The article describes an implementation of ran-domized computer-based tests in a philosophy course. Based on two control tests performed by 172 students, we demonstrate the effectiveness of statistical analysis methods for measuring stu-dent performance, as well as evaluating the valid-ity of developed multiple-choice questions. Four criteria are considered: the validity of the results obtained basing on the hypothesis of the normal distribution of correct answers; calculation of test reliability (Spearman-Brown Coefficient); the index of difficulty and the index of discrimination calculated for each specific task. In the course of post-examination analysis, using the example of four test items, the study shows which questions appear effective and which ones require further refinement. The text argued that multiple-choice questions are both significant for assessing know-ledge of philosophical concepts and should be considered an important element of feedback. The data obtained in the course of solving the test by students can be used for subsequent adjustment of the items.

We are witnessing a growing interest of post-positivist philosophy, history, and sociology of science in medicine. For historical epistemology, biomedical sciences, medical theory and practice are one of the most preferred subjects of research. What is the epistemological uniqueness of medicine? What can medicine tell the historical epistemologist? What is important for historical epistemology is the pronounced dependence of medical theoretical know-ledge on medical practice, which in turn reveals a strong dependence on the historically changing so-cio-cultural context in which it unfolds. The article considers naturalistic and objectivist interpretations of disease, which understand disease as an unchangeable “natural kind” that does not depend on a perceiving subject. It is shown that these interpretations face serious problems, for example, the problem of logical definition of causal mechanisms of the dis-ease. The author demonstrates that disease has on-tological, epistemological and value dimensions, which turns it from a “natural kind” into a “concept” that arises and exists in the space of a certain “style of thinking”. The coexistence of different styles of thinking explains the conflicting interpretations of “disease”, each of which has its own legitimacy in the context of a particular style. The question is also asked about the possible reverse influence of historical epistemology on medicine: what can a philosopher (historical epistemologist) tell a doctor? The article shows that the position that historical epistemology takes in relation to medicine assumes that medicine is receptive to philosophy. Is this receptivity to philosophy spontaneous? And what is its relation to professional philosophy (historical epistemology)?

The article discusses the institutional features of little and big science as two normative-oriented forms of the community of scientists and stages of the development of all the science. Is the author shows that despite the relatively stable understanding of the differences between little and big science the radically changed status of the latter, as well, ‒ as new interpretations of the internal content of the former, require clarifi-cation of their general and special features. These circumstances determined the relevance of the topic of continuity of little and big science institu-tions in the context of the formation of its new organizational forms. The formal-logical basis for achieving this goal is the lack of a clear indication of the presence of a common generic feature in the institutions of little and big science. The article uses the paradigm conception in the quality of its methodological orientation and the essen-tial understanding of science as more relevant variant of the institutional approach. It is noted that the key concept of the paradigm doctrine is the concept of «disciplinary matrix», the norma-tive element of which is exemplary ways of solv-ing scientific problems. This leads to the conclusion that the paradigm-matrix is a normative component of the institute of science designed to ensure its efficient and stable functioning. As the analysis of the components of the normative structure shows, there is a fundamental simi-larity between the stating part of technical norms and the results of scientific research. This coincidence allows us to identify the institute of science as a normative form of activity implemented as part of the scientific community. The final part of the article shows the differences in the constitutive features of the target unions of little and big science and makes the following conclusions. The main difference between the target associations of little science is their internally autocephalous and externally heteronomous character. In turn organizations of big science are associations of a heterocephalic type that maintain moral, political and ideological dependence on society and the state, but rely in their professional activities on the heteronomous prescriptions of the institute of science as a whole.

Archaic laws of Draco and Solon were authoritative for the Hellenes of classical Athens. In the ancient tradition of classical time, a word θεσμός was used to denote the old legal provisions (the laws of Draco and Solon), by which the ancient Greeks primarily understood the sacred ordinance and associated their first laws with religion. However, along with the use of this concept, classical authors described their modern laws by using the word νόμος, which together was widely used in the philosophical thought of the ancient Greeks. The article discusses the possible reasons why the concept of θεσμός, relevant for the archaic era, was rarely used in the writings of classical authors being replaced by a new term, which, in addition to political law, was actively used in philosophical systems. The author investigates the issue of how the political thought of Greece developed and how it first interacted with the Greek religion, and then with philosophy. She slso considers the process of rationalization of Greek society, which, according to the author, led to the distinction between archaic legal provisions and the political law of the classical period. The author concludes that the change in the use of concepts reflected changes in the consciousness of the ancient Greeks and the transi-tion from a mythological and religious perception of the world to a more rationalized philosophical perception.

