Ethos of communication and understanding in project activity (an editorial)
Philosophy «Problematization of the human: an ongoing project» (special issue)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17072/2078-7898/2021-3-293-301Keywords:
ethos, procreation, mutual understanding, project activity, solidarity, scientific group formation, scientific communication, reciprocity, trustAbstract
Nowadays, the problematization of a person as an unfinished project takes place as a cross-cutting thematization of the interdisciplinary approach, which presupposes a holistic, complex study that «throws light on both the meaning of all scientific activity and the unified basis of the mechanisms of imagination operating here» (G. Holton). The article draws attention to the peculiarities of project activity, its aspiration for the possible embodiment of a community of interests in solving urgent problems. The creative complementarity of the personal and the collective as well as internal and external factors in the changing norms and values of the scientific community is reshaping the ethos of communication and understanding. The agenda includes the need to address the current ambivalence of scientific communication taking into account the response to the demands of society to work out the updated principles of assembling scientific teams based on trust and solidarity. The procreative, generative function of scientific activity is prescribed in the context of team building. The problematization of the academic community assembly is growing as it is becoming more open and accountable to society. The culture of skills of critical but empathic mutual trust in communication is actualized, this trust including the heuristics of the scientific dispute of the interest-based ethos. Repetitive successful practices of pro-creative communication can, over time, acquire the character of an institutionally formed tradition, a conventionally fixed norm of creative cooperation. The authors suggest the possibility of achieving this goal grounded not only on the primary impulse of the community of interest but on prolonged communication strategies. The basis for such an outcome is the symmetrical contribution of participants in problem-oriented scientific communication to the achievement of the collective good in the form of innovative approaches to solving fundamental problems of our time which have confirmed practical application in multiple specific cases. Convergence of expectations resulting from the emergence of trust in the ethos of the scientific community can be built «in between» behavioral choice options in the ternary matrix of «loyalty–voice–exit». The preadaptive academic activity of the group can be sustainable in the presence of «protective valves» channeling dissatisfaction with the parameters of order, renewed understanding and communication patterns in the project activity of the group.References
Алпатов А.С. Познавательный интерес как выражение субъективности в познании // Известия Саратовского университета. Новая серия. Серия: Философия. Психология. Педагогика. 2009. Т. 9, вып. 1. С. 3–7.
Аршинов В.И., Свирский Я.И. Сложностный мир и его наблюдатель. Часть вторая // Философия науки и техники. 2016. Т. 21, № 1. С.78–91.
Асмолов А.Г. Психология личности: Принципы общепсихологического анализа. М.: Смысл, 2001. 416 с.
Богатая Л.Н. На пути к многомерному мышлению. Одесса: Печатный дом, 2010. 372 с.
Гофман И. Представление себя другим в повседневной жизни. М.: Канон-пресс-Ц; Кучково поле, 2000. 304 с.
Деланда М. Новая философия общества. Теория ассамбляжей и социальная сложность / пер. с англ. К.С. Майоровой. Пермь: Гиле Пресс, 2018. 170 с.
Дюбуа Ж., Эделин Ф., Клинкенберг Ж.-М., Мэнге Ф., Пир Ф., Тринон А. Общая риторика. Благовещенск: БГК им.Бодуэна де Куртенэ, 1998. 392 с.
Киященко Л.П. Этос постнеклассической науки (к постановке проблемы) // Философия науки. Вып. 11: Этос науки на рубеже веков. М.: ИФ РАН, 2005. С. 29–53.
Ласло Э. Век бифуркации: постижение изменяющегося мира // Путь. 1995. № 7. С. 3–129.
Луман Н. Общество как социальная система. М.: Логос, 2004. 232 с.
Междисциплинарные исследования культурного трансфера: философия, лингвистика, медицина: сб. науч. ст. / отв. ред. Л.П. Киященко, Ф.Г. Майленова. М.: Изд-во Моск. гуманит. ун-та, 2020. 220 с.
Пирожкова С.В. Предсказание, прогноз, сценарий: к вопросу о разнообразии результатов исследования будущего // Философия науки и техники. 2016. Т. 21, № 2. С. 111–129.
Пойзнер Б.Н. Бытие становления как объект познания // Известия высших учебных заведений. Прикладная нелинейная динамика. 1994. Т. 2, № 3-4. С. 101–110.
