Science is one of the defining features of modern culture and perhaps its most dynamic component. Today it is impossible to discuss social, cultural, anthropological problems without taking into account the development of scientific thought. None of the major philosophical concepts of the XX century. could not bypass the phenomenon of science, not express her attitude to science as a whole and to the worldview problems that it poses. What is science? What is the main social role of science? Are there limits to scientific knowledge and knowledge in general? What is the place of science-based rationality in a system of other ways of relating to the world? Is extra-scientific knowledge possible, what is its status and prospects? Is it possible to scientifically answer the fundamental questions of the worldview: how did the Universe arise, how did life appear, how did man originate, what place does the phenomenon of man occupy in the universal cosmic evolution?
The discussion of all these and many other ideological and philosophical issues accompanied the formation and development of modern science and was a necessary form of understanding the features of both science itself and the civilization within which a scientific attitude to the world became possible. Today these questions are in a new and very acute form. This is primarily due to the situation in which modern civilization finds itself. On the one hand, unprecedented prospects for science and technology based on it have come to light. Modern society is entering the information stage of development, the rationalization of all social life becomes not only possible, but also vital. On the other hand, the limits of the development of civilization of a one-sided technological type were revealed: both in connection with the global ecological crisis, and as a result of the revealed impossibility of total control of social processes.
In recent years, attention to these issues in our country has noticeably decreased. It seems that one of the main reasons for this is the general sharp drop in the prestige of scientific knowledge in our society, in the catastrophe that Russian science has been experiencing in recent years. Meanwhile, it is quite clear that without developed science Russia has no future as a civilized country.
The task of the work is to characterize science as an element of technological culture. Consider the specific features, logic and methods of scientific knowledge.
The term technology appeared in the 18th century, although since the emergence of human society, people have used various technologies to ensure their livelihoods. The rapid development of world social production in the second half of the 20th and early 21st centuries. was due, in particular, to the emergence of new technologies, including high ones. The term "technology" began to be applied not only to the description of material transformations, but also energy, information and social ones. No one is surprised by such concepts as "social technologies" and "pedagogical technologies". From modern positions, technology appears as a spider about the transformation of materials (substances), energy, information according to the plan and in the interests of man. In scientific terms, it is considered as a type of cognitive activity focused on the development of objective, systematically organized knowledge about the transforming function of a person, about goals, ways, stages, means, limitations, about the evolution and consequences of productive activity, trends in its improvement, as well as about methods all optimizations. Technique serves as an instrumental means of providing technologies, and the technosphere accumulates a set of technical means for the transformation of materials, energy and information. All technologies are implemented using material means (equipment tools), however, they differ in terms of objects of transformation, and they can be divided into material, energy and information technologies, the latter include social and pedagogical ones.
Throughout its history, mankind has experienced two technological revolutions associated with a radical change in production technologies - agrarian (agricultural, Neolithic (10 thousand years BC), which was characterized by the creation of farming and cattle breeding technologies, and industrial (industrial - XVIII -XIX centuries), culminating in the advent of conveyor production technologies (A. Toffler).
The term technology has a number of meanings: it is used in industry, science, art and other areas of human activity. Obviously, technology means the intellectual processing of technically significant qualities and abilities. In essence, this is a cultural concept associated with human thinking and activity. It determines the place of man in nature, the scope of his possible intervention in natural processes.
Technological culture is the fourth universal culture. It defines the worldview and self-understanding of modern man. At the same time, by universal cultures we mean systems of epistemic principles that are characteristic of a certain era and certain levels of development of scientific knowledge and technical means.
The first universal culture, some features of which were restored during the study of archaeological finds and written evidence, was the mythological culture. It is inherent in all natural civilizations of antiquity. People of this culture explained the phenomena of nature, based on data from direct observations. In their lives they used functionally adapted natural products and materials.
The episteme of such a culture was reduced to the idea of some hidden "secret" forces inherent in all objects of the surrounding world and determining their existence. These forces, according to the ideas of the ancients, determined the sequence of everything that happened; they gave meaning to everything in the world - the cosmos. Existence itself, in this approach, is Fate. People, like everything else, turn out to be only elements of a comprehensive harmony.
The second universal culture - cosmological - flourished during the period of the average natural civilization. Her episteme boiled down to the fact that in every phenomenon the action of the forces of nature is manifested in accordance with their inherent laws. Separate elements, components of a being form natural organisms, while multitudes of natural organisms, in turn, form a balance of natural order, the same "harmony" of mythological culture.
The episteme of the third anthropological culture is characteristic of a developed natural civilization. According to this culture, all the phenomena and patterns of the surrounding world are accessible to human understanding. Experience allows you to reveal the system essence of disparate facts and phenomena.
The qualities of such systems correspond to the qualities of their constituent elements. The planned organization of life turns out to be quite possible, its goal is the same mechanical balance that in other cultures acted as "harmony" or "the order of things."
Man - a researcher, systematizer and creator of the new - drew strength from his own strength and confidence. The human world gradually became the center of his attention, the sphere of his achievements. New ideas arose about the relationship to nature, new means of cognition, which ceased to be just intermediaries between thought and nature.
Active human intervention in natural processes began. Thus was the development of the fourth universal culture.
