Kulikov Sergey B
Tomsk State Pedagogical University, 634061, Tomsk, Kievskaya St. 60, Russia.
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2020 Mar;54(1):158-178. doi: 10.1007/s12124-019-09483-6.
Clarification of the scientific ethos provides the opportunity to reconstruct the foundations on which the conscious activity in science is based. Contemporary scientific society does not fully recognize this metaphysical issue because of the domination of the power of naturalistic argument. The ethos of science does not show its natural embodiment; it is the complex of social and psychological norms, which rules each scientist unconsciously. Embodiment of the scientific ethos in Wittgenstein and Husserl exhibits metatheoretical prerequisites for critique of the theory presented by Robert Merton. The phenomenological approach offered by Husserl helps to visualize the scientific ethos. The analytical approach developed by Wittgenstein allows enriching this procedure. Interaction of these approaches provides disclosure of scientific mind for representation of conscious activity within science. The author maintains four theses. I. The form of attributive proposition cannot express scientific ethos, thereby, scientific ethos cannot be actually universalistic. II. The scientific ethos demands disclosure of metaphysical perspective of understanding, and it cannot lead to ordinary social forms of interaction. III. The phenomenology of scientific ethos is a branch of metaphysical studies that presupposes the correspondence between personal experiences and extraordinary forms of communication. IV. Contradictions in the scientific ethos are necessary, and they demand the corresponding theory for the explanation. Thesis (I) opens a way to interpretation of a scientific ethos as the semi-formalized description of the bases of science. It discloses new way for psychological understanding of scientific activity. The science is a complex of propositions on the base of the extra-rational assumptions of the nature of knowledge. Thesis (II) discloses options of understanding of this nature. Theses (III) and (IV) provide investigations of a metaphysical origin of scientific knowledge, namely, irremovable contradictions and wisdom as elements of the general scientific ethos.
阐明科学精神为重建科学中自觉活动所基于的基础提供了契机。当代科学社会由于自然主义论证力量的主导，并未充分认识到这一形而上学问题。科学精神并未展现出其自然体现；它是社会和心理规范的复合体，无意识地支配着每一位科学家。维特根斯坦和胡塞尔对科学精神的体现展示了对罗伯特·默顿所提出理论进行批判的元理论前提。胡塞尔提供的现象学方法有助于使科学精神可视化。维特根斯坦所发展的分析方法则能丰富这一过程。这些方法的相互作用为揭示科学思维以呈现科学中的自觉活动提供了条件。作者提出了四个论点。一、属性命题的形式无法表达科学精神，因此，科学精神实际上不可能是普遍主义的。二、科学精神要求揭示形而上学的理解视角，且它不会导向普通的社会互动形式。三、科学精神现象学是形而上学研究的一个分支，它预设了个人经验与特殊交流形式之间的对应关系。四、科学精神中的矛盾是必要的，它们需要相应的理论来解释。论点（一）为将科学精神解释为对科学基础的半形式化描述开辟了道路。它揭示了对科学活动进行心理学理解的新途径。科学是基于关于知识本质的超理性假设之上的命题复合体。论点（二）揭示了对这种本质的理解方式。论点（三）和（四）对科学知识的形而上学起源进行了研究，即不可消除的矛盾和作为一般科学精神要素的智慧。
