UDC

165.19:004

DOI

10.37482/2687-1505-V425

Authors

Olga V. Pashchenko
Cand. Sci. (Philos.), Assoc. Prof., Assoc. Prof. at the Department of Philosophy, South Ural State University (National Research University) (address: prosp. Lenina 76, Chelyabinsk, 454080, Russia).
e-mail: o.pashchenko@list.ru, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6232-6407

Abstract

Scientific knowledge is an integral component of modern society due to the fact that scientific activity carried out by scientists is woven into the fabric of social reality, which is impossible to imagine without science and its achievements. All production, material, technical and, oftentimes, spiritual activities are associated with scientific discoveries. Society recognizes the leading role of science in the transformational activity. This article aims to consider the development of scientific knowledge in the process of changing the quality of social environment. A digital society can hardly function without scientific achievements. Scientific activity provides a basis for enhancing digitalization processes, which have become a trend and the main indicator of the level of development of social relations. The main task of this paper is to demonstrate that the axiological dimension of science is fading into the background, giving way to the sociological dimension. This understanding of science emphasizes the interdependence between science and society. Research activity is a priority area of development for any country in the technocratic digital world. The products of scientific activity are not simply elements of scientific production, but an integral part of social consciousness, which is obsessed with the idea that everything must be scientifically verified, substantiated and proven. Moreover, it can be argued that scientific knowledge is turning into an information resource for society. The intensification of digital technologies contributes to an increase in society’s level of education and allows various actors who are not scientists by profession to get involved in scientific research and development. Thus, humans are facing a new reality in which science plays a decisive role.

Keywords

social environment, social existence of science, scientific knowledge, humanistic orientation, digital society, technocratic control

References

1. Serova O.A. Subjects of Research Activities: From Traditional Concepts to Civil Science. Rule-of-Law State Theory Pract., 2022, no. 3, pp. 98–103 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.33184/pravgos-2022.3.13
2. Reznik Yu.M. Ponyatie “sotsial’noe” v sovremennoy filosofii i nauke [The Concept “Social” in Recent Philosophy and Science]. Voprosy sotsial’noy teorii, 2008, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 88–111.
3. Shipovalova L.V. O sub”ekte nauchnoy deyatel’nosti v tsifrovuyu epokhu [On the Subject of Scientific Activity in the Digital Age]. Argamakova A.A., Maslanov E.V., Slyusarev V.V., Khusyainov T.M. (eds.). Sotsial’nye i tsifrovye issledovaniya nauki [Social and Digital Studies of Science]. Moscow, 2020, pp. 23–37. Available at: http://rshps.ru/books/social-and-digital-studies-of-science (2020).pdf (accessed: 19 July 2024).
4. Nurmukhametov R.K., Torin S.S. Tsifrovoe doverie (digital trust): sushchnost’ i mery po ego povysheniyu [Digital Trust: The Essence and Measures to Increase It]. Izvestiya Tul’skogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ekonomicheskie i yuridicheskie nauki, 2020, no. 1, pp. 32–39.
5. Platonova S.I. Epistemologicheskie transformatsii nauki v tsifrovuyu epokhu [Epistemological Transformations of Science in Digital Age]. Manuskript, 2021, vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 1628–1631. https://doi.org/10.30853/mns210275
6. Lektorskiy V.A. Vozmozhny li nauki o cheloveke? [Are Human Sciences Possible?]. Voprosy filosofii, 2015, no. 5, pp. 3–15.
7. Markuse H. Odnomernyy chelovek. Issledovanie ideologii razvitogo industrial’nogo obshchestva [One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society]. Available at: http://socium.ge/down-loads/komunikaciisteoria/markuze%20odnomerni%20chelovek.pdf (accessed: 1 June 2024).
8. Matveev V.S., Matveeva I.S., Matveeva L.A., Khodarinova N.V., Shaposhnikov V.L. Sovremennye metody diagnostiki produktivnosti upravleniya issledovatel’skoy deyatel’nost’yu [Modern Methods of Diagnostics of Efficiency of Management of Research Activities]. Uchenye zapiski universiteta im. P.F. Lesgafta, 2019, no. 1, pp. 199–204.
9. Lakatos I. Istoriya nauki i ee ratsional’nye rekonstruktsii [History of Science and Its Rational Reconstructions]. Available at: http://filosof.historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000330/index.shtml (accessed: 13 May 2024).
10. Lakatos I. Metodologiya nauchnykh issledovatel’skikh programm [The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes]. Available at: https://www.keldysh.ru/pages/mrbur-web/philosophy/lacatos.htm (accessed: 13 May 2024).
11. Goncharov V.N., Kolosova O.Yu. Sotsial’no-filosofskiy aspekt nauchno-informatsionnoy deyatel’nosti v sisteme obshchestvennogo razvitiya [Social and Philosophical Aspect of Scientific Information Activities in the System of Social Development]. Gumanitarnye, sotsial’no-ekonomicheskie i obshchestvennye nauki, 2015, no. 9, pp. 26–29.
12. Akhunzhanova I.N., Lunev A.P., Tomashevskaya Yu.N., Koshkarov A.V., Gamidov S.S. Adhocracy as a Modern Form of Organization of Russian Universities Activities. Manag. Sci. Russ., 2019, no. 9, pp. 85–97 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.26794/2404-022X-2019-9-4-85-97
13. Toffler A. Powershift: Knowledge, Wealth, and Violence at the Edge of the 21st Century. New York, 1990. 585 p. (Russ. ed.: Toffler E. Metamorfozy vlasti. Moscow, 2003. 669 p.).