Here it is worth considering two points. The first is that human intervention in the course of natural processes is taking on an unprecedented scale, becoming permanent and, if we mean the results, irreversible. The second is the habitat of mankind - the Earth ceases to be an inexhaustible source of various resources, a kind of "cornucopia"; the consumer attitude to the world, rooted in the minds of the "king of nature", is increasingly becoming the cause of the disorder of the natural balance, as a result, it can lead to its final violation.
Since the second half of the XX century. humanity is experiencing the third technological revolution, when the transition from an industrial to a technological society is taking place. The emergence of new technologies in industry and agriculture contributed to a sharp increase in world social production (7 times from 1950 to 1990). This growth continues to the present. The creation of computers led to the emergence of the information world and high technology. The amount of information used by the population has increased dramatically. The information revolution of the last decades, which has turned the world into a single information space, has become one of the deepest upheavals in the history of mankind. The industrial society of conveyor production and blue collars is being replaced by the postindustrial society of white collars. Due to the widespread use of information and telecommunication technologies, their rapid change, the main condition for the development of modern production is working with new information and creative solutions to constantly emerging production problems. It is interesting to trace the change in the distribution of labor in the developed countries of the world in the XX. If in the USA in 1900 20% of workers worked in the sphere of material production, 44% in agriculture and 30% in services, then in 1994 3.1% of workers worked in agriculture, 15% in industry, ( 5%; 6% in some parts of the United States (New York, San Francisco, Boston) the latter figure reached 92% In Western Europe and Japan it varies from 71 to 78% In Russia in 1995 the number of commas in the service sector and In the literature, this change in the distribution of the labor force is called deindustrialization.In 1995, in the US, healthcare, scientific research, the service sector, and the production of intangible scientific products and software accounted for almost 43% of GDP. technologies and inf formations. According to forecasts, by 2010 the share of people employed in the field of information and telecommunication technologies in developed countries will be at least 50% of the total number of employees, and 5 to 10% of the population will remain in factories and factories. The main means of existence is the processing of information in one form or another.
In the 21st century the vast majority of the population work in the service sector, including education and health care, and in information, sciences and culture. Even on farms and in industry, more workers will be involved in information processing than in cultivating the land and working on production lines. An example is the US auto industry, where more people are involved in sales, insurance, advertising, design, and safety than in the actual assembly of cars. However, the transition to the information world does not detract from the importance of material production, including manual labor in the life support of society. Our world remains material, but information plays an ever-increasing role in it.
Countries that are able to improve the quality of education of the population, general culture, technological discipline of production and, of course, science, the main creative force of the post-industrial society, become leaders in world development. This is evidenced by the experience of the United States, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc. It is in the secondary school that the foundations of the humanitarian, natural science, and technological culture of young people are laid, it is this culture that determines the intellectual potential of the country - not the elite, but the mass of people with a fairly high and versatile education, the level of which determines the success of solving global problems of an environmental, energy, informatization and social nature. The quality of manufactured science-intensive products depends on the technological culture of the population.
The modern understanding of progress is changing in the direction of spiritual and cultural factors, which means deepening the originality of a person, expanding his spirituality. From this position, the human change of progress allows us to talk about the need to develop the technological culture of society and each individual member of it. Therefore, technological culture can be defined as an actual paradigm of modern and future education.
A feature of technological culture as a new culture that is being formed around us is a new attitude towards the world around us, based on scientific knowledge, creative attitude, and the transformative nature of activity. Its influence on the development of each member of society is so great that it makes it necessary to educate and educate young people on a qualitatively new basis, to provide new extraordinary approaches in education aimed at solving the problems of the technological environment.
At the end of the 20th century, when a new technological society (“knowledge society”) began to form, technological knowledge and skills become the most important value, a factor in economic transformations. Now technological culture has become a measure of literacy.
Today, the concept of culture covers all aspects of human activity and society. Therefore, there are political, economic, legal, moral, environmental, artistic, professional and other forks of culture. The fundamental component of the general culture is the technological culture.
Technological culture is the culture of a modern technologically saturated society. This is a new attitude to the world around us, based on the transformation and improvement, as well as the improvement of the human environment. Technological culture, being one of the types of universal culture, has an impact on all aspects of human life and society. It forms a technological worldview, which is based on a system of technological views on nature, society and man. Its integral part is technological thinking associated with the generalized reflection of the scientific and technological environment by the individual and the mental ability for transformative activity.
The manifestation of various human qualities that can transform the environment, improve the world around us - this is the multitude of cultures that are embodied in the concept of "technological culture". From the position of modern concepts of the development of human society, in whose field of vision the rational abilities of a person, his creative approach to everything that surrounds him, his creative self-expression, the concept of "technological culture" personifies a new layer of culture, indicating a high level of abilities and scientific knowledge in the implementation by a person of any technological process or project, both in the social and in the industrial spheres of activity.
At present, the technological stage of the development of society is designed to establish the priority of the method over the result of the activity. Therefore, society needs a comprehensive approach to the choice of methods (including material and intellectual means) of its activities from the mass of alternative options and to the assessment of its results. The main goal of human activity is to ensure that technological capabilities serve humans, that is, to change the social, economic and cultural life of our society in such a way that it stimulates human development.
2. SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE
Scientific knowledge is a system of knowledge about the laws of nature, society, and thinking. Scientific knowledge forms the basis of the scientific picture of the world and reflects the laws of its development.
