SCIENCE IN THE MIRROR OF CULTURE
UDC index:
008
DOI:
Article ID in the RSCI:
Article file: Download
Information about authors: Popova Natalya Sergeevna, PhD in Art History, Associate Professor of Department Culturology, Kemerovo State University of Culture (Kemerovo, Russian Federation). E-mail: bublikova2007@yandex.ru Popov Sergey Ivanovich, PhD in Philosophy, Associate Professor of Department Humanities, Kemerovo Institute (Branch) of the Plekhanov Russian University of Economics (Kemerovo, Russian Federation). E-mail: bende-ostap@yandex.ru
Annotation: The work is devoted to revealing the generalized cultural image of the science of nature. An adequate image of science to society is vital. At the same time, the disruption of the real process of scientific cognition and the process of shaping the image of science in the eyes of society seems inevitable. The cultural projection of science is behind science itself: society assimilates something in science that it is ready to absorb. An attempt is made to perform an “outline” (describe an ideal historical invariant) of this cultural image of science, focusing on a system of the three coordinates: nature (world) – science – scientist. The epoch of the Renaissance connected two late-antique views: neoplatonism with its pantheism and hermetism. Nature is diverse and infinitely wonderful. Science is scientific magic, capable of taking from nature its miracles. The scientist is the superman, magician. In modern times science is wonderful, but within strictlimits, which are supposed to be deterministically understood “laws of nature.” From the triad of “nature – science – scientist,” characteristic of the Renaissance, the New European similar triad is distinguished by a restriction in the interpretation of the concept of “natural.” Natural islimited to mechanical causes. The consequence of the reductionism of science is its well-known value nihilism, the skeptical attitude of scientists towards values, the unwillingness to take them into account and discuss them. This feature of the scientific mindset makes relevant not the principle of adequacy, but the principle of complementarity as applied to the science of nature and humanitarian culture. The potential danger of scientific rationality makes it desirable to supplement the internal self-reflection of science with its cultural – humanitarian – mastering-“expertise.”
Keywords: science, society, world picture, nature, creation, magic, miraculous, natural, determinism, reductionism.
DOI:
Article ID in the RSCI:
Article file: Download
Information about authors: Popova Natalya Sergeevna, PhD in Art History, Associate Professor of Department Culturology, Kemerovo State University of Culture (Kemerovo, Russian Federation). E-mail: bublikova2007@yandex.ru Popov Sergey Ivanovich, PhD in Philosophy, Associate Professor of Department Humanities, Kemerovo Institute (Branch) of the Plekhanov Russian University of Economics (Kemerovo, Russian Federation). E-mail: bende-ostap@yandex.ru
Annotation: The work is devoted to revealing the generalized cultural image of the science of nature. An adequate image of science to society is vital. At the same time, the disruption of the real process of scientific cognition and the process of shaping the image of science in the eyes of society seems inevitable. The cultural projection of science is behind science itself: society assimilates something in science that it is ready to absorb. An attempt is made to perform an “outline” (describe an ideal historical invariant) of this cultural image of science, focusing on a system of the three coordinates: nature (world) – science – scientist. The epoch of the Renaissance connected two late-antique views: neoplatonism with its pantheism and hermetism. Nature is diverse and infinitely wonderful. Science is scientific magic, capable of taking from nature its miracles. The scientist is the superman, magician. In modern times science is wonderful, but within strictlimits, which are supposed to be deterministically understood “laws of nature.” From the triad of “nature – science – scientist,” characteristic of the Renaissance, the New European similar triad is distinguished by a restriction in the interpretation of the concept of “natural.” Natural islimited to mechanical causes. The consequence of the reductionism of science is its well-known value nihilism, the skeptical attitude of scientists towards values, the unwillingness to take them into account and discuss them. This feature of the scientific mindset makes relevant not the principle of adequacy, but the principle of complementarity as applied to the science of nature and humanitarian culture. The potential danger of scientific rationality makes it desirable to supplement the internal self-reflection of science with its cultural – humanitarian – mastering-“expertise.”
Keywords: science, society, world picture, nature, creation, magic, miraculous, natural, determinism, reductionism.