This overview introduces an area of semantics that is not often discussed in works on the philos-ophy of language. The overview talks about the mechanisms by which information about time is encoded in natural languages. The philosophy of language traditionally pays attention to the problems of reference to individual objects, as well as accounting for the so-called intensional contexts. However, reference to moments of time not only reproduces the key problems of reference to individual objects in extensional and intensional contexts, but also reveals new aspects of how this reference can be expressed in the structure of a natural language and, consequently, in the structure of human thought, if the latter is understood in the Fregean spirit as intelligible objective content. The review introduces the reader to the ways in which these topics are discussed in the latest research that was presented at the leading conferences in semantics in 2019 and 2020. In particular, the review examines the problems of the semantics of tense morphemes, verbal aspect, the lexical content of verbs and such issues that are more familiar to philosophers as the semantics of certain descriptions in the temporal dimension.

The article suggests a solution to the important problem of humanities and semiotics (the author proceeds from an interesting report made by Alexandra Volodina at the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences). The fact is that traditional semiotics explains well only a relatively small class of signs, for example, natural language, transport, communication, etc. Attempts to bring works of art, icons, schemes, and projects under the classical concept of a sign (F. de Saussure, L. Hjelmslev, U. Eco) do not appear effective. The author suggests a hypothesis about the connection (symbiosis) of signs and events of psychic reality, allowing, in his opinion, to solve this problem. He attempts to demonstrate that while the first class of signs satisfactorily described in traditional semiotics serves primarily the processes of communication, the second class (works of art, icons, schemes, projects, etc.) supports two processes simultaneously – communication and going through the experiences of some individual reality. To clarify and prove this hypothesis, the article analyzes three cases (understanding eclipse by indigenous peoples; children experiencing fairy tales and discovering images). In these cases, the concepts of diagram, mental reality, event, and sign are used. The author also interprets the relationship between signs and events through a biological analogy with the symbiosis of two organisms (signs provide reality events, and events form the basis for meaning). At this, referring to his previous research, he claims that a similar symbiosis is characteristic of many processes (for example, the process of realization of personality and the process of dreams, as well as the processes of communication, game and some forms of reflection).

The article considers the prospect of a new ‘republic of letters’ in the context of the coronavirus pandemic. Unlike the ‘republic of letters’ that existed during Renaissance and Enlightenment, the new international community of researchers is built on the basis of common problems and affairs (res), rather than cognitive interests of the public. Nevertheless, certain cognitive and intellectual virtues may also be required from researchers in order to overcome the three types of risks associated with the formation of a new community. Each type of risk is described in a separate section of the article. Respectively in each section we disclose epistemic virtues necessary to minimize the risks, as well as provide examples of research practices in which these virtues are manifested. For example, the ability of social research to cognize fluid objects, such as viruses, may help to overcome danger of imprisoning in ‘ivory tower’. The virtues of openness and curiosity valued by biohackers help to cope with the threats of structural epistemic injustice. Intellectual courage and modesty, which allow bioethicists to criticize judgments that claim to be universal, help to overcome expert conformity.

Years preceding the COVID-19 pandemic were marked by decrease in trust in science and crisis of expertise. By the beginning of the pandemic once solid authority of science has eroded, while confidence in scientific knowledge has been replaced by diversity of conflicting opinions and proliferation of claims to expertise. One reason for tensions in relations between science and society is an extremely resilient image of scientists as cracking the nature’s secrets in a remote space, isolated from society. When in a specific moment public acquires a possibility to observe actual science-in-the-making, popular expectations regarding how reliable facts and trustworthy experts look like, become disappointed. However, with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, conditions of global uncertainty and necessity to nonetheless make decisions with life and death implications provoked changes in knowledge production. These changes, including unprecedented accessibility of science’s “backstage” for observation and participation, can become foundation for bridging epistemically separated communities which otherwise will continue to drift apart from each other.

This article examines some features of the Republic of Letters of Renaissance and Modern Age, which can help to characterize peculiarities of information exchange about manifestations of COVID-19 virus in different countries within the framework of “new” Republic of Scientists formed on the basis of civil science. The article aims to identify the continuity of principles of the contemporary republic of scientists in relation to the Respublica literaria in Renaissance and Modern Age, as well as identify, within the framework of their comparison, some historical parallels related to the methods of research of the scientific object.

