ISSN 1811-833Х (Print)
ISSN 2311-7133 (Online)
Nowadays the most important and difficult problem for the social epistemology is how to overcome the empiricism and the absence of a logical system which would be able to preserve in its frame the individuality of its constituents. The return to the rationality of the New Time does not give the desired result. Both the attempts to appeal to classical logic in its integrity and to some of its elements, which are especially difficult to refuse from in their previous quality, testify this. I mean, first of all, the notions of truth and knowledge objectivity that are directly connected with the necessity to remove all social elements from the knowledge. But just these social moments, provides the individuality of the results, obtained in science. The emergence in the last century trends of thinking on the basis of communication between authors of scientific achievements instead of generalization of already existing results evolved two features of the thought of a new type. On the one hand, the communication is possible only between subjects who are different, otherwise we shall have to deal with one person. In this case he has nobody to communicate with. On the other hand, we need to have something common for the communication. It is this common, that presupposes the communication between individuals who do not coincide with each other, that is becoming the basis of new logic and gives it the property of universality. This general is emerging out the environment, medium, of the context where there are no common or individual, where the border between them is disappearing, and in general all borders that are essential for classic are blurred. Many contemporary philosophers and sociologies are studying opportunities to move through the newly arisen border between the context where we do not have the usual divisions, in the world where both the generalization and the communication are possible. The appearance in the philosophical analysis of the points of science growth such a notion as convergence also shows the growing interest in the studies of a new field of epistemology.
Alekseeva I.Yu., Arshinov V.I., Chekletsov V.V. “Technohumans” vs. “posthumans”: NBICS-revolution and the future of mankind («Tekhnolyudi» protiv «postlyudey»: NBIKS-revolyutsiya i budushchee cheloveka). Voprosy filosofii, 2013, no.3.
Arshinov V.I. A convergence of biological, informational, nano- and cognitive technologies: a challenge for philosophy (Konvergentsiya biologicheskikh, informatsionnykh, nano- i kognitivnykh tekhnologiy: vyzov filosofii (materialy «kruglogo stola»)). Voprosy filosofii, 2012, no. 12.
Bibler V.S. Ot naukoucheniya – k logike kul'tury. Dva filosofskikh vvedeniya v dvadtsat' pervyy vek (From study of science to the logic of culture. Two philosophical introductions into the 21st century). Moscow, 1991.
Blinov E., Kasavin I.T., Rockmore T. Social Epistemology, Interdisciplinarity and Context. Epistemology and Philosophy of Science – Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki. 2013. no. 3, pp. 57-76.
Deleuze G. Guattari F. Chto takoe filosofiya? (What is philosophy?). Saint-Petersburg, 1998.
Deleuze G. Logika smysla (Logic of Sense). M., Ekaterinburg. 1998.
Kasavin I.T. Sotsial'naya epistemologiya. Fundamental'nye i prikladnye problemy (Social epistemology: fundamental and applied problems). Moscow, 2013.
Latour B. We have never been modern? Cambridge, 1993.
Losev A.B. Iz rannikh proizvedeniy (From early works). M. 1990.
Luhmann N. Sotsial'nye sistemy. Ocherk obshchey teorii (Social Systems). Saint-Petersburg, 2007.
Mamardashvili M.K. Strela poznaniya. Nabrosok estestvennoistoricheskoy gnoseologii (Arrow of Knowledge. A sketch of natural historical gnoseology). Moscow, 1996.
Markova L.A. Are Consensus and Pluralism Compatible? A Reply to Steve Fuller. Social Epistemology of Science and Reply Collective. 2013, vol. 2, No. 7. Pp. 35-39.
Markova L.A. Context and Naturalism in Social Epistemology. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 2013, vol. 2, No 9. P. 33-35.
Markova L.A. Nauka na grani s nenaukoy (Science on the border with non-science). Moscow, 2013.
Markova L.A. New people and a new type of communication. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective. 2013. Vol. 2, No. 11. P. 47-53.
Markova L.A. On the way to a new ontology of science (Na puti k novoy ontologii nauki). Voprosy filosofii. 2013, no. 11. pp. 40 – 50.
Pavlov I.P. Polnoe sobranie sochineniy (Full collection of works). 2-e dop. Izd. T. IV. Moscow, 1951 – 1952.
Thom R. Strukturnaya ustoychivost' i morfogenez (Structural Stability and Morphogenesis). Moscow, 2002.
Tishchenko P.D. Ekologiya cheloveka i problema «otkhodov» sotsial'nykh tekhnologiy. Bioethics and Humanitarian Expertise - Bioetika i gumanitarnaya ekspertiza. 2012, no. 6, pp. 27-38.