by a myriad of communication links both among themselves and with other powerful subsystems of society and the state (economy, education, politics, culture, etc.)

scientific revolution- a radical change in the process and content of scientific knowledge, associated with the transition to new theoretical and methodological premises, to a new system of fundamental concepts and methods, to a new scientific picture of the world, as well as with qualitative transformations material resources observation and experimentation, with new ways of evaluating and interpreting empirical data, with new ideals of explanation, validity, and organization of knowledge.

Historical examples of the scientific revolution are the transition from medieval ideas about the Cosmos to a mechanistic picture of the world based on mathematical physics of the 16th-18th centuries, the transition to an evolutionary theory of the origin and development of biological species, the emergence of an electrodynamic picture of the world (19th century), the creation of quantum relativistic physics in early 20th century and etc.

Scientific revolutions differ in depth and breadth of coverage of the structural elements of science, in the type of changes in its conceptual, methodological and cultural foundations. The structure of the foundations of science includes: ideals and norms of research (proof and validity of knowledge, norms of explanation and description, construction and organization of knowledge), the scientific picture of the world and the philosophical foundations of science. According to this structuring, the main types of scientific revolutions are distinguished: 1) the restructuring of the picture of the world without a radical change in the ideals and norms of research and the philosophical foundations of science (for example, the introduction of atomism into ideas about chemical processes in the early 19th century, the transition of modern elementary particle physics to synthetic quark models, etc.

Topic 10.

P.); 2) a change in the scientific picture of the world, accompanied by a partial or radical replacement of ideals and norms scientific research, as well as its philosophical foundations (for example, the emergence of quantum-relativistic physics or the synergetic model of cosmic evolution). The scientific revolution is a complex step-by-step process that has a wide range of internal and external, i.e., socio-cultural, historical, determinations that interact with each other. The “internal” factors of the scientific revolution include: the accumulation of anomalies, facts that cannot be explained within the conceptual and methodological framework of a particular scientific discipline; antinomies that arise when solving problems that require a restructuring of the conceptual foundations of the theory (for example, the paradox of infinite values that arises when explaining in terms of classical theory radiation model of an absolutely “black body”); improvement of means and methods of research (new instrumentation, new mathematical models etc.), expanding the range of objects under study; the emergence of alternative theoretical systems that compete with each other in their ability to increase the “empirical content” of science, that is, the area of facts explained and predicted by it.

The “external” determination of the scientific revolution includes a philosophical rethinking of the scientific picture of the world, a reassessment of the leading cognitive values and ideals of cognition and their place in culture, as well as the processes of changing scientific leaders, the interaction of science with other social institutions, a change in relations in the structures of social production, leading to fusion of scientific and technical processes, bringing to the fore fundamentally new needs of people (economic, political, spiritual). Thus, the revolutionary nature of the ongoing changes in science can be judged on the basis of a complex “multidimensional” analysis, the object of which is science in the unity of its various dimensions: subject-logical, sociological, personal-psychological, institutional, etc. The principles of such an analysis are determined by the conceptual the apparatus of epistemological theory, within the framework of which the main ideas about scientific rationality and its historical development are formulated. Ideas about the scientific revolution vary depending on the choice of such an apparatus.

For example, within the framework of the neo-positivist philosophy of science, the concept of scientific revolution appears only as a methodological metaphor expressing the conditional division of the basically cumulative growth of scientific knowledge into periods of domination of certain inductive generalizations that act as “laws of nature”. Transition to "laws" more high level and the change of former generalizations is carried out according to the same methodological canons; knowledge certified by Experience retains its significance in any subsequent systematization, perhaps as a limiting case (for example, the laws of classical mechanics are considered as limiting cases of relativistic, etc.). The concept of scientific revolution plays the same “metaphorical role” in “critical rationalism” (K. Popper and others): revolutions in science occur constantly, each refutation of an accepted one and the promotion of a new “bold” (i.e., even more subject to refutation) hypotheses can in principle be considered a scientific revolution. Therefore, the scientific revolution in the critical-rationalist interpretation is a fact of changing scientific (primarily fundamental) theories, viewed through the prism of its logical-methodological (rational) reconstruction, but not an event real history science and culture. This is also the basis for understanding the scientific revolution by I. Lakatos. The historian can only “retroactively” apply the scheme of rational reconstruction to past events and decide whether this change was a transition to a more progressive program (increasing its empirical content due to the heuristic potential inherent in it) or a consequence of “irrational” decisions (for example, erroneous assessment of the program by the scientific community). In science, various programs, methods, etc., constantly compete, which for a time come to the fore, but then are pushed aside by more successful competitors or are substantially reconstructed. The concept of scientific revolution is also metaphorical in historically oriented concepts of science (T. Kuhn, S. Tulmin, etc.), but the meaning of the metaphor here is different: it means a leap across the abyss between “incommensurable” paradigms

mi, performed as a “gestalt switch” in the minds of members of the Scientific Communities. In these concepts, the main attention is paid to the psychological and sociological aspects of conceptual changes, the possibility of a “rational reconstruction” of the scientific revolution is either denied or allowed due to such an interpretation of scientific rationality, in which the latter is identified with the totality of successful decisions of the scientific elite.

Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the Google search on the site:

Lecture Search

Science as a social institution

Introduction

Science is a complex, multifaceted socio-historical phenomenon. Representing a specific system (rather than a simple sum) of knowledge, it is at the same time a peculiar form of spiritual production and a specific social institution that has its own organizational forms.

Science as a social institution is a special, relatively independent form of social consciousness and a sphere of human activity, acting as a historical product of the long development of human civilization, spiritual culture, which has developed its own types of communication, human interaction, forms of division of research labor and norms of consciousness of scientists.

Social philosophy and social science

To date, a significant complex of sciences, which are commonly called social sciences, has developed. In the modern world, the role and importance of the social sciences is universally recognized. Moreover, the development of social-scientific knowledge is a characteristic feature of our day. Its validity is not disputed. However, at one time a real revolution in scientific thinking was required in order for knowledge about society to take place, moreover, as knowledge that meets the requirements of scientific character. This revolution took place from the thirteenth century. and ended only in the twentieth century, when knowledge about society was finally established as scientifically legitimate.

Obviously, objectivity is just as necessary in the social sciences as in the natural sciences. However, it is also clear that in reality it is much more difficult to achieve. Just as important is the attitude towards intellectual honesty, which, over time, by R. Descartes determines any research that claims to be scientific. Finally, in the social sciences, it is extremely important to choose the right method to avoid arbitrary or deliberately desired conclusions. A lot of such methods have been accumulated in the arsenal of scientific social science today.