The article analyses the project of a new “Republic of Letters” built on the basis of epistemic virtues of biohackers. Consideration of the new “Republic of Letters” involves studying the concept of “fluid object”, which is key for a number of studies in the framework of actor-network theory. The author claims that fluidity is not an ontological property of the object itself. The concept of fluidity is used by researchers of science and technology to demonstrate the contingent variability of objects under conditions of their immutability in network spaces. It is proved that scientists and engineers strive to create extensive networks of stable relationships, and, consequently, science has never had the desired degree of autonomy. The article demonstrates the concept of risk as the general basis for the organization of institutional and citizen science. The risk model that emerged in the 70s of the twentieth century defined the conditions of the “new social contract” of science and the state setting the key principles of their interaction. In context of the coronavirus pandemic, the risk model is becoming basic for introducing the quarantine measures. At the same time, the quarantine is considered as a special case of “state of emergency” demonstrating the sovereignty of the state. The pandemic itself and its related activities are primarily political. Thus, the spread of epistemic virtues of biohackers is not able to solve all the problems associated with the creation of a new “Republic of Letters”.

This article contains a more detailed exposition of virtue epistemology, the framework of which defined the arguments of the first, basic, article. Responding to the opponents, I specify the roles of epistemological virtues of citizen science in the creation of a network of COVID-19 researchers and the relationship between science and society.

Философы науки разработали сложные модели для объяснения того, как происходят научные революции и, в целом, как ученые работают с фактами, противоречащими существующим предположениям и теоретическим концепциям. В свою очередь, историками науки и социологами знания был сделан существенный вклад в вопрос о влиянии прорывов в науке на социальные революции и на то, как социальные факторы способствовали или препятствовали научному развитию. Вместе с тем научные революции и научный «прогресс» всегда оказываются в центре внимания. При этом в значительной степени игнорируется не менее важный вопрос о том, почему новые, а также противоречащие доказательства иногда не приводят к научной революции. Углубление нашего понимания «отмененных» или «отложенных» революций может не только способствовать анализу успешных научных революций. Осознание того, как и почему защитникам статус-кво удается сдерживать новую информацию и игнорировать научные факты, имеет решающее значение для понимания научных и политических противоречий. Данная статья, таким образом, ставит целью обрисовать в общих чертах концептуальную модель исследования «черного ящика» научных революций. Кроме того, будет намечена потенциальная основа для анализа проблемы выживания неоклассической экономической теории после мирового финансового кризиса. Ключевые слова: научная революция, научноисследовательская программа, современный факт, парадигма, эпистемология, история науки, экономическая теория

This paper discusses two general approaches to natural language studies – descriptivism and prescriptivism. Prescriptivism is an approach according to which there are preferred and correct rules of natural language that are distorted in the process of language use by its speakers and the role of a language expert is to select the correct rules and preserve them. The known arguments against prescriptivism both from the scientific perspective and the commonsense perspective are discussed. Prescriptivism is presented not only as an antiscientific view, but also as a view that leads to various types of discrimination. Prescriptivism remains an influential popular science misconception in Russia. Some specific examples illustrating prescriptivism in the recent Russian literature are discussed. The paper also discusses the relevance of the distinction between descriptivism and prescriptivism for philosophy of language – an area of philosophy that relies on the analysis of natural language sentences. Some specific examples of philosophical argumentation in the recent literature based on the prescriptive viewpoint are discussed and criticized.

The paper considers the problem of analysis of knowledge in analytic philosophy. The author proposes a detailed review of Gettier’s article Is Justified True Belief Knowledge? In order to clarify the main characteristics of conceptual analysis as a philosophical method, the author examines Ayer’s book The Problem of Knowledge. It supports the argument that it is possible to clarify the concept of knowledge without relying on historical or sociological studies of knowledge. As the first possible response to the Gettier problem, the author considers a “no-false-premise” solution. Even though it allows to see why Gettier’s cases are instances of true justified beliefs and not of knowledge, this solution is not apt to analyse non-inferential kinds of knowledge. Then reliabilism and the casual theory of knowledge are studied. They are better suited to analyse non-inferential kinds of knowledge but remain vulnerable to other objections. The author then examines the defeasibility analysis of knowledge. Unlike other responses to the Gettier problem, this kind of analysis succeeds in solving it but only at a cost of establishing a too tight connection between truth and justification, which contradicts Gettier’s note that there can be a false yet justified belief. Finally, Zagzebski’s article The Inescapability of Gettier Problems is discussed to clarify the connection between different components of the definition of knowledge. At the conclusion, some of the merits of conceptual analysis for epistemology are discussed which would otherwise be lost if it is substituted with historical and sociological methods of study of knowledge.

