The Ambivalence of the Scientific Ethos Is Irresistible

Ambivalence of the scientific ethos (R. Merton) today is still a topical issue under the escalation of contradictions between science and society. The autonomy of science, the solidarity of scientists in the face of internal and external challenges are the issues decisions of which are burdened by a number of antinomies such as “profession – vocation”, “individual – collective” and “a priori – a posteriori”. Is it possible to rid the ethics of science, designed to develop and represent moral norms for the scientific community, from this ambivalence? The article offers a sketch of the ethics of science, combining virtue epistemology with some ideas of J. Rawls and W. Pareto. It shows that the ethical assessment is irreparably present in the structure of roles and statuses in the scientific community, and epistemic virtues are intertwined with moral ones. In terms of this, ambivalence is a form of problematization inherent in any ethical discourse. Hence the task of the ethics of science is not to prescribe norms of behavior to a particular agent, but to explicate conditions of moral freedom.

About Open Science and Autonomy of Science

This article invites us to a concise walk through the past, offering insights defined by the major challenges science encountered during the centuries. Some lessons for today and tomorrow are enumerated in the three sections of the article, and they go beyond the relatively few perspectives offered by today's Data Science: Open Science (OS) is what has always happened and is nothing new, because science has always sought to be open. Esthetical values played a relevant role in the past. Former scientists recognized the intrinsic relation between the way they opened science and the way they followed the principles of beauty and the sense of esthetic. Their groundbreaking heritage still inspires us in being ready to open new ways in science. Whereas Latin was the original lingua franca of European science, and English is the recent lingua franca, the new lingua franca is software. Pieces of software are the filter, which connect researchers to the world, through layers of data. They assist in observing, in choosing, and in selecting. Open scientists should be aware of the fact that their autonomy in science depends on the quality of these pieces. Another lesson is that ethics—regarded as a source of innovative activities—must be a core component of innovative processes in OS, because society needs a responsible use of data and algorithms in corresponding practices that serve OS.

Kryzys, krytyka, mądrość. Kantowskie ujęcie mądrości i jego aktualność

The title concepts of criticism, crisis, and wisdom are taken from the paradigm of Kantian philosophy and are characterised in the development given by the contemporary philosopher Odo Marquard. In this connection I present the relationship between wisdom and thinking in the Enlightenment usage. The call for philosophy to be self-understanding in the sense of the Enlightenment Bildung and the autonomy of science and wisdom sounds particularly strong here. I conclude that philosophy becomes stupidity when it turns into a field that—because of some kind of philosophical fundamentalism—would like to become this one-sided attitude towards reality that eliminates and replaces other attitudes.

Kryzys, krytyka, mądrość. Kantowskie ujęcie mądrości i jego aktualność

The title concepts of criticism, crisis, and wisdom are taken from the paradigm of Kantian philosophy and are characterised in the development given by the contemporary philosopher Odo Marquard. In this connection I present the relationship between wisdom and thinking in the Enlightenment usage. The call for philosophy to be self-understanding in the sense of the Enlightenment Bildung and the autonomy of science and wisdom sounds particularly strong here. I conclude that philosophy becomes stupidity when it turns into a field that—because of some kind of philosophical fundamentalism—would like to become this one-sided attitude towards reality that eliminates and replaces other attitudes.

Kant on the Ends of the Sciences

Kant speaks repeatedly about the relations between ends or aims and scientific research, but the topic has mostly been ignored. What is the role of ends, especially (though not exclusively) practical ones, in his views on science? I will show that while Kant leaves ample space for recognizing a function of ends both in the definition and the pursuit of inquiry, and in the further practical application of scientific cognition, he does not claim that science is simply an instrument for achieving practical ends. I explain his complex conception, pointing out that Kant argues (1) that the sciences require ends for their very definition, (2) that ends come in fundamentally different kinds, (3) that the relation between science and ends requires the rational determination and hierarchization of all our ends, with “wisdom” as the highest, and (4) that this determination and hierarchization – which ought to be done by metaphysics – has itself to be carried out in a “scientific way”. I show further that (5) Kant gives sui generis weight to the epistemic aims and standards of science and to the autonomy of science from our practical lives. This places his position between separatism and anti-separatism with regard to the relation between science and our ends or values.

Technoscience: “Where the Danger Is, Grows the Saving Power Also”

The article is a response to the arguments by O.B. Koshovets and I.E. Frolov on the emergence of "technoscience”. Technoscience is opposed by the authors to the classical science characterized by the dominance of the technological component of research and capitalization of knowledge. The article focuses on two tasks. The first one supposes an appeal to the historical origins of technoscience and demonstrates significant relationship between technoscience and classical science. The second one involves the disclosure of contemporary negative trends of technoscience as creating conditions for their own overcoming. In conclusion it associates the work on the autonomy of science with the constructive dialogue between scientific and non-scientific knowledge.

Próba przezwyciężenia doktryny podwójnej prawdy przez Galileusza

The article is an attempt to answer the question of whether Galileo has overcome the doctrine of double truth in Copernican letters. The answer to this question is not unequivocal, just as the ‘Galileo case’ is unequivocal. As it is well known, the attempt to defend Copernicanism ended tragically for him. He had to revoke his view that the Earth revolves around the Sun. Also, as for the „evidence” presented by him on this matter, it proved to be either insufficient or false. However, the principle of the autonomy of science and faith, his emphasis on the authority of scientific knowledge and the authority of the Bible survived the period of condemnation of his thoughts and made itself felt in the nineteenth century, and today they determine the fides et ratio relation.

Learner Autonomy of Science Using 5E Learning Cycle

This aims to determine the effect of the 5E learning on student learning Autonomy. The research subjects are 84 PGSD students. 5E Learning applicants with the syntax of Engagement, Exploration, Exploration, Elaboration, and Evaluation were carried out in advanced science courses in the second semester. Research with the type of quasi experiment using questionnaires as a measure of student learning Autonomy. The results showed that the mean score of the control group and the experimental group had increased. The Mann-Whitney U test obtained a significance of 0.039 and the effect of the 5E learning showed a high category with score of N gain is 0.98. it can be concluded that the 5E learning affects student learner autonomy.