The Scientisation of Culture: risks and challenges
https://doi.org/10.21453/2311-3065-2018-6-2-125-132
Abstract
The author dwells upon the meaning of the scientisation of culture that leads to the predominance of discursive over the moral-ethical and artistic-aesthetic. According to the author’s position, such dynamics represents a danger for the future. It is emphasized that science, for all its importance, does not exhaust the human world and spiritual and moral values are no less important for man. In this regard, there is a conceptual narrowness of the economic-centric paradigm, which absolutizes the desire for enrichment in any way.
About the Author
K. H. DelokarovRussian Federation
Kadyrbech Hadjumarovic Delokarov, Dr. Sc. (Philos.), professor,
Moscow, Vernadsky av., 84
References
1. Alle M. (2003). Globalization: the destruction of employment conditions and economic growth. The empirical is obvious. Moscow (In Rus).
2. Berdyayev N.A. (1994). Philosophy of the free spirit. Moscow (In Rus). Kortunov S. (2003). Formation of a security policy. Moscow (In Rus).
3. Laval K. (2010). Economic man. The essay on the origin of neoliberalism. Transl. S. Ryndin. Moscow: New literary review (In Rus).
4. Martin G.-P., Schumann H. (1997). The Global Trap: Globalization and the Assault on Prosperity and Democracy. Moscow (In Rus).
5. Svasyan K.A. (2010). Philosophy of the symbolic forms of E. Cassirer: Critical analysis. Moscow (In Rus).
6. Skirbekk S. (2003). Dysfunctional Culture: The Inadequacy of Cultural Liberalism as a Guide to Major Challenges of the 21st Century. Moskva: Moskvaforlaget MIK (In Rus).
7. Thurow L. (1999). The future of capitalism. How today's forces shape tomorrow's world. Novosibirsk (In Rus).
8. Fukuyama F. (2007). America at the Crossroads. Democracy, Power and a Neoconservative Legacy. Moscow (In Rus).
Review
For citations:
Delokarov K.H. The Scientisation of Culture: risks and challenges. Communicology. 2018;6(2):125-132. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21453/2311-3065-2018-6-2-125-132