Scientific Knowledge:
- is the result of comprehension of reality and the cognitive basis of human activity;
- socially conditioned; and
- has a different degree of reliability.
Scientific information about things merges with information about the opinions of others about these things. In a broad sense, both obtaining information about things and obtaining information about the opinions of others about these things can be called information activity. It is as old as science itself. In order to successfully fulfill his main social role (which is the production of new knowledge), the scientist must be informed about what was known before him. Otherwise, he may find himself in the position of a discoverer of already established truths.
The question of the structure of scientific knowledge deserves special consideration. It is necessary to distinguish three levels in it: empirical, theoretical, philosophical grounds.
At the empirical level of scientific knowledge, as a result of direct contact with reality, scientists gain knowledge about certain events, identify the properties of objects or processes of interest to them, fix relationships, and establish empirical patterns.
To clarify the specifics of theoretical knowledge, it is important to emphasize that the theory is built with a clear focus on explaining objective reality, but it directly describes not the surrounding reality, but ideal objects, which, unlike real objects, are characterized not by an infinite, but by a quite definite number of properties. For example, such ideal objects as material points, with which mechanics deals, have a very small number of properties, namely, mass and the ability to be in space and time. The ideal object is built in such a way that it is fully intellectually controlled.
The theoretical level of scientific knowledge is divided into two parts: fundamental theories, in which the scientist deals with the most abstract ideal objects, and theories that describe a specific area of reality on the basis of fundamental theories.
The strength of a theory lies in the fact that it can develop, as it were, on its own, without direct contact with reality. Since in theory we are dealing with an intellectually controlled object, the theoretical object can, in principle, be described in any detail and obtain arbitrarily distant consequences from the initial ideas. If the original abstractions are true, then the consequences of them will be true.
In addition to the empirical and theoretical in the structure of scientific knowledge, one can single out another level containing general ideas about reality and the process of cognition - the level of philosophical premises, philosophical foundations.
For example, the well-known discussion of Bohr and Einstein on the problems of quantum mechanics was essentially conducted precisely at the level of the philosophical foundations of science, since it was discussed how to relate the apparatus of quantum mechanics to the world around us. Einstein believed that the probabilistic nature of predictions in quantum mechanics is due to the fact that quantum mechanics is incomplete, since reality is completely deterministic. And Bohr believed that quantum mechanics is complete and reflects the fundamentally irremovable probability characteristic of the microworld.
Certain ideas of a philosophical nature are woven into the fabric of scientific knowledge, embodied in theories.
A theory turns from an apparatus for describing and predicting empirical data into knowledge when all its concepts receive an ontological and epistemological interpretation.
Sometimes the philosophical foundations of science are clearly manifested and become the subject of heated discussions (for example, in quantum mechanics, the theory of relativity, the theory of evolution, genetics, etc.).
At the same time, there are many theories in science that do not cause controversy about their philosophical foundations, since they are based on philosophical ideas that are close to generally accepted ones.
It should be noted that not only theoretical, but also empirical knowledge is associated with certain philosophical ideas.
At the empirical level of knowledge, there is a certain set of general ideas about the world (about causality, stability of events, etc.). These ideas are perceived as obvious and are not the subject of special studies. Nevertheless, they exist, and sooner or later they change at the empirical level as well.
The empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge are organically linked. The theoretical level does not exist on its own, but is based on data from the empirical level. But it is essential that empirical knowledge is inseparable from theoretical ideas; it is necessarily immersed in a certain theoretical context.
British sociologist 3. Bauman names three types of such differences. Firstly, scientific knowledge is organized differently, it is subject to strict requirements and rules. These requirements include the following:
a) the certainty of the categorical apparatus;
b) developed and tested methods of cognition;
c) reinforcement of theoretical generalizations with real facts;
d) openness of the scientific concept for discussion, critical reflection. Ordinary knowledge is freer, it is devoid of rigid frameworks, it does not claim the right to "responsible statements" characteristic of scientists as a special status group in society, from which competent conclusions are expected.
Secondly, scientific knowledge always implies a wider field for collecting material for generalizations and judgments. Ordinary knowledge is formed in a more limited information space. In everyday life, we very rarely try (if at all) to rise above the level of our everyday interests, to expand the horizon of our experience, therefore ordinary knowledge is always fragmentary, it snatches out only individual events, episodes of the political process; the scientific, on the contrary, lays claim to the breadth of generalization and comprehensiveness of analysis.
Thirdly, scientific knowledge differs in the way it explains political events. In science, the explanation should be as depersonalized as possible, i.e. substantiation, interpretation are carried out on the basis of isolating many factors, interdependencies. Knowledge based on common sense is characterized by an explanation of certain events, actions of politicians based on pre-existing ideas and beliefs. A person usually ascribes to politicians those intentions that are known to him from previous experience.
Thus, scientific knowledge about politics is more complex, complex. It requires the researcher to have special skills in working with observed phenomena, to possess the appropriate categorical apparatus, the ability to use special methodological tools for understanding the sphere of political relations and interactions, the ability to analytically comprehend relationships, dependence and modeling complex political processes. Scientific knowledge about politics is a system of theories, concepts that explain and describe politics, as well as a set of methods that allow deepening and expanding ideas about politics.