The article considers typological connections of Orpheus image in philosophical, literary and critical articles of the Russian symbolist V. Ivanov and the French poet and philosopher M. Blanchot. With the help of biographical, cultural-historical, historical-typological and mythological methods, moments of fundamental similarity associated with the perception of Orpheus as the ideal embodiment of a creative person are established. Despite the fact that the specific names do not coincide (for Ivanov, such an ideal embodiment is Alexander Scriabin, while for Blanchot, it is Rilke), the fundamental similarity of the approaches of the Russian and French thinkers to this issue allows us to consider both important figures for art in one row. The study pays special attention to the interpretation by both authors of the climax of the myth associated with Orpheus looking back at Eurydice. Along with it, it fixes not only the intersection of Ivanov and Blanchot’s worldviews, but also fundamental differences in their perception of the image of the mythological hero. The most important thing, however, is to identify the commonality of phenomena associated with the deep coincidence in some aspects of the philosophical concepts of these authors, which demonstrates their typological relationship. Thus, Orpheus, in the perception of Ivanov and Blanchot, is a figure endowed with duality. This is what allows him to not only create art, but also transform reality. The article proves the undoubted typological similarity in the interpretation of the image of Orpheus by Ivanov and Blanchot, which is due to the general focus (a characteristic of modernist European culture, which both of them belong to) on understanding the key concepts of culture based on the anthological heritage

This is a review of a recent volume on the philosophy of realism (“Perspektivy realizma”, Moscow, 2017) written by a group of authors who represent leading Russian epistemologists and philosophers of science. The author of the review presents the content of the volume as a series of attempts to justify realism in epistemology and philosophy of science. A number of contributions are discussed in more detail than others. The author concludes that the book represents an illustrative exposition of the issues that are currently discussed in Russian epistemology and are related directly or indirectly to the problem of realism.

This article offers a review and reflection on some trends of today’s academic world through the metaphor of the “global campus” described in the novel The Small World (1984) by David Lodge, an English writer and literary critic. The novel reveals the problems of academic communities in the context of the emerging global neoliberalism. Proceeding from the idea of the university as a “micromodel of society,” which mirrors certain salient trends of social life, I extrapolate this metaphor to the present. The “global campus” ap-pears not only a still trendy metaphor, but also an ever-evolving entity, which is adapting new technologies for its further unfolding. The trends of scientific communications of the 1980s captured in prose are compared with today’s realities, us-ing also the concepts of mobility and networking. In this regard, in the first part of the article I turn to John Urry’s ideas on mobilities and networks, as well as to Peter Galison’s concept of trading zones, aiming to rethink scientific communica-tions in the “physical-virtual” axis. Speaking of academic social networks, in the second part I consider the concepts of distributed knowledge, Science 2.0 and the like, and suggest a few illustrations of how they are possibly transforming the problem of trust. The third part focuses on academic identity in the digital age and the issue of the “double game.” The latter is understood as an attempt to maneuver between conflicting formats of two worlds. The first, offline academic world, is driven by its long ago recognized mechanisms for increasing scientific capital, while the second, online world, largely originates in the principles of open science. In conclusion, I emphasize that we may estimate the uncertainty in the further unfolding of the “global campus” as a constructive moment.

The article attempts to analyze the basic ways scientific communication proceeds in. As known, it embraces two major streams, which are internal scientific communication with other scientists and communication with extra-scientific actors. The first type usually refers to the solution of professional issues, while the second one focuses on communicating the achievement of science to the public. Today, with the evolution of technoscience, the second type of communication is playing a special role. The author substantiates the thesis that the active use of new information and communication technology leads to the spread of scientific world views and scientific rationality beyond science. In the process of its use, new information and communication technology forms a space of values, intrinsic to scientific community, for non-scientists. Along with it, the intense development of projects to popularize scientific knowledge, together with the introduction of scientific rationality through the active use of various interfaces, leads to a situation where society is increasingly learning about science. There is an intersection of two communication flows – between scientists themselves and between scientists and extra-scientific actors. In this situation, a common space of communication is forming, and it can develop into a common space of projects and discussions between professionals and non-professionals. A border zone of a synthetic approach is forming between the two communication flows, where professional communication and science communica-tion with non-scientists is starting to mix together. Such strategies are actively evolving within social networks or synthetic platforms, allowing both an acquaintance with scientific results and a participation in discussions with scientists or even in scientific research. As a result, the value and significance of scientific knowledge are becoming devalued.

This paper considers the problem of the attitude to sociology and sociological research by various social agents (employees of various state and public organizations, media representatives, etc.). The author identifies the problems that arise from the fact that most people consider sociological data and their use understandable and easy, and readily treat them to confirm their assertions without having a proper understanding of how these data have been obtained and of the relevant methodologies needed by the study. Along with it, the author elucidates a manifestation of pseudo-competence, which also results from today’s availability of a large amount of various information and research tools to a wide range of the Global Network’s users.