Suchergebnisse

Modern economic science studies the behavior of an individual making choice in conditions of limited resources, and seeking to satisfy his own interests as a result of this choice. Economics is a social science as it studies the behavior of an individual which involves the interests of other people and communities. Economics is close to natural sciences as it considers the behavior of an individual in a material world of limited resources. Besides, a human being may be considered as a material system in which there are certain biological processes influencing its behavior. The question of how fully can economics use methodological assumptions of natural sciences, is sharply debatable. The author's position is that the cooperation between economics and natural sciences has both objective grounds and objective problems. In any case, economics is not a natural science, and the natural sciences shouldn't have a priority in this dialogue. It is only a new stage in self-reflection of different sciences. The importance of this research is defined by the need of studying the scientific status of economics and the prospects of its development in terms of the subject and methodology.

This article considers the subject of interdisciplinary interaction among specialists working in exact and social sciences as a practice of exchanging ideas about social reality; mutual adaptation of these ideas; empirical verification of the universal formal logic rules applied to specific tasks of sociological research. Such formulation of the subject goes beyond the problem of adapting educational programs to "literacy classes" for potential partners. It is maintained that in inter-professional communication it is important to formulate conceptual systems of common use not "in general", not for all possible cases, but with regard to the problem addressed by consolidated effort. For such conceptual systems we use the term "common language area" according to the ideas of epistemologists (Ilya Kasavin). Elements of these conceptual systems include paradigms, concepts, tools and procedures mobilized for collaborative work. Readers are offered a description of the experience of cooperation between mathematicians and sociologists in 1990 – 2010s in the qualitative analysis of sociological data — which is an area of concern for both sociology and exact methods. To find a cooperative solution, we needed to develop a system of basic propositions regarding the object and purpose of the research; to put together a structure of sociological data suitable for using the proposed formal tool; to carry out empirical verification of the formalized language of logic-mathematical reasoning. This work has made it possible to explicate the opportunities and limitations when it comes to interpreting results. The article draws conclusions about the specifics of communication in a team of specialists, including sociologists and mathematicians, and about the development of a common language area in the field of cooperation that deals with qualitative analysis of sociological data. Our experience of cooperation in using formalized qualitative analysis of sociological data shows that, when it comes to the need to solve a common problem, partner role relations turned out to be the most effective (rather than role pairs such as "teacher-student" or "seller-buyer").

The article, which is addressed to a wide range of readers, but first of all to University teachers, graduate students and students, outlines a wide range of views on the institution of the state of social scientists of different times and peoples: from ancient thinkers to modern authorities. Discussion of the latest trends in the development of this Institute in the late twentieth and first decades of the XXI century is the subject of the author's research. The article analyzes the futurist ideas about the state related to forecasts of the progress of information technologies, as well as ideas about the dynamics of relations between state power and society. Special sections of the article are devoted to: the evolutionary concept of the state; the challenges that States face in the context of the next technological (fourth industrial) revolution; the discourse on the discrepancy between formal and real citizenship as the reverse side of the extraterritoriality of the state.

Scientiic collaboration continues to increase in frequency and importance. It has the potential to solve complex scientiic problems. The relevance of the research is caused by the role of scientiic collaboration in scientiic and technological sphere. Scientiic collaboration can be deined as a science infrastructure and as a process of intellectual cooperation. The aim of the research is to construct the model of scientiic collaboration in Russian science and technology. This has been gained by solving the following research objectives: deinition of the term «scientiic collaboration», types of collaborations consideration, analysis of intellectual and research infrastructure cooperation methods which take place in Russian scientiic organizations. The main feature of this research is the particular methodology which is based on scientometrics, comparative analysis and scientiic modeling. Scientometrics was used for deining productive scientiic collaboration in Russia. Open sources of information about international and Russian scientiic collaboration, oficial websites of Russian Ministry of Education and Science and Russian Academy of Science, such databases as Russian Statistics Committee and Web of Science can be mentioned as main information resources of the research. Main results of theoretical and practical part of the research are the original authors` vision of the base of scientiic collaborations in formation Russia which meansan effective cooperation of three components: intellectual resources (scientists and research teams), infrastructure (which can provide scientists with regular access to research equipment) and government (as a main regulator). Moreover, it should be mentioned that the main productive development option for Russian scientiic collaboration is territory integration of intellectual resources and research infrastructure.

The paper examines the conventionalism that arose within the framework of the second positivism in European philosophy at the turn of the XIX–XX centuries, in connection with Russian science and philosophy. Despite its being popular and developed mainly in Western philosophy, we demonstrate that its ideas were also reflected in Russian culture. Moreover, we argue that it was the achievements of Russian mathematicians that influenced the emergence of this direction in European philosophy. To determine the place of conventionalism in Russian culture, the works of such scientists, philosophers and historians of science as A. Poincaré, N.V. Efimov, G.V. Florovsky, P.S. Yushkevich and others were used. The article also provides an overview of their main works and ideas. The analysis also deals with the influence of ideological and political factors on the development of philosophy in the XX century in Russia and the USSR. It is shown that the achievements of Russian mathematicians had a significant influence on the emergence of conventionalism, and the ideas of conventionalism, in turn, were reflected in the concepts of Russian thinkers concerning the philosophy of science and the philosophy of history. Thus, N.I. Lobachevsky can be called a harbinger of mathematical conventionalism, some ideas of P.S. Yushkevich and A.A. Bogdanov can be referred to natural-scientific conventionalism, and some ideas of G.V. Florovsky can be called historical conventionalism. We conclude that Russian science, firstly, was one of the reasons for the emergence of conventionalism in Europe, and secondly, Russian philosophy adopted and applied some of its ideas, in particular, concerning the impossibility of complete knowledge of the world or the relativity of ways of expressing truth, which remain relevant today.

The scientiic and technological (S&T) development of the Russian Federation is one of the government top priorities. In the context of globalization, a clear image of the country's global S&T ranking can be helpful for decision making in science policy. The paper analyzes the main international statistical data banks which allow for cross-country comparisons of S&T capabilities and reviews various international rankings, including special innovation indices and rankings based on science and technology indicators, which provide opportunity to locate position of Russia in the global S&T and innovation landscape. The study is based on data from the World Bank, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), UNESCO, international rankings relecting the countries' readiness for a knowledge-based economy: the Global Innovation Index, the Bloomberg Innovation Index, The IMD World Competitiveness, The Global Talent Competitiveness Index, the Networked Readiness Index. The article focuses on analysis of Russia's positions in international science, technology and innovation rankings. The discussion ends with the conclusion that despite rather high R&D expenditures and quality of human capital, R&D efectiveness and impact of S&T on the Russian economy are estimated as rather low.

The article is devoted to analysis of new Marxism as a key methodological
trends of political science research. Historical events of the last century and the
ensuing updated the creative legacy of Marx and contributed to its reconsideration,
which was the enrichment of political science, development of methodology in its area
schools and trends, developing ideas known German scientist.