Везде
Technoscience: “Where the Danger Is, Grows the Saving Power Also”
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
Technoscience: “Where the Danger Is, Grows the Saving Power Also”
Annotation
PII
S1811-833X0000616-7-1
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Lada Shipovalova 
Edition
Volume 57 Issue 1
Pages
45-50
Abstract
The article is a response to the arguments by O. B. Koshovets and I. E. Frolov on the emergence of "technoscience”. Technoscience is opposed by the authors to the classical science characterized by the dominance of the technological component of research and capitalization of knowledge. The article focuses on two tasks. The first one supposes an appeal to the historical origins of technoscience and demonstrates significant relationship between technoscience and classical science. The second one involves the disclosure of contemporary negative trends of technoscience as creating conditions for their own overcoming. In conclusion it associates the work on the autonomy of science with the constructive dialogue between scientific and non-scientific knowledge.
Keywords
scientific-technical revolution, autonomy of science, problem of demarcation
Date of publication
01.03.2020
Number of purchasers
22
Views
509
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf

References



Additional sources and materials

    

  1. Avtonomova, N.S., Bazhanov, V.A., Kasavin, I.T. et al. “Dostoinstvo znanija kak problema sovremennoj jepistemologii. Materialy Kruglogo stola” [The Self-Integrity of Knowledge as a Problem of Modern Epistemology. Materials of “Round Table”], Voprosy flosofii, 2016, no. 8, pp. 20-56. (In Russian).
    2. 

  2. Barash, R.E., Antonovski, A.Y. “Radikal'naja nauka. Sposobny li uchenye na obshhestvennyj protest” [Radical Science. Are the Scientists Capable on Social Protest?], Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 2018, vol. 55, no 2, pp. 18-33. (In Russian).
    3. 

  3. Husserl, E. “Krizis evropejskogo chelovechestva i filosofija” [Philosophy and the Crisis of European Man], In: Husserl, E. Collected papers, Minsk: Harvest, Moscow: AST, 2000, pp. 625-65. (In Russian).
    4. 

  4. Marcuse, H. Odnomernyj chelovek [One-Dimensional Man], REFL-book, Moscow, Russia, 1994. (In Russian).
    5. 

  5. Stoliarova, O. “Tehnonauka kak jeksperimental'na sreda i jeksperimental'naja metodologija” [Technoscience as an Experimental Environment and Experimental Methodology], Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 2016, vol. 48, no 2, pp. 40-44. (In Russian).
    6. 

  6. Nowotny, H., Scott, P., Gibbons, M. Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty, Cambridge: Polity Press, 2001.
    7. 

  7. Teich, M. J. D. “Bernal the Historian and the Scientific-Technical Revolution”, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 2008, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 135–139.
    8.

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate