UDC 001.32
DOI 10.20339/AM.03-26.008
Nikolay N. Gubanov, D.Sc. (Philosophy), Docent, Professor of sub-faculty of Philosophy at Bauman Moscow State Technical University; Professor of sub-faculty of Humanities at Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, e-mail: gubanovnn@mail.ru
The article is devoted to the study of the place and role of the discipline “History and Philosophy of Science” in the domestic education system. There is a huge number of methodological publications dedicated to the discipline “Philosophy”, its role in culture and the problems of its teaching in universities. The same cannot be said about the relatively new discipline “History and Philosophy of Science” introduced with the candidate exam in postgraduate programs since the early 2000s. The existing works do not clearly substantiate the position as to why postgraduate students need this particular discipline and why studying general philosophy, as was the case before, is not enough. Two main theses running like a red thread through the proposed article are that 1) the discipline “History and Philosophy of Science” in existential terms performs a vital and irreplaceable psychotherapeutic function in relation to the scientific community, and especially in relation to its younger and more inquisitive representatives; 2) This discipline represents the self-awareness of science as a special form of culture. It is shown that “History and Philosophy of Science” is the result of a productive interaction between philosophy and science: philosophy helps scientists address meaningful worldview questions and determine the direction of scientific inquiry, while scientists provide philosophers with concrete scientific knowledge that informs philosophical constructs. The history of the development of this discipline in Russia is briefly reviewed. Various challenges in teaching “History and Philosophy of Science” are characterized, and solutions are proposed.
Keywords: history and philosophy of science, education, science, scientific activity, motivation for scientific activity
References
1. Gazeta.ru. Medvedev on low teacher salaries: Go into business [Electronic resource]. URL: https://www.gazeta.ru/business/news/2016/08/03/n_8953517.shtml?updated (circulation date: 05.11.2025).
2. Collins, R. (2002) Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change. Novosibirsk: Siberian Chronograph, 1280 p.
3. Gubanov, N.N. (2024) Understand Science to Believe in it. Book Review: Lebedev ,S.A. Introduction to the Philosophy of Science: 15 Lectures. Moscow, Prospect Publ., 2024. 352 p. Contemporary Philosophical Research. No. 3. Pp. 150–158.
4. Lebedev, S.A. (2024) Introduction to the Philosophy of Science: 15 Lectures. Moscow: Prospect Publ., 352 p.
5. Carnap, R. (1971) Philosophical Foundations of Physics. Moscow: Progress, 390 p.
6. Kuhn, T. (1975) The structure of scientific revolutions. Moscow: Progress, 288 p.
7. Stepin, V.S. (2003) Theoretical knowledge. Moscow: Progress-tradition, 744 p.
8. Gubanov, N.N., Yusipov, E.A., Gubanov, N.I. (2021) Features of teaching philosophy to students of natural sciences and technical specialties. Alma mater (Vestnik vysshey shkoly). No. 1. Pp. 27–34. https://doi.org/10.20339/AM.01-21.027
9. Gubanov, N.N., Gubanov, N.I. (2021) History of scientific ideas through the prism of philosophical ideas. Dialog so vremenem. No. 76. Pp. 5–19. https://doi.org/10.21267/AQUILO.2021.76.76.026
.png)
