| Abstrakt: |
Urgency of the research. In recent years, the issue of science communication has gained global importance, not least due to the belief that science and technology are the foundation of the knowledge economy. Science and technology are an integral part of our culture and greatly influence our daily lives. Scientific knowledge is useful to society, but at the same time dangerous, which in turn gives the public every reason to know about these new achievements. However, regardless of how research is funded, its implications must be communicated to both scientists and the public. Target setting. The communication of scientists among themselves and with the public has a long history, but in the era of globalization and in the face of social turbulence, it faces new challenges. The famous philosopher J. Habermas believed that scientific discourse is important if it does not contradict moral guidelines, and that technology is as anthropological as possible and should be present in communication. The question is, is scientific communication really based on the norms generally accepted by society, and what features does it acquire in the context of globalization and social turbulence? Actual scientific researches and issues analysis. The historical and philosophical aspect of the study of scientific communication is represented by the works of J. E. McClellan, H. Dorn, C. S. Wagner. In the theory of communicative action, a great contribution was made by the outstanding J. Habermas, the nature of the mind and its interaction with science was studied by M. Heidegger, O. Neurath. D. Bugros, K. R. Popper, M. Woelfle, P. Olliaro, M. H. Todd and others, theorized the issues of open society and open science. The research objective. Scientific communication is a problematic phenomenon, in order to solve the essential features of which it is necessary to study the history of scientific communication, the achievements of the theorists of communication processes, the concepts of open science and open society, to explore the conditions of social turbulence and globalization that scientific communication faces. The statement of basic material. Science in the modern sense as an experimental science was born only in the 16th century. Despite the fact that even in antiquity the process of accumulation and systematization of knowledge acquired a high level of empirical and practical status, it was far from a rational level. The science of antiquity offered solutions to specific problems, while science in its modern sense operates with theorems and axioms. With the development of science, since the 17th century, the practice of scientific communication has been formed in Europe. Scientific communication through correspondence brought together such intellectuals of the New Age as F. Bacon, G. Galileo, I. Newton, R. Descartes and many others. World science works at the global level as a network, the same “invisible college”. Between the “invisible collegium” of the 17th century and its 21st century counterpart there are many common features, they still contributed to the communication of leading intellectuals, they still function spontaneously. The theorist of communicative action J. Habermas said that his original theory should set new meanings for rationality and social architecture related to it. In conditions of social turbulence, there is a growing need for a special kind of heuristic scientist. A scientist guided by a special path of cognition to a deep understanding of the processes. His activity should be based on the already existing experience and be directed to the constructive result of cognition and action. The essence of this view of the process of cognition lies in the dualism of knowledge and understanding, for example, in the dynamic conditions of social turbulence, it is not enough just to look for the right or useful ways to solve the tasks set, it is also necessary to realize, search for meaning. Conclusions. In the 19-20th centuries science is gradually becoming a real social institution, the number of scientists in the world has grown from several thousand to several million. The globalization of scientific communication is of an economic nature, but this is not an advantage or disadvantage, it is a characteristic of the era. It has a direct impact on the innovative nature of science. In conditions of social turbulence, established images become vague and need to be rethought. This also applies to scientific communication or rather, the communication competencies of a scientist. What was previously considered sufficient for scientific communication, namely professional knowledge and professional skills, in the conditions of social turbulence turns out to be insufficient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
