Path of Science: International Electronic Scientific Journal

The article analyses the relationship between philosophy and science at the present stage through the prism of interdisciplinarity and scientific progress. Generally, the philosophical meaning of "scientific progress" is considered - the position of T. Sokolova, which caused a comprehensive discussion, is analysed considering the different points of view on this matter.

It is shown that, in general, consideration of this problem from the point of view of interdisciplinary interactions and the formation of interdisciplinary new knowledge has heuristic potential. In particular, the philosophical and epistemological "measurement" of scientific progress becomes relevant at this time.

The discussions confirm that determining an adequate criterion for scientific progress is one of the main problems when considering the problem in the selected context. Various and different proposals and theses appear. This difference in positions is related to the issue's complexity.

Considering the diversity of opinions noted above, the article expresses a unique approach to the problem. In particular, the thesis has been put forward that the philosophical understanding of the concept of "now" can play a significant role in determining the criterion of scientific progress from an interdisciplinary position. The novelty of "now" was studied in synthesising cognitive and practical aspects.

It is shown that in the cognitive aspect if each subsequent stage of the formation of interdisciplinary knowledge can simplify the cognitive situation compared to the previous stage (creating a more precise picture), we can talk about scientific progress.

At the same time, if the practical application of new interdisciplinary knowledge is assessed as innovation, this means scientific progress.

In conclusion, the following thesis is formulated: the criterion of scientific progress can be determined based on a synthesis of the purely cognitive novelty of interdisciplinary knowledge and an assessment of its application in the sociocultural environment as innovative.

An interdisciplinary methodology was used to achieve the scientific goal.

In particular, such methodological principles as nonlinearity, intersubjectivity, formation and synergy were applied.

Complexity simplification and synergistic synthesis were used as a method.

Scientific novelty is associated with the thesis that the synthesis of aspects 1) "now" of scientific progress "translates the cognitive situation from complexity to simplicity as a purely cognitive criterion" and 2) "is innovative as a result of its practical application to society as new interdisciplinary knowledge "can be a criterion of scientific progress at the present stage in general.

nonlinearity; intersubjectivity; formation; synergy; new interdisciplinary knowledge; criterion of progress; simplification of complexity; synergetic synthesis

1. Arshinov, V. (2011). Refleksivno-aktivnye sredy innovacionnogo razvitija v kontekste sinergetiki slozhnosti [Reflexive-active environments of innovative development in the context of the synergetics of complexity]. In Mezhdisciplinarnye problemy sredovogo podhoda k innovacionnomu razvitiju [Interdisciplinary problems of the environmental approach to innovative development]. Moscow: Kogito (in Russian).

2. Bashljar, G. (2000). Prikladnoj racionalizm [Applied rationalism]. In Bashljar G., Izbrannoe (Vol. 1, pp. 7–198). Moscow: Universitetskaja kniga.

3. Braunstein, J.-F. (2002). Bachelard, Canguilhem, Foucault. Le ‘style français’ en épistémologie. In Les philosophes et la science (pp. 920–963). Paris: Gallimard (in French).

4. Boon, M. (2022). Preface to Federica Russo’s monograph Techno-Scientific Practices – An Informational Approach. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/370527331

5. De Boer, B. (2019). Gaston Bachelard's Philosophy of Science: Between Project and Practice. Parrhesia, 31, 54–173.

6. Kasavin, I. T. (2023). Metaphysics of Progress and the Disciplinary Structure of Science. Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 60(2), 35–41. doi: 10.5840/eps202360220

7. Kasavin, I. T. (2014). STS: Operezhajushhaja naturalizacija ili dogonjajushhaja modernizacija? [Advanced naturalisation or catch-up modernisation?]. Epistemologija i filosofija nauki, 39(1), 3-17. doi: 10.5840/eps20143911

8. Kissinger, G., Shmidt, E., & Hattenloker, D. (2022). Iskusstvennyj razum i novaja jera chelovechestva [Artificial intelligence and a new era of humanity]. Moscow: Alpina Digital (in Russian).

9. Montuori, A. (2013). Complex thought. An Overview of Edgar Morin’s Intellectual Journey. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260603130_Edgar_Morin_and_Complex_Thought

10. Morin, E. (2005). Metod. Priroda Prirody [Method. Nature of Nature]. Moscow: Progress-Tradicija (in Russian).

11. Nickles, T. (2017, June 14). Historicist Theories of Scientific Rationality. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationality-historicist/

12. Niiniluoto, I. (2002, October 1). Scientific Progress. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/Entries/scientific-progress/

13. Nowotny, H. (2005). The Increase of Complexity and its Reduction. Theory, Culture & Society, 22(5), 15–31. doi: 10.1177/0263276405057189

14. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary. (2023). Progress. Retrieved from https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/progress_1

15. Porus, V. (2010). Mnogomernost' racional'nosti [Multidimensionality of rationality]. Jepistemologija i filosofija nauki, 1, 5–16 (in Russian).

16. Porus, V. N. (2023). On the Multidimensionality of Scientific Rationality and Scientific Progress. Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 60(2), 58–64. doi: 10.5840/eps202360223

17. Porus, V. (2015). Ot mezhdisciplinarnosti k transdisciplinarnosti: mosty mezhdu filosofiej nauki i filosofiej kul'tury [Perspektivy From interdisciplinarity to transdisciplinarity: bridges between the philosophy of science and the philosophy of culture]. In Transdisciplinarity in philosophy and science. Approaches. Problems. Prospects (pp. 416–432). Moscow: Navigator (in Russian).

18. Russo, F. (2022). Techno-Scientific Practices. An Informational Approach. London: Rowman & Littlefield.

19. Sokolova, T. D. (2023). Conceptualizing Scientific Progress. Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 60(2), 23–34. doi: 10.5840/eps202360219

20. Timashev, S. F. (2000). A new dialogue with nature. AIP Conference Proceedings. doi: 10.1063/1.1302392

21. Bazhanova, V., & Scholz, R. (Eds.). (2015). Transdisciplinarnost' v filosofii i nauke: podhody, problemy, perspektivy [Transdisciplinarity in philosophy and science: approaches, problems, prospects]. Moscow: Navigator (in Russian).

22. Tsurkan, E. G. (2023). Scientific Progress, Rationality and Interdisciplinarity. Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 60(2), 65–71. doi: 10.5840/eps202360224

23. College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences. (2023). About. Retrieved from https://liberalarts.vt.edu/departments-and-schools/department-of-science-technology-and-society.html