At the same time, out of all the diversity of social life, science can purposefully single out a certain aspect—economic, political, social, cultural, and so on. In this case, a certain system of society and the subsystems that make it up are singled out. In turn, the systematic approach, as a rule, is supplemented by structural and functional ones. The scientific approach to social reality is also served by the methods of social statistics, which make it possible to identify and fix a certain regularity in the manifestations of social life in various spheres.

In view of the foregoing, we can conclude that the social sciences in the modern world are a huge variety of scientific disciplines that have accumulated a wealth of experience in studying social processes.

The question arises: what is the relation of social philosophy to the social sciences? The answer is not based on several factors. First, social philosophy seeks not only to survey social life as a whole, but also to discover the meaning of the existence of social institutions and society as such. Secondly, within the framework of social philosophy, one of the most important is the problem of the relationship between the individual and society, posed primarily in general terms, i.e. in a certain independence from specific types of social organization. Thirdly, social philosophy thinks about the ontological foundations of social life, i.e. explores the conditions under which society retains its integrity, does not crumble into isolated parts or into a set of individuals not connected by any commonality. Fourthly, within the framework of social philosophy, the methodology of scientific knowledge of social life is comprehended, and the experience of social sciences is generalized. According to these parameters, philosophical knowledge about society differs from scientific knowledge proper.

Science as a social institution

A social institution is a historical form of organization and regulation of public life. With the help of social institutions, relations between people, their activities, their behavior in society are streamlined, the stability of social life is ensured, the integration of actions and relations of individuals is carried out, social cohesion is achieved. groups and layers. Social cultural institutions include science, art, etc.

Science as a social institute - the sphere of people. activity, the purpose of which is the study of objects and processes of nature, society and thinking, their properties of relationships and patterns; one of the common forms. consciousness.

Ordinary everyday experience does not belong to science - knowledge obtained on the basis of simple observation and practical activities, not going further simple description facts and processes, revealing their purely external aspects.

Speaking about modern science in its interactions with various spheres of human life and society, we can distinguish three groups of social functions performed by it: 1) cultural and ideological functions, 2) the functions of science as a direct productive force, and 3) its functions as a social force associated with topics. that scientific knowledge and methods are now increasingly used in solving the most diverse problems that arise in the course of social development.

An important aspect of the transformation of science into a productive force was the creation and streamlining of permanent channels for the practical use of scientific knowledge, the emergence of such branches of activity as applied research and development, the creation of networks of scientific and technical information, etc. Moreover, following industry, such channels also appear in other sectors of the material production and beyond. All this entails significant consequences for both science and practice. The functions of science as a social force in solving the global problems of our time are important.

The growing role of science in public life has given rise to its special status in modern culture and new features of its interaction with various layers of social consciousness. in this regard, the problem of the peculiarities of scientific knowledge and the relationship with other forms of knowledge becomes acute. cognitive activity. This problem is also of great practical importance. Understanding the specifics of science is a necessary prerequisite for the introduction of scientific methods in the management of cultural processes. It is also necessary for constructing a theory of management of science itself in the conditions of the development of scientific and technological revolution, since the elucidation of the laws of scientific knowledge requires an analysis of its social conditioning and its interaction with various phenomena of spiritual and material culture.

The relationship between science as a social institution and society has a two-way character: science receives support from society and, in turn, gives society what is necessary for the progressive development of the latter.

Being a form of people's spiritual activity, science is aimed at producing knowledge about nature, society and knowledge itself; its immediate goal is to comprehend the truth and discover the objective laws of human and natural world based on generalization real facts. Sociocultural features of scientific activity are:

- universality (general significance and "general cultural"),

- uniqueness (innovative structures created by scientific activity are unique, exclusive, irreproducible),

- non-cost productivity (it is impossible to attribute cost equivalents to the creative actions of the scientific community),

- personification (like any free spiritual production, scientific activity is always personal, and its methods are individual),

— discipline (scientific activity is regulated and disciplined like scientific research),

— democratism (scientific activity is unthinkable without criticism and freethinking),

- communality (scientific creativity is co-creation, scientific knowledge crystallizes in a variety of communication contexts - partnership, dialogue, discussion, etc.).

Reflecting the world in its materiality and development, science forms a single, interconnected, developing system of knowledge about its laws. At the same time, science is divided into many branches of knowledge (private sciences), which differ from each other in what side of reality they study. According to the subject and methods of cognition, one can single out the sciences of nature (natural science - chemistry, physics, biology, etc.), the sciences of society (history, sociology, political science, etc.), a separate group is made up of technical sciences.

42. Science as a social institution

Depending on the specifics of the object under study, it is customary to subdivide the sciences into natural, social, humanitarian and technical. The natural sciences reflect nature, the social and humanitarian sciences reflect human life, and the technical sciences reflect the "artificial world" as a specific result of human impact on nature. It is possible to use other criteria for classifying science (for example, according to their “remoteness” from practical activities, sciences are divided into fundamental, where there is no direct orientation to practice, and applied, directly applying the results of scientific knowledge to solve production and socio-practical problems.) Together at the same time, the boundaries between individual sciences and scientific disciplines are conditional and mobile.

2.1 Social institution of science as scientific production

Such an idea of the social institution of science is especially characteristic for Rostov philosophers. So, M.M. Karpov, M.K. Petrov, A.V. Potemkin proceed from the fact that "the elucidation of the internal structure of science as a social institution, the isolation of those bricks that make up the ²temple of science², the study of the laws of connection and the existence of its structural elements are now becoming the topic of the day." The most important aspects of scientific production are considered as “bricks”, starting from the discussion of the problem of the origin of science and ending with the features of modern requirements for the training system scientific personnel.

THEM. Oreshnikov is inclined to identify the concept of "social institution" with the concept of "scientific production". In his opinion, “social sciences are a social institution, the purpose of which is the knowledge of the laws and phenomena of social reality (the production of socio-economic and political knowledge), the dissemination of this knowledge among members of society, the struggle against bourgeois ideology and any of its manifestations, the reproduction of scientific and scientific and pedagogical personnel necessary for the development of science itself and for the needs of social life. However, here we are talking, in fact, about the institutional study of scientific production, and not about the social institution of science. A very close position is taken by A.V. Uzhogov, for whom a social institution is scientific production (“production of ideas”).