Let us note, firstly, the following points in the change in the image of science today:
a) of course, the advancement of fundamentally new ideas in science remains the work of relatively few of the most prominent scientists who manage to look beyond the "horizons" of knowledge, and often significantly expand them. But nevertheless, for scientific knowledge as a whole, collective forms of activity, carried out, as philosophers put it, by "scientific communities" are becoming more and more characteristic. Science is becoming more and more not just a system of abstract knowledge about the world, but also one of the manifestations of human activity, which has taken the form of a special social institution. The study of the social aspects of the natural, social, and technical sciences in connection with the problem of scientific creativity is an interesting but still largely open problem;
b) modern science is increasingly penetrating methods based on new technologies, and on the other hand, new mathematical methods that seriously change the previous methodology of scientific knowledge; therefore, philosophical adjustments are also required in this regard. A fundamentally new method of research has become, for example, a computational experiment, which is now the most widely used. What is its cognitive role in science? What are the specific features of this method? How does it affect the organization of science? All this is of great interest;
c) the scope of scientific knowledge is rapidly expanding, including previously inaccessible objects both in the microcosm, including the finest mechanisms of the living, and on a macroscopic scale. But it is no less important that modern science has moved to the study of objects of a fundamentally new type - super-complex, self-organizing systems. One of these objects is the biosphere. But the Universe can also be regarded in a certain sense as such a system;
d) Another characteristic feature of modern science is that it has moved to a comprehensive study of man by the methods of different sciences. The unification of the foundations of these methods is inconceivable without philosophy;
e) significant changes are taking place in the system of scientific knowledge. It becomes more and more complicated, the knowledge of different sciences intersects, mutually fertilizing each other in solving the key problems of modern science. It is of interest to build models of the dynamics of scientific knowledge, to identify the main factors influencing its growth, to clarify the role of philosophy in the progress of knowledge in various fields of studying the world and man. All these are also serious problems, the solution of which is unthinkable without philosophy.
Secondly, the analysis of the phenomenon of science should be carried out taking into account the enormous role that it plays in the modern world. Science has an impact on all aspects of life, both society as a whole and the individual. The achievements of modern science are refracted in one way or another in all spheres of culture. Science provides unprecedented technological progress, creating conditions for improving the level and quality of life. It also acts as a socio-political factor: a state that has a developed science and, on the basis of this, creates advanced technologies, provides itself with greater weight in the international community.
Thirdly, some dangers associated with the possible application of the achievements of modern science were also quickly discovered. For example, modern biology studies the subtle mechanisms of heredity, and physiology has penetrated so deeply into the structure of the brain that it is possible to effectively influence human consciousness and behavior. Today, rather significant negative consequences of the uncontrolled spread of advanced technologies have become obvious, indirectly creating even a threat to the very survival of mankind. Such threats are manifested, for example, in some global problems - the depletion of resources, pollution of the environment, the threat of genetic degeneration of mankind, etc.
These points, which characterize the sharp increase in the impact of science on technology, society and nature, make us analyze not only the cognitive side of scientific research, as it was before, but also the “human” dimension of science.
From our point of view, a detailed analysis of all the noted aspects of the phenomenon of science as a whole, that is, in the unity of its cognitive and human aspects, is now very important. The fact is that the changes in the image and status of science that are taking place now are causing its growing separation from everyday consciousness. As compensation, we have a “luxurious” flourishing of all kinds of pseudosciences, which are more understandable for ordinary consciousness, but have absolutely nothing to do with science. In modern conditions, pseudoscience is gaining such power in the minds of certain sections of people (including sometimes scientists) that it begins to pose a danger to the healthy development of science itself. That is why a deep analysis of the foundations of the scientific method, its differences from the methods of reasoning used by pseudoscience, is necessary.
Further, it is urgently necessary to continue the study of science in its connection with
the progress of modern technology and the change in its social role. Many of those who by no means refuse to use the achievements of science in their daily lives portray scientific and technological progress as a kind of "monster" that suppresses and enslaves a person, that is, as an unconditional "evil". Now, as if from a cornucopia, accusations are being poured against not only scientific and technological progress, but also science itself, which are considered to have broken with “human goals”. And although in this case the criticism largely misses the target - science is accused of "sins" of which it is not so much itself that is guilty, but the system of institutions within which it functions and develops - the critics of science are right in one thing: in an era when it was clearly revealed that the development of science can lead to socially negative consequences, the scientist's orientation towards obtaining objectively true knowledge, being an unconditionally necessary stimulus for his activity, is nevertheless not sufficient. The question of the scientist's social responsibility for the possible use of his discoveries as the most important ethical norm of scientific activity acquires great relevance. This range of problems also requires unremitting attention.
3. DIFFERENTIATION AND INTEGRATION OF SCIENCES
The development of science is characterized by the dialectical interaction of two opposite processes - differentiation (singling out new scientific disciplines) and integration (synthesis of knowledge, unification of a number of sciences - most often into disciplines that are at their "junction"). At some stages of the development of science, differentiation prevails (especially during the period of the emergence of science as a whole and individual sciences), at others - their integration, this is typical of modern science.
