Turbulence of Modern Society as a Worldview Challenge to the Phenomenon of Science
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32405/2413-4139-2020-2(29)-12-19Keywords:
global perspectives of social development, turbulence of modern society, worldview challenges to science, need to rethink development priorities, overcoming negative trends, paradigm of human progressAbstract
Inherent in the end of the 20th Century, optimistic sentiments regarding the global prospects of
social development were replaced by confusion, anxiety and pessimism at the level of mass consciousness after three decades. This factor significantly exacerbates the need for worldview rethinking of reality, actualizes the aspect of finding answers to the question of cause-and-effect relationships of negative changes and ways to optimize the situation. The worldview challenge addressed to science is not limited to the need to actively search for target orientations, adequate for the transformation of society: the criteria for the effectiveness of science need to be rethought, as well as their relevance to society in a modern format. The modernization of science in accordance with the requirements of the 21st Century necessitates a critical review of stereotypes, a large part of which are inadequate to the realities of life.
In particular, the criteria of scientificity need clarification, the blurring of which is closely correlated
with the tendency of the decline of scientific criticism. Overcoming such negative trends will help to
strengthen the status of the ideal of a scientist, who is characterized by creativity, heuristics, innovation and responsibility.
Downloads
References
1. Beck, U. (2000). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity [Obshchestvo riska. Na puti k drugomu
modernu]. Moscow. [in Russian].
2. Wolniewic, B. (2020). Scientific criticism and criteria of scientific character: (transl. by Oleh Hirnyi)
[Naukova krytyka ta kryteriyi naukovosti: (per. Oleh Hirnyy)]. Philosophiya osvity – Philosophy of
Education, 26(1), 2020, P. 250–259. DOI https://doi.org/10.31874/2309-1606-2020-26-1-15. [in Ukrainian].
3. Levkulych, V. (2021). Vyshcha osvita suchasnosti kriz’ pryzmu kontseptualʹnykh priorytetiv [Modern
higher education through the prism of conceptual priorities]. Universytety i liderstvo – Universities and
Leadership. 12, P. 100–116. DOI https://doi.org/10.31874/2520-6702-2021-12-2-100-116. [in Ukrainian].
4. Mayers, D. (1998). Sotsialnaya psikhologiya [Social Psychology]. St. Peterburh, 1998. [in Russian].
5. Feyerabend, P. (1993). Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge. Verso.
6. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2021). Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. University
of Chicago Press.
7. Kitcher, P. (2011). Science in a Democratic Society. Prometheus.
8. Kitcher, P. (2003). Science, Truth, and Democracy. Oxford University Press.
9. Kuhn, T. S. (2012). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: 50th Anniversary Edition. University of
Chicago Press.
10. Popper, K. (1993). Evolutionary Epistemology, Rationality, and the Sociology of Knowledge. Open
Court Publishing Company.
11. Rhode Island University professor defends Antifa gunman who killed a Trump supporter by saying
‘there’s nothing wrong with it from a moral perspective because he was fascist’. (2020). Retrieved from: https://
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8721235/University-professor-says-wrong-moral-perspective-Antifa
killing-fascist.html.
12. Rose, T. (2022). Collective Illusions: Conformity, Complicity, and the Science of Why We Make Bad
Decisions. Hachette Go.