For all these researchers, the term "social institution" is not of a specialized nature, but, on the contrary, simultaneously replaces several categories of historical materialism and abstractions. system method. This is the main drawback of using the term "social institution" as a synonym for scientific production.

2.2 The social institution of science as a system of institutions

This understanding of the social institution seems to be the most productive. In this sense, this term is used by V.A. Konev. Thus, the concept of a social institution (through the concept of social control) is included in the system of categories of historical materialism. Apparently, V.Zh. also comes to a similar conclusion. Kelle. Speaking of "social institution", "system of organization of science", he calls them institutions.

A social institution is a functionally unified system of institutions that organizes one or another system of relations of social management, control and supervision. The social institute of science is a system of institutions that organizes and maintains the production and transmission of scientific knowledge, as well as the reproduction of scientific personnel and the exchange of activities between science and other branches of social production. The social institution of science in this case is a social form of existence of management relations in scientific production.

In the process of production of scientific knowledge, its translation and diverse practical use, participants in scientific production enter into relations joint activities in need of an organizing start.

A scientific institution, like any other institution, is characterized primarily by the presence of a permanent and paid staff (not to be confused with an association, group, collective) with its characteristic division of functions and service hierarchy, as well as a certain legal status. (A great connoisseur of this business, Ostap Bender, when creating his office "Horns and Hooves", took into account, by the way, in the first place precisely these circumstances - by creating a staff and hanging a sign, he thereby organized the institution.)

With the professionalization of scientific activity, the organizational forms of science acquire economic and ideological content, turn into an extensive system of institutions, which we call the social institution of science.

©2015-2018 poisk-ru.ru
All rights belong to their authors. This site does not claim authorship, but provides free use.
Copyright Violation and Personal Data Violation

Education is a social subsystem that has its own structure. As its main elements, educational institutions can be distinguished as social organizations, social communities (teachers and students), studying proccess as a type of sociocultural activity.

The science(like the education system) is a central social institution in all modern societies. To an increasing extent, the very existence of modern society depends on advanced scientific knowledge. Not only the material conditions for the existence of society, but also the very idea of the world depends on the development of science.

Prerequisites for the development of science:

Formation of speech;
Account development;
The emergence of art;
Formation of writing;
Formation of worldview (myth);
The emergence of philosophy.

Usually, the following periods of the emergence and development of science are distinguished:

Prescience- the origin of science in the civilizations of the Ancient East: astrology, letters, numerology.
ancient science- the formation of the first scientific theories (atomism) and the compilation of the first scientific treatises in the era of Antiquity: the astronomy of Ptolemy, the botany of Theophrastus, the geometry of Euclid, the physics of Aristotle, as well as the emergence of the first protoscientific communities represented by the Academy.
Medieval magical science- the formation of experimental science on the example of alchemy Jabir (famous Arab alchemist, doctor, pharmacist, mathematician and astronomer.)
Scientific revolution and classical science- the formation of science in the modern sense in the works of Galileo, Newton, Linnaeus.
Non-classical (post-classical) science- science of the era of the crisis of classical rationality: Darwin's theory of evolution, Einstein's theory of relativity, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, Big Bang theory, René Thom's catastrophe theory, Mandelbrot's fractal geometry.

The history of the emergence of education can be divided into stages.

The stage of the primitive-communal stage of development. General organization hunting and distribution of prey, management of domestic needs and a general system for the transfer of knowledge from generation to generation. Stage of the slaveholding stage. With the emergence of the slave system, according to scientists, there is a gap between physical labor and intellectual activity. The result of this is the emergence of nodes and centers of storage, processing and transfer of knowledge isolated from society - schools and philosophical communities. Here, secular science does not include religious centers, although it is well known that it was religion from the very beginning that figured in every known source of writing as the main theme of their content. stage of the feudal system. The monopoly of intellectual education went to the clergy, and education itself thus assumed a predominantly theological character. Renaissance. The education system finally “moved away from the Church”, which led to the gradual loss of the ontological (Ontology is the doctrine of being, of being, a section of philosophy) meaning of education.

Age of Enlightenment. Here education continued its transformation, moving further and further away from religion and philosophy. It becomes more and more practically oriented, more and more changes its tasks from heavenly to earthly, teaches a person to live more with the “head” - the mind, than with the “heart” - the conscience. The main task of education is "education of a free personality. In the same era, a man appeared in Russia who finally developed an integral didactic system - Konstantin Dmitrievich Ushinsky, who managed to bring together the demands of society and the deep need of the human soul in God.

Social functions of science:

Worldview (this includes knowledge of the world).

Management (knowing the laws of the development of the world, we can manage our own activities to obtain certain results)

Culturological (science is able to form not only the attitude of a person to nature, but, based on new knowledge about the person himself, the relationship between people in society)

· The functions of science as a social force, due to the fact that scientific knowledge and methods are now increasingly used in solving a variety of problems that arise in the course of social development.

Social functions of education:

Education (development of cultural and moral values).

2. Learning as a process of transferring knowledge, skills and abilities.

Are you sure you're human?

Training of qualified specialists.

4. Introduction to cultural products and technologies.

5. Socialization (inculcating patterns of behavior, social norms and values).

Features of the functioning of science at the present stage of development. One of the most important components of the culture of society is science. The science - highest form knowledge, obtaining objective and systematically organized and substantiated knowledge about nature, society and thinking. It brings to perfection such functions of culture as cognitive, practical and methodological.

Features of the functioning of education at the present stage of development. New approaches to reforming education that meet the promising trends in world development are determined by the shift of sources and driving forces of socio-economic progress from the material to the intellectual sphere. Under the influence of this fundamental shift, the role and structure of education are changing: it becomes not a derivative, but a determining factor in economic growth; it no longer satisfies societal needs so much as shapes future social opportunities.

Science as a social institution is a sphere of human activity, the purpose of which is to study the objects and processes of nature, society and thinking, their properties of relationships and patterns.

The way scientists organize and interact has changed throughout historical development science.

In antiquity, scientific knowledge was dissolved in the systems of natural philosophers, in the Middle Ages - in the practice of alchemists, mixed with either religious or philosophical views.

The emergence of science as a social institution is associated with fundamental changes in the social system, in particular with the era bourgeois revolutions, which gave a powerful impetus to the development of industry, trade, construction, etc.

Science as a social institution arose in Western Europe in the 16th-17th centuries. in connection with the need to serve the emerging capitalist production and claimed a certain autonomy. In the system of social division of labor, she had to be responsible for the production of theoretical knowledge. Science as a social institution included not only a system of knowledge and scientific activity, but also a system of relations in science, scientific institutions and organizations.

