Suchergebnisse

The paper considers historical epistemology as a relevant direction of philosophical reflection on the historical foundations of scientific cognition. The researcher emphasizes the identity of historical epistemology in a number of other historical and philosophical studies of science, explores the matters of ontological turn in historical epistemology, reflexivity and relativism. The paper demonstrates that historical epistemology, making an ontological turn, offers an original way to solve the problem of relativism regarding science, which arises in the context of a historical approach to scientific foundations. The research considers the historical epistemology not only as a subject of philosophical research, but also as a special strategy for the study of science, which has its own methods. The possibilities and prospects of this strategy use, in particular, related to the constructive interdisciplinarity are also in the focus of this research.

Disputes in the field of science and technology studies (STS) demonstrate its topicality as they elucidate the prospects for a postmodern world, and William Lynch in his book, in search of a constructive solution to current controversies, employs the dialectical approach of Lakatos and Feyerabend. Lynch takes a bold step to present an apparently "degenerated scientific research program" as a competitive alternative to the established and "progressive" mainstream. The book offers not only a theoretical justification for this "minority report," but also its empirical confirmation, as well as the possibility of practical and socio-political application. We believe that Lynch's book actualizes the discussion about the nature of sociality as related to scientific cognition, as well as provokes the question of the possibility of specific ontology of scientific knowledge. However, the internal heterogeneity of the sociology of scientific knowledge seems to be slightly underestimated, which sometimes prevents Lynch recognizing his real allies and opponents in modern STS. Lynch's approach to analyzing scientific alternatives to dominant paradigms and to science communication practices helps problematize current controversies through demonstrating their incommensurability not incomparability. Hopefully this will increase their mutual understanding and collaboration.

The paper reveals the issue of the scientific research efficiency, which is in the center of modern scientific and philosophical debates. This problem is interpreted as a contradiction between efficiency and autonomy – the two significant features of academic research. This contradiction became urgent in the second half of the 20th century and is expressed in the crisis of institutional interactions or a clash of interests between academia and its governing stakeholders. The paper provides a brief description of the historical prerequisites of this contradiction, obtains insights into the modern crisis and outlines possible ways out. As a conclusion, it emphasizes that the issue of academic efficiency may be solved through a new system of adequate representation of scientific research that would also act as a metric of academic efficiency, thus aligning the targets of various entities engaged in the academic activities. The crucial preconditions for this system in Russia are the formation of a consolidated academia and aligned targets of the academic policy.

Straipsnyje analizuojama idėjų ir žinojimo distributyvumo sąvoka, aptinkama ankstyvoje Naujųjų laikų metafizikoje. Ši sąvoka nebuvo iki galo išplėtota, ją užgožė objektyvumo sąvoka. Pateikiamas bandymas formalizuoti distributyvumą ir jo savybes. Atskleidžiamas distributyvus pažinimas iki-kantiškoje metafizikoje, ypatingą dėmesį skiriant Leibnizo mokymui. Straipsnio autoriai teigia, jog individų bendravimo įvykiai yra paremti distributyvaus pažinimo taškais.

The article deals with the problems of historical epistemology as a topical direc­tion of scientific knowledge research. It focuses on the relationship between his­torical epistemology and historical ontology, on historical event, and on the differ­ence between the work of a historian of science and a historical epistemologist. The author builds a dialogue with the publication of I.T. Kasavin "Knowledge and Reality in the Historical Epistemology". She puts forward the thesis that epistemology is justifiably called historical if it not only performs the primary epistemological grasp of a historical-scientific event, but also makes an ontologi­cal turn. When interpreting the ontological turn, she uses its understanding in contemporary anthropological research. The essential elements of the ontolog­ical turn are the historical event that sets the direction of the ontological turn and the historical epistemologist as its actor. The author interprets the event as the beginning of more than one causal historical series, an inexhaustible source of scientific knowledge for cognition. The work of the historical epistemologist is revealed as problematization of one's own position and the local coordination of emerging causal historical series. The author gives the examples of such work of contemporary historical epistemologists from the texts of L. Daston and P. Galison. It is concluded that the relationship between epistemology and onto­logy in historical research of science, as well as interaction between the historian of science and epistemologist, depends on whether these positions are interpreted as stable and rigidly differentiated or whether the movement between them is recognized as necessary.

The research focuses on the question of the governance strategy of an increasingly complex social system. The complication related to the contemporary socio-political situation, which requires the participation of various stakeholders with their knowledge in the process of decision-making. Digital technologies as an ambiguous context and mediators of public communication exacerbate this issue. The author conducts research at the intersection of epistemological and socio-political contexts and implements conceptual analysis of governability and recursivity, revealed, firstly, to the problem of governing an increasingly complex system and, secondly, the conditions for its resolution. The concept of contingency supplements the concept of recursivity. The article consistently reveals the problematic nature of the concepts of governability and recursivity, the dual use of recursivity in political sciences, the ambiguity of the relationship between recursivity and contingency. The analysis of concepts allows identifying the conditions for both the involvement of additional active participants with their knowledge in governance, and their use as passive carriers of information. The author clarifies this alternative through two models of the relation of contingency and recursivity, namely, the "victory" or "defeat" of the first. As an example of how the models work, the author uses a study of citizen participation in city governance through digital platforms. She concludes that the governance strategy, taking into account the model of "victory" of contingency, provides conditions for the recognition of new active participants in decision-making processes.

This paper focuses on the concept of the scientific-technical revolution. This concept is relevant today most of all in the context of historiographic studies of the Soviet period or the reflection of contemporary technological transformation from the Marxist position. The article demonstrates its relevance in the context of important contemporary issues. For a conceptual framework, the author uses the works on the social history of science by J. D. Bernal, the contemporary studies of science, technology and society, and the critical theory of technology, which seeks to integrate the philosophy of science and technology into topical socio-political discussions. The author reveals the concept of the scientific-technical revolution as describing the radical transformations taking place since the beginning of the 20 th century in science, society, and technology. These transformations manifest the essential social and technological character of science and its previously hidden contradiction. The social character of science involves an increasing number of participants of these transformations, but the technological character leaves them passive objects of the efficiency requirements. However, the scientific-technical revolution offers a lesson in overcoming this contradiction, creating conditions for the activity of various participants — scientists, nature, lay experts, and technologies themselves. The emphasis on the radical revolutionary changes that have occurred with science allows us to keep in the spotlight the foundations of modern problems and how to solve them.