The process of differentiation, branching off of sciences, the transformation of individual "rudiments" of scientific knowledge into independent (private) sciences and the intrascientific "branching" of the latter into scientific disciplines began already at the turn of the 16th and 17th centuries. During this period, previously unified knowledge (philosophy) splits into two main "trunks" - philosophy itself and science as an integral system of knowledge, spiritual education and social institution. In turn, philosophy begins to be divided into a number of philosophical sciences (ontology, epistemology, ethics, dialectics, etc.), science as a whole is divided into separate private sciences (and within them into scientific disciplines), among which the classical (Newtonian) becomes the leader. ) mechanics, closely related to mathematics since its inception.
In the subsequent period, the process of differentiation of sciences continued to intensify. It was caused both by the needs of social production and by the internal needs of the development of scientific knowledge. The consequence of this process was the emergence and rapid development of frontier, "butt" sciences.
As soon as biologists delved into the study of living things to such an extent that they understood the enormous importance of chemical processes and transformations in cells, tissues, organisms, an intensified study of these processes began, the accumulation of results, which led to the emergence of a new science - biochemistry. In the same way, the need to study the physical processes in a living organism led to the interaction of biology and physics and the emergence of a frontier science - biophysics. Physical chemistry, chemical physics, geochemistry, etc. arose in a similar way. There are also such scientific disciplines that are at the junction of three sciences, such as, for example, biogeochemistry. The founder of biogeochemistry, V. I. Vernadsky, considered it to be a complex scientific discipline, since it is closely and completely connected with one specific earthly shell - the biosphere and with its biological processes in their chemical (atomic) manifestation. The “field of reference” of biogeochemistry is determined by both the geological manifestations of life and the biochemical processes within organisms, the living population of the planet.
The differentiation of sciences is a natural consequence of the rapid increase and complication of knowledge. It inevitably leads to specialization and division of scientific labor. The latter have both positive sides (the possibility of in-depth study of phenomena, increased productivity of scientists) and negative ones (especially “loss of connection of the whole”, narrowing of horizons - sometimes to “professional cretinism”). Concerning this side of the problem, A. Einstein noted that in the course of the development of science, “the activities of individual researchers inevitably converge to an increasingly limited area of general knowledge. This specialization, even worse, leads to the fact that a single common understanding of all science, without which the true depth of the research spirit is necessarily reduced, keeps up with the development of science with great difficulty ...; it threatens to deprive the researcher of a broad perspective, degrading him to the level of an artisan” 1 .
Simultaneously with the process of differentiation, there is also a process of integration - unification, interpenetration, synthesis of sciences and scientific disciplines, their unification (and their methods) into a single whole, erasing the boundaries between them. This is especially characteristic of modern science, where today such synthetic, general scientific areas of scientific knowledge as cybernetics, synergetics, etc. are rapidly developing, such integrative pictures of the world as natural science, general science, and philosophy are being built (because philosophy also performs an integrative function in scientific knowledge).
The trend of "connection of sciences", which has become a regularity of the current stage of their development and a manifestation of the paradigm of integrity, was clearly captured by V. I. Vernadsky. A great new phenomenon of scientific thought of the XX century. he believed that “for the first time, all the currents of human spiritual creativity that have hitherto gone in little dependence on each other, and sometimes quite independently, merge into a single whole. The turning point in the scientific understanding of the Cosmos coincides, therefore, with the profound change that is taking place simultaneously in the sciences of man. On the one hand, these sciences merge with the sciences of nature, on the other hand, their object is completely changed. The integration of the sciences convincingly and with increasing force proves the unity of nature. It is possible because such a unity objectively exists.
Thus, the development of science is a dialectical process in which differentiation is accompanied by integration, interpenetration and integration into a single whole of the most diverse areas of scientific knowledge of the world, the interaction of various methods and ideas.
In modern science, the unification of sciences to solve major problems and global problems put forward by practical needs is becoming more widespread. Thus, for example, the complex problem of cosmic exploration required the combined efforts of scientists from various specialties. The solution of the environmental problem, which is very urgent today, is impossible without close interaction between the natural and human sciences, without a synthesis of the ideas and methods developed by them.
One of the general patterns of the historical development of science is the dialectical unity of differentiation and integration of science. The formation of new scientific directions, individual sciences is combined with the erasure of sharp lines separating different branches of science, with the formation of integrating branches of science (cybernetics, systems theory, informatics, synergetics, etc.), mutual exchange of methods, principles, concepts, etc. Science as a whole is becoming an increasingly complex unified system with a rich internal division, where the qualitative originality of each specific science is preserved. Thus, not the confrontation of different "cultures in science", but their close unity, interaction, interpenetration is a natural trend of modern scientific knowledge.
CONCLUSION
One of the old mottos says: "knowledge is power." Science makes man powerful before the forces of nature. With the help of natural science, man exercises his dominance over the forces of nature, develops material production, and improves social relations. Only through knowledge of the laws of nature can a person change and adapt natural things and processes so that they satisfy his needs.
Natural science is both a product of civilization and a condition for its development. With the help of science, a person develops material production, improves social relations, educates and educates new generations of people, heals his body. The progress of natural science and technology significantly changes the way of life and well-being of a person, improves the living conditions of people.