An important prerequisite for the formation of science as a social institution is the presence of a systematic education of the younger generation.

Institutionalization (science) - (lat.institute - to establish, establish) is the formation of stable patterns of social interaction based on customs, rituals, formalized rules, legal laws. Scientific activity is institutionalized if it is morally and organizationally sanctioned by the state or is reflected in the already established legal system.

The process of institutionalization of science is the process of formation of science as a social institution. science social institution public

The process of institutionalization of science began with the formation of academies. They largely embodied the ideas expressed by F. Bacon (1561 - 1626) and R. Descartes (1596 - 1650) that science should be organized.

Uniting in a community, scientists adopted the Charter, which formulated the goals and objectives of the association, principles of activity, boundaries subject area. The charter was evaluated by the authorities and approved by them. The existence of the community, thus, received a formal fixation in the state structure, and with it a certain social status. In the 17th century, the social status of science was recognized and thus it was born as a new social institution.

Within science, there are scientific schools that function as an organized and controlled scientific structure, united by a research program, a single style of thinking, and, as a rule, headed by an outstanding scientist. In the science of science, a distinction is made between "classical" scientific schools (which arose on the basis of universities, the heyday of their activity fell on the second third of the 19th century) and modern ("disciplinary") ones - they came at the beginning of the 20th century. in connection with the transformation of research laboratories and institutes into the leading form of organization scientific work. These schools weakened the functions of teaching and were oriented towards planned programs that were formed outside the framework of the school itself. When the research activity ceased to be "cemented" by the scientific position and strategy of the leader, and was directed only by the set goal, the "disciplinary" scientific school turned into a scientific team.

The next stage in the development of institutional forms of science was the functioning of scientific teams on an interdisciplinary basis, which ensures the emergence of new discoveries at the junctions of various fields of knowledge.

Arises and develops in the 19th century connection of science with economics, with material production. In the first half of the 19th century, science began to form into a special profession, the transformation of science as an activity of amateur scientists into a profession. To late XIX and the beginning of the 20th century, research activity becomes a stable and important tradition in society. In the twentieth century, the concept of "scientific worker" will appear.

The beginning of this process at the end of the first third of the 19th century was the combination of research and higher education, initiated by the reform of the University of Berlin. Its principles were implemented in the creation of laboratories within the university. Scientists began to create having practical value explosives, chemical fertilizers, electrical appliances, and at the same time, the products of scientific activity were in demand in the market. They have become a commodity. Science declared itself in practice, in economic life, and interested practitioners.

An example is the laboratory of the chemist J. Liebig, established in Giessen in 1825. The laboratory was profitable. But this was not the rule. It was typical of the 19th century that scientists considered it humiliating to earn money from their discoveries. Scientific research was carried out at universities, and scientists received money for teaching. Salaries for science began to be paid systematically in the 20th century.

In the second half of the 19th century, the Institute of Research Institute (research institute) was formed.

The relationship between science and production is developing, at least in two forms: applied science is developing as a part of science and science-intensive production is developing. Social structures appear that functionally combine science and production.

The first form of integration of science and production is enterprises that had laboratories in their composition. These are the so-called industrial laboratories. Such enterprises were the first institutional form of integration of science and production. The process becomes purposeful and constant, and science becomes the main source of increasing production efficiency, increasing labor productivity, and a source of innovation.

The emergence of the first industrial laboratories refers to the end of the 70s - 80s of the XIX century. Edison's lab is considered the first. It was created in 1876 near New York in Menlo Park. In the first half of the 80s of the 19th century, the laboratories of the German chemical firms Hoechst, Bayer, BASF, Agfa were also created. American companies: "Arthur de Little" - 1886, "W.G. Goodrich - 1885, General Electric - 1890. English firm "Level Vravera" - 1889. Their appearance is associated primarily with the formation of the electrical and oil refining industries.

Characteristic features of science and its difference from other branches of culture

Considering such a multifaceted phenomenon as science, we can distinguish three of its sides: the branch of culture; way of knowing the world; special institute (the concept of an institute here includes not only a higher educational institution, but also learned societies, academies, laboratories, magazines, etc.).

Like other areas of human activity, science has specific features.

Universality - scientific knowledge is true for the entire universe under the conditions under which it is obtained by man. Scientific laws operate throughout the universe, such as the law of universal gravitation.

Fragmentation - science does not study being as a whole, but various fragments of reality or its parameters; itself is divided into separate disciplines. The concept of being as a philosophical one 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.

Validity - scientific knowledge is suitable for all people; the language of science is unambiguously fixing the terms, which contributes to the unification of people.

Impersonality - 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. For example, in the law of universal gravitation there is nothing of Newton's personality.

Systematism - science has a certain structure, and is not an incoherent collection of parts.

Incompleteness - although scientific knowledge grows without limit, it cannot reach absolute truth, after which there is nothing left to explore.

Continuity - new knowledge in a certain way and according to certain rules correlate with old knowledge.

Critical - science is ready to question and revise its (even fundamental) results. Intra-scientific criticism is not only possible, but necessary.

Reliability - scientific conclusions require, allow and are subject to mandatory verification according to certain formulated rules.

Extramorality - scientific truths are morally neutral, and moral assessments can relate either to the acquisition of knowledge (the ethics of a scientist requires him to be intellectually honest and courageous in the process of searching for truth), or to its application.

Rationality -- science obtains knowledge on the basis of rational procedures. The components of scientific rationality are: conceptuality, i.e. the ability to define terms by identifying the most important properties of a given class of objects; logic - the use of the laws of formal logic; discursiveness -- the ability to decompose scientific statements into their component parts.

Sensibility - scientific 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 validity - impersonality, systematicity - incompleteness, continuity - criticality, reliability - non-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.

The noted characteristic features of science make it possible to distinguish it from all other branches of culture.

The difference between science and mysticism lies in the desire not to merge with the object of study, but to its theoretical understanding and reproduction.

Science differs from art by rationality, which does not stop at the level of images, but is brought to the level of theories.

Unlike mythology, science seeks not to explain the world as a whole, but to formulate the laws of the development of nature that allow empirical verification.

What distinguishes science from philosophy is that its conclusions allow for empirical verification and answer not the question “why?”, but the questions “how?”, “how?”.

Science differs from religion in that rationality and reliance on sensory reality are of greater importance than faith.

Compared with ideology, scientific truths are generally valid and do not depend on the interests of certain sections of society.

