UDC 001.32:17
https://doi.org/10.20339/AM.06-21.007
N.N. Gubanov is Dr. Sci. (Philosophy), Prof., Ass. Prof. at sub-faculty of Philosophy at Bauman Moscow State Technical University e-mail: gubanovnn@mail.ru; N.I. Gubanov is Dr. Sci. (Philosophy), Prof., Head of sub-faculty of Philosophy and History at Tyumen State Medical University e-mail: gubanov48@mail.ru; L.V. Klimina is 6th year medical student at Tyumen State Medical University e-mail: lui.vik.27111996@mail.ru
Analyzed is the problem of principles of scientific ethos in educational environment of university. At present, as a result of the activation of youth (student, master's and postgraduate) science — our scientific future — it is important to instill in people entering science the principles of the scientific ethos, which make it possible to build productive relationships within the scientific community, as well as between the scientific community and society. Of course, the topic “Science and Ethics” is relevant for mature scientists as well. The article is a brief outline of the ethics of science as one of the areas of applied ethics. The 4 norms of the scientific ethos of CUDOS proposed by R. Merton are considered: Communalism: the belief about the common heritage of scientific knowledge; Universalism: assessment of the truth of the provisions should be independent of titles, gender, age, race of scientists; Disinterestedness: the primary stimulus of a scientist’s activity is a disinterested search for truth; Organized Skepticism: Organized skepticism, the duty of the scientist is to objectively assess the soundness of what his colleagues have done and the reliability of his results. Using the golden rule of morality, additional norms have been formulated: not to commit plagiarism; do not falsify data; not to interfere with the publication of the works of opponents; 8) not hush up arguments that contradict their concept; prevent undeserved co-authorship; in the references, cite only works related to the essence of the problem; fairly evaluate the contribution of employees to the overall work; it is inadmissible to present a compilation instead of a scientific work; not to publish papers on a problem in which you do not have sufficiently complete information; give an adequate assessment of the work of colleagues; do not sell their authorship; be humble and respect opponents; and be intolerant of violation of the norms of the scientific ethos by others. In the context of the development of applied science and its commercialization, a tendency arose to abandon the Merton norms. The norms of the PLACE system by J. Ziman are described (property rights, patents; solving local problems; setting the research goal by authoritarian authorities; work to order; work of a limited circle of experts). When abandoning Merton’s norms, the peculiarities of fundamental and applied science are not taken into account. The article shows that Merton norms and additional norms apply to classical science and modern fundamental science. Ziman highlighted norms, as well as additional norms refer to applied science. Additional norms apply to both fundamental and applied science, and these are general norms of modern science. It is suggested that on the basis of the convergence of fundamental and applied research, a single ethos of science can be formed.
Key words: R. Merton, J. Ziman, ethos of science, the golden rule of morality, fundamental science, applied science, academic fraud.
References
1. Gubanov, N.I., Gubanov, N.N. Scientific ethics standards. Moscow: Ethnosocium International Publishing Center, 2021.
2. Merton, R. Social theory and social structure. Moscow: AST, Khranitel’, 2006.
3. Tsaregorodtsev, G.I., Shingarov, G.H., Gubanov, N.I. History and philosophy of science. Moscow: Publishing House of the Modern Humanitarian University, 2014.
4. Ushakov, E.V. Introduction to the philosophy and methodology of science. Moscow: Еxam, 2005.
5. Yudin, B.G. Ethics of Science and Responsibility of a Scientist. In: Philosophy and methodology of science. Part II. Moscow: SvR-Argus, 1994. Р. 132–154.
6. Mirskaya E.Z. R.K. Merton and the ethos of classical science. In: Philosophy of Science. Issue 11: Ethos of Science at the Turn of the Century. Moscow: Institute of Philosophy RAS, 2005. Р. 5–36.
7. Kohanovsky, V.P., Zolotukhina, E.V., Leshkevich, T.G., Fathi, T.B. Philosophy for postgraduates. Rostov n/D: Phoenix, 2003.
8. Kicherova, M.N. The ethos of science in the information society. Internet Journal “Naukovedenie”, 2013. No. 4. URL: http://docplayer.ru/34922495-Etos-nauki-v-informacionnom-obshchestve-1-ethos-of-science-in-information-societ.html (accessed on: 16.09.2020).
9. Styopin, V.S. Gorohov, V.G. Rozov, M.A. Philosophy of Science and Technology. Moscow: Kontakt-Alfa, 1995.
10. Selivanov, F.A. Good, truth, connection. Tyumen: RICZ TGAKI, 2008.
11. Kasavin, T.I. Science as an ethical project. Voprosy filosofii. 2019. No. 11. P. 90–103.
12. Ziman, J. Why must scientist become more ethically sensitive then there usud tu be? Science. 1998. Vol. 282. No. 5395. P. 1813–1817.
13. Кasavin, T.I. Applied and fundamental in the ethos of modern sciencе In: Philosophy of Science. Issue 11: Ethos of Science at the Turn of the Century. Moscow: Institut filosofii RAN Publ., 2005. P. 12–120.
14. Lebedev S.A. Axiology of Science: Value Regulators of Scientific Activity. Voprosy` filosofii. 2018. No. 7. P. 82–92.
.png)