Natural science is one of the most important engines of social progress. As the most important factor in material production, natural science is a powerful revolutionary force. Great scientific discoveries (and technical inventions closely related to them) have always had a tremendous (and sometimes completely unexpected) impact on the destinies of human history. Such discoveries were, for example, discoveries in the 17th century. the laws of mechanics that made it possible to create the entire machine technology of civilization; discovery in the nineteenth century. electromagnetic field and the creation of electrical engineering, radio engineering, and then radio electronics; the creation in the 20th century of the theory of the atomic nucleus, followed by the discovery of means for releasing nuclear energy; expansion in the middle of the twentieth century. molecular biology of the nature of heredity (DNA structure) and the possibilities of genetic engineering for the management of heredity that have opened up as a result; and others. Most of the modern material civilization would not be possible without the participation in its creation of scientific theories, scientific and design developments, technologies predicted by science, etc.
In the modern world, science causes people not only admiration and admiration, but also fears. You can often hear that science brings a person not only benefits, but also the greatest misfortunes. Atmospheric pollution, catastrophes at nuclear power plants, an increase in the radioactive background as a result of nuclear weapons tests, an “ozone hole” above the planet, a sharp reduction in plant and animal species - people tend to explain all these and other environmental problems by the very fact of the existence of science. But the point is not in science, but in whose hands it is, what social interests stand behind it, what public and state structures guide its development.
The growth of global problems of mankind increases the responsibility of scientists for the fate of mankind. The question of the historical destinies and the role of science in its relation to man, the prospects for its development has never been so sharply discussed as at the present time, in the context of the growing global crisis of civilization. The old problem of the humanistic content of cognitive activity (the so-called “Rousseau problem”) has acquired a new concrete historical expression: can a person (and if so, to what extent) count on science in solving the global problems of our time? Is science able to help humanity in getting rid of the evil that modern civilization carries in itself with the technologization of people's way of life?
Science is a social institution, and it is closely connected with the development of the whole society. The complexity and inconsistency of the current situation lies in the fact that science, of course, is involved in the generation of global, and, above all, environmental problems of civilization (not in itself, but as a part of society dependent on other structures); and at the same time, without science, without its further development, the solution of all these problems is in principle impossible. And this means that the role of science in the history of mankind is constantly increasing. And therefore, any belittling of the role of science, natural science is currently extremely dangerous, it disarms humanity in the face of the growing global problems of our time. And such derogation, unfortunately, sometimes takes place, it is represented by certain mindsets, tendencies in the system of spiritual culture.
Science is a component of spiritual culture, and therefore the processes that take place in the entire system of culture in one form or another are reflected in science.
PHENOMENON OF ARTISTIC CULTURE AND FACTORS AFFECTING ITS DEVELOPMENTFEATURES OF THE SPIRITUAL CULTURE OF RUSSIAN YOUTH
Introduction
The topic of the essay is "Technological culture" in the discipline "Culturology".
The purpose of the work is to get acquainted with the concept of technological culture, namely:
Technology;
The world of technology in the space of culture;
Features of scientific knowledge;
The origin and development of engineering culture.
Technology as a cultural phenomenon
The vital activity of a person is subject, on the one hand, to biological laws, and on the other hand, to the conditions of his existence in the socio-cultural world. In animals, the goals of life activity are set "by nature" and boil down to satisfying the vital (life) needs for self-preservation, procreation, etc. The "technology" of their life activity - its mechanisms and methods - is basically genetically determined, and only in more or less modified depending on the individual experience of the individual. In humans, over the biological, vital needs, a whole pyramid of social and spiritual needs, conditioned by the culture of society, is built up.
The concept of technology is used in the literature in different meanings. Technology may mean: a set of rules for a specific production process (“underwater welding technology”); organization of any type or branch of production, including all the conditions - means, methods, procedures - for its implementation ("conveyor technology", "engineering technology"); forms and ways of using technology; application of scientific knowledge in the organization of practical activities; scientific description of any activity, its processes, means and methods. Understanding technology as the organizational side of any human activity, I use this concept in the modern, most general sense.
Formation and development of technological culture
Technological culture took its first steps in the form of myth and magic.
Further development of technological culture went in two directions. On the one hand, the volume of knowledge and skills grew, which led to their separation from mythology and magic.
On the other hand, the "material", subject inventory of technological culture expanded and improved.
Technical knowledge for a long time - up to the Renaissance - had, in the main, a purely practical character. Gradually, in this knowledge, more and more space began to be occupied by information about the properties of materials and devices used in work, about the phenomena occurring in the functioning of technical devices. Thus, the beginnings of technical science were gradually born.
But in parallel with the development of technology and special technical knowledge, another process was going on in the history of culture: the development of philosophical thinking.
In modern times, both streams of knowledge - technical knowledge that has developed in practical activity and theoretical science that has matured in the bosom of philosophy - have come close and intertwined with each other. As a result, science in its modern sense was born.
After the industrial revolution, which gave in the XVIII century. an impetus to the development of large-scale machine industry, technology is increasingly merging with science, and by the 20th century. it is thoroughly imbued with it, it becomes "scientific" in its origin.
The complication of the technology of production processes, the transformation of science into a theoretical basis for production, the need to rely on scientific knowledge in the design, construction, manufacture and operation of equipment - all this has put forward the figure of an engineer to a prominent place in society.
So, technological culture consists of three main components - technology, science and engineering.