Unlike technology, science is not aimed at using the knowledge gained about the world to transform it, but at understanding the world.

Science differs from ordinary consciousness in its theoretical assimilation of reality.

The institutionalization of science is achieved through certain forms of organization, specific institutions, traditions, norms, values, ideals, etc.

Science as a special phenomenon of social life

The concept of science is used to designate both the process of developing scientific knowledge and the entire system of knowledge tested by practice, representing objective truth, as well as to indicate certain areas of scientific knowledge, individual sciences. Modern science is an extremely ramified set of individual scientific branches. Through science, humanity carries out its interaction with nature, develops material production, and transforms social relations. Science contributes to the development of a worldview, frees a person from superstitions and prejudices, broadens his horizons, improves his mental abilities, and forms moral convictions.

The word "science" literally means "knowledge". By knowledge we mean reliable information about material and spiritual sawings, their correct reflection in the mind of a person. Knowledge is the opposite of ignorance, i.e. lack of verified information about something. Our mind moves from ignorance to knowledge, from superficial knowledge to ever deeper and more comprehensive knowledge. Knowledge can be different: elementary, everyday, pre-scientific, scientific, empirical and theoretical.

Elementary knowledge is characteristic of animals that have correct information about certain properties of things and their simplest relationships, which is a necessary condition for their correct orientation in the world around them. Children have some worldly knowledge early age. Each person in the course of his life acquires a lot of empirical information about the outside world and about himself. Already primitive people possessed considerable knowledge in the form of useful information, customs, empirical experience, production recipes passed down from generation to generation, they knew how to do a lot, and their skills were based on their knowledge. And worldly, and pre-scientific, and scientific knowledge is based on practice. All kinds of knowledge are a true reflection of things. But, nevertheless, scientific knowledge differs significantly from pre-scientific and worldly knowledge. Everyday empirical knowledge, as a rule, comes down to stating facts and describing them. For example, sailors knew perfectly well how to use levers, and merchants knew how to use scales.

Scientific knowledge presupposes not only the statement of facts and their description, but also the explanation of facts, their comprehension in the entire system of concepts of a given science. Worldly knowledge states, and even then very superficially, how this or that event proceeds. Scientific knowledge answers the questions not only how, but also why it proceeds in this way: the essence of scientific knowledge lies in a reliable generalization of facts, in the fact that behind the random it sees the necessary, regular, behind the individual - the general, and on this basis it makes a prediction. various phenomena, objects and events,

An essential feature of scientific knowledge is its consistency, i.e. a body of knowledge that is organized on the basis of certain theoretical principles. A collection of disparate knowledge that is not united into a system does not yet form a science. Scientific knowledge is based on certain initial provisions, patterns that allow combining relevant knowledge into a single system. Knowledge turns into scientific when the purposeful collection of facts and their description are brought to the level of their inclusion in the system of concepts, in the composition of the theory. The ancient peoples had accumulated considerable knowledge about the quantitative relationships of things. On the basis of this knowledge, quite complex structures were built: palaces, pyramids, etc. But these elementary mathematical and physical knowledge for a long time they were only pre-scientific in nature: they were not combined into a logically coherent system based on general principles, patterns.

Scientific knowledge of the world differs significantly from the aesthetic form of consciousness. Although both science and art are a reflection of reality, in science this reflection is carried out in the form of concepts and categories, and in art - in the form of artistic images. And scientific concept, and artistic image represent a generalized reproduction of reality. But due to the conceptual nature scientific thinking the relationship between the general, the particular and the individual in scientific knowledge occurs differently than in art. In science, the unity of the general, the particular, and the individual appears in the form of the general, in the form of concepts, categories, while in art the same unity appears in the form of an image that preserves the direct visibility of a single life phenomenon. Scientific knowledge strives for maximum accuracy and excludes anything personal, introduced by scientists from themselves: science is a universal public form knowledge development. The entire history of science testifies to the fact that any subjectivism has always, sooner or later, been ruthlessly thrown out of the way of scientific knowledge, and only the genuine, the objective has been preserved in science. For scientific knowledge, it is essential, first of all, what is being investigated, reveals the nature of the subject of science, while the answer to the question of how research is carried out reveals the nature of the research method. The subject of science is the whole reality, i.e. various forms and types of moving matter, as well as forms of their reflection in the human mind. The level of development of a particular science can be judged by the nature of the methods used by it. Types and forms of methods in science can be divided into a number of groups.

General methods apply to all science, i.e. any of its objects. The comparative method involves the study of not an isolated object, but an object together with the totality of its relationships with other objects. Using the comparative method, for example, D.I. Mendeleev revealed the universal connection of chemical elements - the periodic law, according to which the properties of elements are in a periodic dependence on their atomic masses.

With the help of the historical method, the principle of development in a particular area of phenomena of reality is revealed and substantiated. In biology, this method, as shown by K.A. Timiryazev, is a common methodological basis Darwin's evolutionary theory, according to which the species of animals and plants are not constant, but changeable, the currently existing species originated naturally from other species that existed earlier, the expediency observed in living nature was created and is being created by natural selection changes that are beneficial to the survival of the organism. The historical method in geology is based on the full use of observations of modern natural phenomena and geological processes, which are taken as a starting point for judgments about the processes and physical and geographical conditions of past geological periods and their changes in the course of the Earth's development. In astronomy, using the same approach, based on modern observations of the state and development of celestial bodies, cosmogony is developing - the science of the origin and development of celestial bodies.

Special methods are used in all branches of science, but for the study of only certain aspects of objects. Since the path of cognition goes from the study of immediate phenomena to the disclosure of their essence, specific methods of research correspond to the individual steps of this general course of cognition:

- direct observation of phenomena in natural conditions;
- an experiment with the help of which the phenomenon under study is reproduced artificially and placed in predetermined conditions;
- comparison,
- measurement - a special case of comparison, which is a special kind of technique by which a quantitative relationship is found between the object under study and another known object, taken as the unit of comparisons;
- induction (from particular to general);
- deduction (from the general to the particular) - with the help of the last two methods, empirical knowledge is logically generalized and logical consequences are derived - analysis and synthesis, which make it possible to reveal the regular connections between objects through their dismemberment and reconstruction from parts.

When the role of theoretical thinking becomes sufficiently large, the form of development of science becomes a hypothesis. The theoretical generalization of experimental data is carried out with the help of stupid abstractions, concepts, the accumulated empirical material makes it necessary to revise and break the previous theoretical ideas and develop new ones by generalizing the newly accumulated experimental data.