Франкл В. Сказать жизни «Да!». Психолог в концлагере. М.: Альпина нон-фикшн, 2021. 239 с.
Хабермас Ю. Познание и интерес // Философские науки. 1990. № 1. С. 90−99.
Хайдеггер М. Что зовется мышлением? М.: Территория будущего, 2006. 320 с.
Холтон Дж. Тематический анализ науки. М.: Прогресс, 1981. 384 с.
Шеллинг Т. Стратегия конфликта. М.: ИРИСЭН, 2007. 375 с.
Bennett M., Gadlin H. Collaboration and Team Science: From Theory to Practice // Journal of Investigative Medicine. 2012. Vol. 60, iss. 5. P. 768–775. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2310/jim.0b013e318250871d
Coser L. The Functions of Social Conflict. N.Y.: Free Press, 1964. 192 p.
Davis Cross M. Crisis & Catharsis in EU Integration // European Union Studies Association (EUSA) Fourteenth Biennial Conference. 2015. URL: https://aei.pitt.edu/78922/1/Cross.pdf (accessed: 16.08.2021).
Decision-Making under Ambiguity and Time Constraints. Assessing the Multiple-Streams Framework / ed. by R. Zohlnhöfer, F. Rüb. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press, 2016. 298 p.
Druckman J., Lupia A. Using Frames to Make Scientific Communication More Effective // The Oxford Handbook of the Science of Science Communication. N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2017. URL: https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~jnd260/pub/Druckman%20and%20Lupia%20Using%20Frames%20to%20Make%20Scientific%20Communication%20Effective.pdf (accessed: 16.08.2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190497620.013.38
Hirschman A. Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States. Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970. 176 p.
Lauth H.-J. Informal Institutions and Democracy // Democratization. 2000. Vol. 7, no. 4. P. 21–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13510340008403683
Luhmann N. Trust and Power. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1979. 208 p.
Ostrom E., Walker J. Trust and Reciprocity: Interdisciplinary Lessons for Experimental Research. N.Y.: Russell Sage Foundation, 2003.424 p.
Roeder Ph. Where Nation-States Come From: Institutional Change in the Age of Nationalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007. 440 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400842964
Sabatier P. An Advocacy Coalition Framework Of Policy Change and the Role of Policy-Oriented Learning Therein // Policy Sciences. 1988. Vol. 21, iss. 2–3. P. 129–168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00136406
Tomz M. Reputation and International Cooperation: Sovereign Debt across Three Centuries. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2008. 328 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400842926
Алпатов А.С. Познавательный интерес как выражение субъективности в познании // Известия Саратовского университета. Новая серия. Серия: Философия. Психология. Педагогика. 2009. Т. 9, вып. 1. С. 3–7.
Аршинов В.И., Свирский Я.И. Сложностный мир и его наблюдатель. Часть вторая // Философия науки и техники. 2016. Т. 21, № 1. С.78–91.
Асмолов А.Г. Психология личности: Принципы общепсихологического анализа. М.: Смысл, 2001. 416 с.
Богатая Л.Н. На пути к многомерному мышлению. Одесса: Печатный дом, 2010. 372 с.
Гофман И. Представление себя другим в повседневной жизни. М.: Канон-пресс-Ц; Кучково поле, 2000. 304 с.
Деланда М. Новая философия общества. Теория ассамбляжей и социальная сложность / пер. с англ. К.С. Майоровой. Пермь: Гиле Пресс, 2018. 170 с.
Дюбуа Ж., Эделин Ф., Клинкенберг Ж.-М., Мэнге Ф., Пир Ф., Тринон А. Общая риторика. Благовещенск: БГК им.Бодуэна де Куртенэ, 1998. 392 с.
Киященко Л.П. Этос постнеклассической науки (к постановке проблемы) // Философия науки. Вып. 11: Этос науки на рубеже веков. М.: ИФ РАН, 2005. С. 29–53.
Ласло Э. Век бифуркации: постижение изменяющегося мира // Путь. 1995. № 7. С. 3–129.
Луман Н. Общество как социальная система. М.: Логос, 2004. 232 с.
Междисциплинарные исследования культурного трансфера: философия, лингвистика, медицина: сб. науч. ст. / отв. ред. Л.П. Киященко, Ф.Г. Майленова. М.: Изд-во Моск. гуманит. ун-та, 2020. 220 с.
Пирожкова С.В. Предсказание, прогноз, сценарий: к вопросу о разнообразии результатов исследования будущего // Философия науки и техники. 2016. Т. 21, № 2. С. 111–129.
Пойзнер Б.Н. Бытие становления как объект познания // Известия высших учебных заведений. Прикладная нелинейная динамика. 1994. Т. 2, № 3-4. С. 101–110.
Франкл В. Сказать жизни «Да!». Психолог в концлагере. М.: Альпина нон-фикшн, 2021. 239 с.
Хабермас Ю. Познание и интерес // Философские науки. 1990. № 1. С. 90−99.
Хайдеггер М. Что зовется мышлением? М.: Территория будущего, 2006. 320 с.
Холтон Дж. Тематический анализ науки. М.: Прогресс, 1981. 384 с.
Шеллинг Т. Стратегия конфликта. М.: ИРИСЭН, 2007. 375 с.
Bennett M., Gadlin H. Collaboration and Team Science: From Theory to Practice // Journal of Investigative Medicine. 2012. Vol. 60, iss. 5. P. 768–775. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2310/jim.0b013e318250871d
Coser L. The Functions of Social Conflict. N.Y.: Free Press, 1964. 192 p.
Davis Cross M. Crisis & Catharsis in EU Integration // European Union Studies Association (EUSA) Fourteenth Biennial Conference. 2015. URL: https://aei.pitt.edu/78922/1/Cross.pdf (accessed: 16.08.2021).
Decision-Making under Ambiguity and Time Constraints. Assessing the Multiple-Streams Framework / ed. by R. Zohlnhöfer, F. Rüb. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press, 2016. 298 p.
Druckman J., Lupia A. Using Frames to Make Scientific Communication More Effective // The Oxford Handbook of the Science of Science Communication. N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2017. URL: https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~jnd260/pub/Druckman%20and%20Lupia%20Using%20Frames%20to%20Make%20Scientific%20Communication%20Effective.pdf (accessed: 16.08.2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190497620.013.38
Hirschman A. Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States. Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970. 176 p.
Lauth H.-J. Informal Institutions and Democracy // Democratization. 2000. Vol. 7, no. 4. P. 21–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13510340008403683
Luhmann N. Trust and Power. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1979. 208 p.
Ostrom E., Walker J. Trust and Reciprocity: Interdisciplinary Lessons for Experimental Research. N.Y.: Russell Sage Foundation, 2003.424 p.
Roeder Ph. Where Nation-States Come From: Institutional Change in the Age of Nationalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007. 440 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400842964
Sabatier P. An Advocacy Coalition Framework Of Policy Change and the Role of Policy-Oriented Learning Therein // Policy Sciences. 1988. Vol. 21, iss. 2–3. P. 129–168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00136406
Tomz M. Reputation and International Cooperation: Sovereign Debt across Three Centuries. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2008. 328 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400842926
References
Alpatov, A.S. (2009). [Gnoseological interest as expression of gnoseological subjectness]. Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Novaya seriya. Seriya: Filosofiya. Psikhologiya. Pedagogika [Izvestiya of Saratov University. Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy]. Vol. 9, iss. 1, pp. 3–7.
Arshinov, V.I. and Svirskiy, Ya.I. (2016). [World of complexity and its observer. Pt. 2]. Filosofiya nauki i tekhniki [Philosophy of Science and Technology]. Vol. 21, pp. 78–91.
Asmolov, A.G. (2001). Psikhologiya lichnosti: printsipy obschepsikhologicheskogo analiza [Psychology of personality: principles of general psychological analysis]. Moscow: Smysl Publ., 416 p.
Bogataya, L.N. (2010). Na puti k mnogomernomu myshleniyu [Towards multifaceted thinking]. Odessa: Pechatnyy Dom Publ., 372 p.
Bennett, M., Gadlin, H. (2012). Collaboration and team science: from theory to practice. Journal of Investigate Media. Vol. 60, iss. 5, pp. 768–775. . DOI: https://doi.org/10.2310/jim.0b013e318250871d
Coser, L. (1964). The functions of social conflict. New York: Free Press, 192 p.
Davis Cross M. (2015). Crisis & catharsis in EU integration. European Union Studies Association (EUSA) Fourteenth Biennial Conference. Available at: http://aei.pitt.edu/78922/1/Cross.pdf (accessed 16.08.2021).
Delanda, M. (2018). Novaya filosofiya obschestva. Teoriya assamblyazhey i sotsial’naya slozhnost’ [New philosophy of society. Assemblage theory and social complexity]. Perm: Gile Press Publ., 170 p.
Druckman, J. and Lupia, A. (2017). Using frames to make scientific communication more effective. Oxford Handbook of the Science of Science Communication. New York: Oxford University Press. Available at: https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~jnd260/pub/Druckman%20and%20Lupia%20Using%20Frames%20to%20Make%20Scientific%20Communication%20Effective.pdf (accessed 16.08.2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190497620.013.38
Dubois, Zh., Edelin, F., Klinkenberg, J.-M. et al. (eds.) (1998). Obschaya ritorika [General rhetoric]. Blagoveshchensk: BРC named after I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay Publ., 392 p.
Frankl, V. (2021). Skazat’ zhizni «Da!». Psikholog v kontslagere [Say «Yes» to life: a psychologist experiences the concentration camp]. Moscow: Al’pina Non-Fiction Publ., 239 p.
Goffman, E. (2000). Predstavleniye sebya drugim v povsednevnoy zhizni [The presentation of self in everyday life]. Moscow: Kanon-press-TS Publ., Kuchkovo pole Publ., 304 p.
Habermas, J. (1990). [Cognition and interest]. Filosofskie nauki [Philosophical Sciences]. No. 1, pp. 90–99.
Heidegger, M. (2006). Chto zovetsya myshleniyem? [What is called thinking?]. Moscow: Territotiya Buduschego Publ., 320 p.
Hirschman, A. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Harvard: Harvard University Press, 176 p.
Holton, G. (1981). Tematicheskiy analiz nauki [Thematic analysis of science]. Moscow: Progress Publ., 384 p.
Kiyaschenko, L.P. (2005). [Ethos of postnonclassical science]. Filosofiya nauki. Vyp. 11: Etos nauki na rubezhe vekov [Philosophy of Science. Iss. 11: Ethos of Science at the Turn of the Century]. Moscow: IP RAS Publ., pp. 29–53.
Kiyaschenko, L.P. and Maylenova, F.G. (eds.) (2020). Mezhdistsiplinarnye issledovaniya kul’turnogo transfera [Interdisciplinary studies of cultural transfer: philosophy, linguistics, medicine]. Moscow: MHU Publ., 220 p.
Laszlo, E. (1995). [The age of bifurcation: understanding the changing world]. Put’ [Path]. No. 7, pp. 3–129.
Lauth, H.-J. (2000). Informal institutions and democracy. Democratization. Vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 21–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13510340008403683
Luhmann, N. (2004). Obschestvo kak sotsial’naya sistema [Society as a social system]. Moscow: Logos Publ., 232 p.
Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons Inc Publ., 208 p.
Ostrom, E. and Walker, J. (2003). Trust and reciprocity: interdisciplinary lessons for experimental research. New York: The Russell Sage Foundation Publ., 424 p.
Pirozhkova, S.V. (2016). [Prediction, forecast, scenario: on question about diversity of prognostic research’s results]. Filosofiya nauki i tekhniki [Philosophy of Science and Technology]. Vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 111–129.
Poyzner, B.N. (1994). [Becoming as a gnoseological object]. Izvestiya Vysshikh uchebnykh zavedeniy. Prikladnaya nelineynaya dinamika [Izvestiya VUZ. Applied Nonlinear Dynamics]. Vol. 2, no. 3–4, pp. 101–110.
Roeder, Ph. (2007). Where nation-states come from: institutional change in the age of nationalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 440 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400842964
Sabatier, P. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences. No. 21, iss. 2–3, pp. 129–168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00136406
Shelling, Th. (2007). Strategiya konflikta [Strategy of conflict]. Moscow: IRISEN Publ., 375 p
Tomz, M. (2008). Reputation and international cooperation: sovereign debt across three centuries. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 328 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400842926
Zohlnhöfer, R. and Rüb, F. (eds.) (2016). Decision-making under ambiguity and time constraints. Assessing the multiple-streams framework. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press, 298 p.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Perm University Herald. Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