It is hardly possible in our time to recognize as justified the view that high culture is compatible with ignorance in the field of "exact" sciences and technological culture in general. The existence of technological culture as a special "niche" of the cultural space is a fact that cannot be ignored. Especially in our era, when technology, engineering and science play such an important role in the life of mankind.
Features of technological culture
1. Spiritual and social culture are focused on the "value" axis, they are united by the fact that they are aimed at creating values and ideals. Technological culture is not concerned with the "value dimension" of activity.
2. From what has been said, another feature of technological culture follows: it is mainly utilitarian in nature.
3. It plays a subordinate, service role in relation to the spiritual and social culture.
4. Technological culture turns out to be a universal and indispensable condition for any cultural activity.
5. In the course of history, it evolves from mysticism to rationality.
Technological culture is based on the idea formulated by the Bulgarian scientist N. Stefanov: “the real problem is not whether it is possible in principle to technologize social processes, but how to do it” .
As noted above, at the present stage it is impossible only to rely on the practical experience accumulated by mankind, peoples or individuals in solving specific life issues.
Technological culture presupposes not so much the very possession of information as the rationalization of its flow, its carriers and the ability to effectively, timely and promptly broadcast it in the management process. In real practice, the problem of information often comes down to an increase in the flow of papers that cover up the imperfection of management, the inability to manage. At the end of the 1980s, there were 100 billion documents in circulation, and about 600 million man-hours were spent on filling them out. For example, a metallurgical plant with 25-30 thousand employees received 130-140 thousand documents per year.
But the lack of rationalization of the flow of information is also inherent in Russia in the 1990s. Separate islands of this rationalization within the framework of specific production organizations do not yet form the integrity of information flows throughout society. It remains only to hope that the number of rationally functioning organizations will grow and at a certain stage the quantity will develop into quality. Therefore, the process of assimilation of the basics of technological culture goes, as it were, “from below”, from specific leaders, their ability to organize scientifically based information flows and put them at the service of the cause.
Technological culture largely depends on the ability to implement a comprehensive, systematic approach. In the meantime, for objective and subjective reasons, administrative voluntarism continues to dominate. Management is faced with a recurring misfortune, vices that do not go away into the past: lack of professionalism, amateurism, superficiality and haste in making decisions, or, in other words, inability or ignorance of the algorithm of management procedures.
The possibilities of technological culture are limited not only by miscalculations in the management process. Science and empiricism continue to oppose each other: practice is very little, more often spontaneously uses scientific recommendations, conclusions and proposals of scientists. Independently of each other, two directions coexist, which are implemented by scientists and practitioners. The former write, research, offer something, the latter do very well without their scientific calculations. In this case, management technology loses its bearings, and management is struck by pragmatism, superficiality, fuss and errors arise.
In addition, there are not so rare cases when the necessary information is collected in a biased way, without taking into account all the characteristics that both speak for making a decision and warn against hasty conclusions. Psychologically, one can understand people who, seeking just such and no other decision, try to find information that confirms precisely their point of view, and often ignore everything that contradicts it. But if this is to some extent understandable for behavior in everyday life, then at the official level this approach cannot be regarded otherwise than as tendentious, because it leads to negative consequences in management practice. Therefore, one of the first requirements for a technological culture is to obtain complete, comprehensive, most representative information that allows you to make more informed recommendations.
The social aspect of technological culture is especially clearly manifested in the extent to which the management process constantly takes into account the interests of workers and coordinates them with the interests of production and society. The labor force today is no longer just a resource, but, above all, as a subject of production. Therefore, where not in words, but in deeds, they refused to analyze the development and functioning of production only from the point of view of the availability of material and financial resources, but take into account the interests and needs of people, a successful solution of socio-economic problems is ensured. It is impossible to equate the labor force in terms of its functions with other resources. People cannot be approached with the same standards as material and financial reserves. With an insufficiently thought out and effective solution, one can ultimately write off (and justify) both material and financial losses. To do this to people is to deliberately cause negative social consequences.
Such functions of technology as regulation, preservation, maintenance and improvement of the management system are important. In each system, there are tendencies towards organization and disorganization, which implies the maintenance and observance of a certain algorithm, the sequence of operations. Procedures and operations may include the use of both economic levers (profit, price, wages, etc.) and the legal mechanism. But in any case, they are always associated with an impact on the consciousness and behavior of people, ensuring the stability of the organization.
The technologization of culture as an element of human culture arises in two ways: it “grows” in culture evolutionarily, gradually, or is built as an artificial formation, the main function of which is the combination of science and practice.
In this sense, social technologies take into account, on the one hand, the nature and indicators of the development of global processes in the modern world (development of means of communication, information, computerization, internationalization of scientific, cultural, educational practices, the growth of interdependence of production, economic and spiritual life, etc.), and on the other hand, the specifics of the national and cultural development of the population, regional features of the way of life of people, their social organization, traditions of interaction in historically defined socio-cultural conditions. Technological culture is impossible without identifying patterns of self-organization and disorganization of socio-economic processes, using them to create favorable conditions for people's life. In technological culture, it is important to take into account socio-psychological phenomena, which often combine contradictory and sometimes mutually exclusive features. Therefore, management involves the identification of these limiting or impeding factors and provides for their consideration, elimination or at least neutralization. All of the above can be attributed to such phenomena as, for example, national and group survivals, human prejudice, often based on random factors.