In modern science, new ways and methods of research have been developed, among which it is worth highlighting:

- the method of analogy, which means the disclosure of the internal unity of various phenomena, unity in their essence, commonality in their laws. A whole class of computers has been created - analog, in which the simulation of a wide variety of processes is carried out using the study of electrical circuits alternating current, oscillations in which are described by the same differential equations(usually of the second order) as the process being modeled;
- a formalization method based on the generalization of the forms of processes that are different in their content, on the abstraction of their form from the content in order to develop common methods of operating with it;
- the method of mathematization, which is a specification of the previous method, extended to the study and generalization of the quantitative side, general connections and structure of the studied objects and processes;
- methods of statistics and probability theory, as well as questions of the use of digital electronic computers;
- a method of modeling, also inextricably linked with the previous ones, in which it is the essence of the phenomena of reality that is modeled by artificially reincarnating it into the image of a real or abstract model.

A necessary condition for scientific research is the establishment of a fact or facts. Their comprehension leads to the construction of a theory, which is the most important constituent part any science. In scientific research, there are, as it were, different levels: some of them meet the immediate and immediate needs of practice, while others are designed for a more or less distant future. They are aimed at solving strategic problems, at revealing the great and wide possibilities of the practice of the future and at making fundamental changes in the existing practice.

The role of science in modern society

Today, in the conditions of the scientific and technological revolution, one more concept is more and more clearly revealed in science, it acts as a social force. This is most clearly manifested in those numerous situations today, when the data and methods of science are used to develop large-scale plans and programs for social economic development. When compiling each such program, which, as a rule, determines the goals of the activities of many enterprises, institutions and organizations, it is fundamentally necessary for the direct participation of scientists as carriers of special knowledge and methods from different fields. It is also significant that, in view of the complex nature of such plans and programs, their development and implementation presuppose the interaction of social, natural and technical sciences.

The 20th century was the century of the victorious scientific revolution. STP has accelerated in all developed countries. Gradually, there was an increasing increase in the knowledge intensity of products. Technology has changed the way we produce. By the middle of the 20th century, the factory mode of production had become dominant. In the second half of the 20th century, automation became widespread. By the end of the 20th century, developed high tech, the transition to the information economy continued. All this happened thanks to the development of science and technology. This had several implications. First, the requirements for workers have increased. They began to require greater knowledge, as well as an understanding of new technological processes. Secondly, the proportion of mental workers, scientific workers, that is, people whose work requires deep scientific knowledge, has increased. Thirdly, the growth of prosperity caused by scientific and technical progress and the solution of many pressing problems of society gave rise to the belief of the broad masses in the ability of science to solve the problems of mankind and improve the quality of life. This new faith found its reflection in many areas of culture and social thought. Achievements such as space exploration, the creation of nuclear energy, the first successes in the field of robotics gave rise to faith in the inevitability of scientific, technological and social progress, aroused the hope of an early solution to such problems as hunger, disease, etc.

And today we can say that science in modern society plays an important role in many sectors and areas of people's lives. Undoubtedly, the level of development of science can serve as one of the main indicators of the development of society, and it is also, undoubtedly, an indicator of the economic, cultural, civilized, educated, modern development of the state.

The functions of science as a social force in solving the global problems of our time are very important. An example of this is environmental issues. As you know, rapid scientific and technological progress is one of the main reasons for such phenomena dangerous to society and man as the depletion of the planet's natural resources, air, water and soil pollution. Consequently, science is one of the factors of those radical and far from harmless changes that are taking place today in the human environment. Scientists themselves do not hide this. Scientific data play a leading role in determining the scale and parameters of environmental hazards.

The growing role of science in public life has given rise to its special status in modern culture and new features of its interaction with various layers of social consciousness. In this connection, the problem of the peculiarities of scientific knowledge and its correlation with other forms of cognitive activity (art, everyday consciousness, etc.) is sharply posed.

This problem, being philosophical in nature, at the same time has great practical significance. Understanding the specifics of science is a necessary prerequisite for the introduction of scientific methods in the management of cultural processes. It is also necessary for constructing a theory of management of science itself in the conditions of scientific and technological revolution, since the elucidation of the patterns of scientific knowledge requires an analysis of its social conditioning and its interaction with various phenomena of spiritual and material culture.

As the main criteria for distinguishing the functions of science, it is necessary to take the main types of activities of scientists, their range of duties and tasks, as well as the areas of application and consumption of scientific knowledge. Some of the main features are listed below:

1) cognitive function given by the very essence of science, the main purpose of which is precisely the knowledge of nature, society and man, the rational-theoretical comprehension of the world, the discovery of its laws and patterns, the explanation of a wide variety of phenomena and processes, the implementation of prognostic activity, that is, the production of new scientific knowledge;
2) worldview function , of course, is closely related to the first, its main goal is the development of a scientific worldview and a scientific picture of the world, the study of the rationalistic aspects of a person’s attitude to the world, the rationale for a scientific worldview: scientists are called upon to develop worldview universals and value orientations, although, of course, the leading role in this matter plays philosophy;
3) production , the technical and technological function is designed to introduce innovations, new technologies, forms of organization, etc. into production. Researchers talk and write about the transformation of science into a direct productive force of society, about science as a special "workshop" of production, referring scientists to productive workers, and all this just characterizes the given function of science;
4) cultural , the educational function lies mainly in the fact that science is a cultural phenomenon, a noticeable factor in the cultural development of people and education. Her achievements, ideas and recommendations have a noticeable effect on the entire educational process, on the content of program plans, textbooks, on technology, forms and methods of teaching. Undoubtedly, the leading role here belongs to pedagogical science. This function of science is carried out through cultural activities and politics, the system of education and the media, the educational activities of scientists, etc. Let us not forget that science is a cultural phenomenon, has a corresponding orientation, and occupies an exceptionally important place in the sphere of spiritual production.

Science as a social institution

The concept of science as a social institution

Science is not only a form of social consciousness aimed at an objective reflection of the world and providing humanity with an understanding of patterns, but also a social institution. In Western Europe, science as a social institution arose in the 17th century in connection with the need to serve the emerging capitalist production and began to claim a certain autonomy. In the system of social division of labor, science as a social institution has assigned specific functions to itself: to be responsible for the production, examination and implementation of scientific and theoretical knowledge. As a social institution, science included not only a system of knowledge and scientific activity, but also a system of relations in science, scientific institutions and organizations.

The Institute presupposes a set of norms, principles, rules, models of behavior that regulate human activity and are woven into the functioning of society; this is a phenomenon of a supra-individual level, its norms and values prevail over individuals acting within its framework. The very concept of "social institution" began to come into use thanks to the research of Western sociologists. R. Merton is considered to be the founder of the institutional approach in science. In the domestic philosophy of science, the institutional approach has not been developed for a long time. Institutionality involves the formalization of all types of relations, the transition from unorganized activities and informal relations by the type of agreements and negotiations to the creation of organized structures that involve hierarchy, power regulation and regulations. The concept of "social institution" reflects the degree of fixation of a particular type of human activity - there are political, social, religious institutions, as well as institutions of the family, school, marriage, and so on.

The process of institutionalization of science testifies to its independence, to the official recognition of the role of science in the system of social division of labor, to the claim of science to participate in the distribution of material and human resources. Science as a social institution has its own branched structure and uses both cognitive and organizational and moral resources. The development of institutional forms of scientific activity involved the clarification of the prerequisites for the process of institutionalization, the disclosure of its content, and the analysis of the results of institutionalization. As a social institution, science includes the following components:

The totality of knowledge and its carriers;

The presence of specific cognitive goals and objectives;

Performing certain functions;

Availability of specific means of knowledge and institutions;

Development of forms of control, examination and evaluation of scientific achievements;

The existence of certain sanctions.

E. Durkheim emphasized the coercive nature of the institutional in relation to an individual subject, its external force, T. Parsons pointed out another important feature of the institution - a stable set of roles distributed in it. Institutions are designed to rationally streamline the life of the individuals that make up society and ensure the sustainable flow of communication processes between various social structures. M. Weber emphasized that an institution is a form of association of individuals, a way of inclusion in collective activity, participation in social action.

The modern institutional approach is characterized by taking into account the applied aspects of science. The normative moment loses its dominant place, and the image of "pure science" gives way to the image of "science put at the service of production." The competence of institutionalization includes the problems of the emergence of new areas of scientific research and scientific specialties, the formation of scientific communities corresponding to them, and the identification of various degrees of institutionalization. There is a desire to distinguish between cognitive and professional institutionalization. Science as a social institution depends on social institutions that provide the necessary material and social conditions for its development. Merton's research uncovers addiction modern science from the needs of the development of technology, socio-political structures and internal values of the scientific community. It was shown that modern scientific practice is carried out only within the framework of science, understood as a social institution. In this regard, there may be restrictions on research activities and freedom of scientific research. Institutionality provides support for those activities and those projects that contribute to the strengthening of a particular value system. The set of core values varies, but at present none of the scientific institutes will not preserve and embody in its structure the principles of dialectical materialism or biblical revelation, as well as the connection of science with parascientific types of knowledge.

Evolution of ways of translation of scientific knowledge

Human society throughout its development needed ways to transfer experience and knowledge from generation to generation. The synchronous method (communication) indicates operational targeted communication, the possibility of coordinating the activities of individuals in the process of their joint existence and interaction. The diachronic method (broadcasting) refers to the transmission of available information, “a sum of knowledge and circumstances” extended in time from generation to generation. The difference between communication and translation is quite significant: the main mode of communication is negative feedback, i.e. correction of programs known to two parties of communication; the main mode of translation is positive feedback, i.e. transmission of programs known to one side of the communication and unknown to the other. Knowledge in the traditional sense is associated with transmission. Both types of communication use language as the main, always accompanying sociality, sign reality.

Language as a sign reality or a system of signs serves as a specific means of storing, transmitting information, as well as a means of managing human behavior. The sign nature of language can be understood from the fact of the insufficiency of biological coding. Sociality, manifested as the attitude of people about things and the attitude of people about people, is not assimilated by genes. People are forced to use non-biological means of reproducing their social nature in the change of generations. The sign is a kind of "hereditary essence" of non-biological social coding, which ensures the transmission of everything that is necessary for society, but cannot be transmitted by biocode. Language acts as a "social" gene.

Language as a social phenomenon is not invented or invented by anyone, it sets and reflects the requirements of sociality. As a product of the creativity of an individual, language is nonsense that does not have universality and is therefore perceived as gibberish. “Language is as ancient as consciousness,” “language is the immediate reality of thought”—such are the classical propositions. Differences in the conditions of human life are inevitably reflected in the language. So, the peoples of the Far North have a specification for the names of snow and there is no such specification for the names of flowers that do not have important meaning for them. Mankind accumulates knowledge and then passes it on to subsequent generations.

Before the advent of writing, the transmission of knowledge was carried out with the help of oral speech. Verbal language is the language of the word. Writing was defined as a secondary phenomenon, replacing oral speech. At the same time, the methods of non-verbal transmission of information were known to the more ancient Egyptian civilization.

Writing is an extremely significant way of transmitting knowledge, a form of fixing the content expressed in the language, which made it possible to connect the past, present and future development of mankind, to make it transtemporal. Writing is an important characteristic of the state and development of society. It is believed that the "savage" society, represented by the social type of "hunter", invented the pictogram; the "barbarian society" represented by the "shepherd" used the ideo-phonogram; the society of "cultivators" created the alphabet. In the early types of societies, the function of writing was assigned to special social categories of people - these were priests and scribes. The appearance of writing testified to the transition from barbarism to civilization.

Two types of writing - phonologism and hieroglyphics - accompany cultures of different types. The flip side of writing is reading, a special type of translational practice. A revolutionary role was played by the formation of mass education, as well as the development of technical possibilities for replicating books (the printing press, invented by I. Gutenberg in the 15th century).

There are different points of view on the relationship between writing and phonetic language. In antiquity, Plato interpreted writing as an auxiliary component, an auxiliary memorization technique. The famous dialogues of Socrates are transmitted by Plato, since Socrates developed his teaching orally.

Starting with Stoicism, notes M. Foucault, the system of signs was ternary, it distinguished the signifier, the signified and the "case". Since the 17th century, the disposition of signs has become binary, since it is determined by the connection between the signifier and the signified. The language that exists in a free, original being as a letter, as a brand on things, as a sign of the world, gives rise to two other forms: above the original layer are comments using existing signs, but in a new use, and below is a text, the primacy of which is assumed by the commentary. Since the 17th century, the problem of the connection between the sign and what it means has arisen. The classical era tries to solve this problem by analyzing representations, while the modern era tries to solve this problem by analyzing meaning and meaning. Thus, language turns out to be nothing more than a special case of representation (for people of the classical era) and meaning (for modern humanity).

Science in public life is a social institution. It includes research laboratories, higher educational institutions, libraries, academies, publishing centers, etc.

The social institution of science began to take shape in the era of modern times in the XVI - XVII centuries. And at first, the influence of science on society manifested itself, first of all, in the sphere of worldview, where religion had dominated for many centuries. And at the initial stage, the formation of science was accompanied by the most acute conflicts with religion. Most swipe on the strongholds of the religious doctrine of the world was applied by the heliocentric system of N. Copernicus. With the discovery of N. Copernicus, science for the first time declared its ability to solve worldview problems. In addition, the study of nature, according to the scientists of the modern era, expressed the desire to understand the divine plan.

So, the beginning of the formation of science into a social institution is associated with such key events as the development of specific methods of cognition and the recognition of the value of scientific research. From this moment on, science begins to act as an independent field of activity.

However, in this era, scientific research was, perhaps, the lot of only the “chosen ones”. The first explorers were fanatically dedicated lone scientists. Science looked hermetic, inaccessible to the general population, and esoteric, since its methods of cognition remained incomprehensible to many.

In the next era, the Age of Enlightenment, which spanned the 18th century, science in the life of society began to gain more popularity. Scientific knowledge began to spread among the general population. In schools, subjects appeared in which natural science disciplines were taught.

The principle of freedom of scientific research acted as an indisputable value in this era. Truth (or "objective knowledge") was recognized as the highest goal of science

Now ideas about achieving social justice and a reasonable social order were associated with scientific knowledge.

In the Age of Enlightenment, views began to appear among progressive scientists and thinkers, absolutizing the role of science. Scientists considered natural science knowledge the only guideline in human activity and denied the ideological significance of religion, philosophy and art. Subsequently, on this basis, scientism - a position that proclaims science as the highest form of culture and nullifies everything that went beyond scientific rationality.

The next key events that influenced the design of science as a social institution took place in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries. During this period, society begins to realize the effectiveness of scientific research. A close relationship is established between science, technology and production. The results of scientific research are now actively beginning to be applied in practice. Thanks to scientific knowledge, new technology began to be improved and created. Industry, agriculture, transport, communications, weapons - this is not a complete list of areas where science has found its application.

The priorities of the scientific community have changed. Those scientific directions that had a wider practical output began to be put forward as "more promising".

At the same time, there is a process of professionalization scientific activity. Scientists are more and more involved in the laboratories and design departments of industrial enterprises and firms. And the tasks they solve are beginning to be dictated by the need to update and improve equipment and technology.

At present, the economic, political, moral and environmental requirements imposed by society have begun to significantly influence the norms and values of science.

The social functions of science today have become very diverse, and therefore, science has begun to acquire great importance in the activities of scientists. Social responsibility, those. the responsibility of the scientist to society. In other words, the cognitive activity of scientists is now determined not only by "internal", professional ethics (which expresses the scientist's responsibility to the scientific community), but also by "external", social ethics (which expresses the scientist's responsibility to the whole society).

The problem of social responsibility of scientists has become especially relevant since the second half of the 20th century. At this time, atomic weapons appeared, weapons of mass destruction; at this time, the environmental movement also appeared as a reaction to the pollution of the environment and the depletion of the natural resources of the planet.

Today we can say that the social responsibility of scientists is one of the factors determining the trends in the development of science, individual disciplines and research areas (as evidenced, for example, by a voluntary moratorium (ban) announced in the 70s by a group of molecular biologists and geneticists on such experiments in the field of genetic engineering, which may pose a danger to the genetic design of living organisms).

Science as a social institution

In the modern world, science appears not only as an individual scientific activity of a scientist, but also as a community of scientists who, in their totality, form a social institution.

Definition 1

Science as a social institution- this is a special sphere of organization of activity, expressing the form of consciousness of the scientific community, and a social institution, the form of which has been developed in the course of the historical development of civilization.

Science within the framework of a social institution organizes a special type of interaction between scientists, the norms of scientific work. Science here takes the form of an institution: a research institute or a scientific school.

There are a number of functions of science as a social institution:

the formation of a social outlook, a picture of the world;
science as a production force that creates new technologies;
expanding the application of scientific methodology: using it to analyze society and social relations.

The institutionalization of science

The beginning of the institutionalization of science dates back to the $17th century.$ By the time when science begins to take shape as an independent social phenomenon. Science becomes the basis of production and technology. At this time in European countries the first academies of sciences appear, scientific journals begin to be published.

The next milestone in the history of the development of science as a social institution was the creation of scientific laboratories and scientific institutes equipped with appropriate technical equipment. Science turns into a "big science" and finally takes the form of a social institution. It establishes a connection with politics, industrial and military production.

Along with this, there are scientific schools that are formed around a certain theory or scientist. This contributes to the education of a new generation of researchers and opens up space for the further generation of new ideas.

In addition, together with official communities among scientists, “informal” groups of scientists are formed, intended for a private exchange of experience and information.

The "ethos" of science

R. Merton, a sociologist of science, in the $middle of the 20th century, formulates the principles that establish the behavior of a scientist within the framework of science as a social institution. These imperatives constitute the "ethos" of science.

Universalism. Science does not involve personal knowledge. The results of scientific research are objective and applicable in all similar situations, that is, they are universal. In addition, this principle states that the degree of scientific contribution and its value cannot depend on national or any other affiliation.
Collectivism. Any scientific discovery is the property of the community. Therefore, the scientist is obliged to publish the results of his research.
Unselfishness. This principle aimed at eradicating from science "unhealthy" competition, thirsting for financial enrichment. The scientist must have as his goal the attainment of truth.
Organized skepticism. On the one hand, this principle confirms the general methodological setting of science, on the basis of which the scientist is obliged to subject the object of his research to critical analysis, on the other hand, within the framework of science itself, scientists must critically consider the results of their own or previous research.

Increment of knowledge and technology

Science as a social institution is subject to processes similar to social ones. In science, "normal development" and revolutions are possible. "Normal development" implies a gradual increase in knowledge. The scientific revolution stands on the positions of a paradigm shift, common system scientific methods and views on their fundamental foundations.

Modern society is largely dependent on science. It forms a person's idea of the world and gives him the technology to live in it. In modern conditions, a scientific discovery is the emergence of a new technology. The level of development of science determines the degree of technological equipment of the industry. Technologization of science is the cause of many global problems of our time, mainly related to ecology.