IS THE SCIENTIFIC WORLDVIEW CONNECTED WITH THE VALUES OF A RESPONSIBLE AND MORAL PERSON? (STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM IN THE ERA OF MACROSHIFT)

Abstract

The article raises the question of whether the scientific worldview is connected with the values of a responsible and moral person. It is viewed both from a historical and a modern perspective. There are two historical approaches to solving this issue: coming from the works of Nicholas of Cusa and Descartes, where the influence of science on human consciousness is recognized, and the rational approach, which actually denies such an influence. Using the example of the author’s case of Tsvetaeva’s personality reconstruction, a hypothesis is introduced that characterizes the features of modern science in the era of macroshift. The author shows that modern science (humanitarian, social and possibly natural science in the field of non-classical rationality) should include, firstly, the position and values of the subjects that are studied in it, secondly, the position and values of the researcher himself, third, analysis of the influence of sociality on the consciousness of individuals, as well as the capture of social structures by a passionate community or individual. If, for example, Pushkin at the turn of the 30s experienced a spiritual revolution, reconsidered his life and began to work, as Pyotr Chaadaev persistently advised him, for the benefit of Russia and its culture, then Tsvetaeva was never able to overcome her egoism and poetic vanity and, in part, , so she died herself and unwittingly contributed to the death of her beloved son Moore. Analysis of the position of the researcher himself allows us to understand what impact the humanist had on the subject being studied, what interested him in him (as M. Bakhtin wrote: not one spirit, but two — the one being studied and the one studying, the interaction of spirits). Socio-humanitarian sciences in the era of macro shift must not only reconstruct the positions of individuals (subject to research and the author), but also, on the one hand, analyze the factors of sociality that transform human consciousness, on the other hand, on the contrary, explain how individual communities or individuals can capture social structures, turning them into their organs.