Technological culture manifests itself in the management of economic, social, political and spiritual processes, in the process of improving research work, intellectual activity, in education, upbringing, and artistic creativity. But technological culture, being a part of culture, an element of creativity, is to a greater extent a product of management science, its integral element. Therefore, the novelty of social technology is primarily determined by its knowledge intensity.
Technological culture should also be responsible for what is realized in the process of its implementation. The scientific literature discusses the idea of management by results and expresses dissatisfaction with the American system of management by goals (income, profit, capital).
The concept of result increasingly includes the human factor, creativity, developed thinking, organizational development, self-management, strengthening interpersonal contacts, and, most importantly, the mechanism for obtaining the social part of the result is being worked out. This mechanism does not include the management of people, but the creation of conditions for the free development of the mental and physical powers of a person, raising the level of organization of the social system, the quality of life, stimulating labor not by decrees, instructions, but by labor itself, its creative content, material and moral factors. Moreover, universal human values are woven into this system very flexibly, to a certain extent smoothing out the contradictions of capital.
The systems of social management implemented in the West, including those based on results (Finnish experience), are not only aimed at achieving a social result, but also provide managerial and organizational support for its achievement, have a technological elaboration that implies trust in the employee, respect for his creative potential , readiness for cooperation and contributes to their manifestation and development by means of planning, regulatory documents. Technological culture ensures the practical implementation of social reserves, the development of social situations through the adoption and implementation of specific social decisions that correspond to the level of solutions to technical and technological problems.
All this allows us to conclude that technological culture is an organic part of a general culture that seeks to integrate the achievements of technical and human sciences in its content, to apply integrated principles not only to the study of social space, but also to its active arrangement in accordance with the goals of social development. systems, the meaning of human existence. An important component of this culture is an innovative type of thinking, which is characterized by constructive thinking. The emphasis in thinking, behavior and practical action is shifting to how to get the final social result, by what methods and means to optimize social actions, how to properly use creative opportunities, existing potentials (society, social organization, personality, etc.). The 21st century, according to experts, should become a humanitarian one. The mechanism of the formation of technological culture opens the way for the organic entry of humanity into the natural science space, into the economic life of society, management structures and ensures the mutual enrichment of different types of culture. The most important component of this mechanism is a change in the style of thinking, which gradually becomes conceptual (humanitarian), strategic and constructive, technological, finding ways and means to solve increasingly complex social problems.
Literature
1. Encyclopedic sociological dictionary. M., 1995. S. 823.
2. Ivanov V.N. Social technologies in the modern world. M., 1996. P.21.
3. See: Utkin E.A. Human factor and intensification of production. M., 1986. P.4; Labor, contacts, emotions. L., 1980. P.28.
4. Afanasiev V.G. Man in the management of society. M., 1977. S.235.
5. Markov M. Technology and efficiency of social management. M., 1983. P.48.
6. Zaitsev A.K. Introduction of social technologies into management practice // Social development of the enterprise and work with personnel. M., 1989. P.95.
7. See: Patrushev V.I. Informatization and technologization of social space: Sat. M., 1994.
8. Dictionary of social technologies. M., 1994. P. 211.
9. Stefanov N. Social sciences and social technology. M., 1976. P. 183.
10. See more: Dudchenko B . C. Innovative games. Tallinn, 1989.
11. Social technologies. Dictionary. M. - Belgrade, 1995. S. 218.
What is technological culture.
Culture is a certain level of development of society and a person, expressed in the types and forms of organizing the life and activities of people, in their relationships, as well as in the material and spiritual values created by them. Today, the concept of culture covers all aspects of human activity and society.
Usually, the material and spiritual spheres of culture are distinguished. The first includes the totality of material goods, objects and means of their production. The second is a collection of knowledge, forms of social consciousness and spiritual values. All elements of culture are inextricably linked.
One of the sides of a common culture is a technological culture, the basis of which is technology. In a generalized form, technological culture can be understood as the level of development of human transformative activity, expressed in the totality of the achieved technologies of material and spiritual production.
The concept of "technology".
The word "technology" from the ancient Greek "techne" - art, skill, skill and "logos" - teaching. Therefore, technology can be viewed from two sides: as a science and practical human activity.Types of industrial technologies.
Technology is usually considered in connection with a specific industry (engineering, construction, etc.) or depending on the subject of labor (material, energy, information, etc.).
What problems does any production technology solve?
Any production technology, modern or archaic, solves three fundamental technological problems, which we formulate in the form of questions:
- how to process?- on what to process?
- what to process?
Three components of technology.
"...Technosphere: a part of the biosphere, radically transformed by man into technical and man-made objects (resources, buildings, roads, mechanisms, structures, etc.), which become part of the noosphere in order to meet socio-economic needs..."
Source: "RESOURCE SAVING. TERMS AND DEFINITIONS. GOST R 52104-2003"
(approved by the Decree of the State Standard of the Russian Federation of 03.07.2003 N 235-st) Official terminology. Akademik.ru. 2012
Watch a movie "Who became people on planet Earth"
Prepare a presentation report "History of things"
👆 Check yourself
The Evolution of Things (film selection)
Evolution of things:
