Scientific Precariat: Individualism versus Collectivism

Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 59 (3):30-37 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The article is a reply to Ilya T. Kasavin’s “Creativity as a social phenomenon” and is devoted to the phenomenon of the scientific precariat. A systematic analysis of the relations between the scientific precariat and the academic community as a dialectical opposition of the individual and the collective is undertaken. The method of critical analysis is aimed at rethinking the stable ideas that have developed in science about the collectivity of scientific work. The concepts of labor and employment in science are considered. It is concluded that the global development of digital technologies has led to the disappearance of the boundaries between physical and intellectual labor, against which there is an elevation of creative activity. The availability of information on the Internet, opening up incredible opportunities for research, destroys the monopoly of professional scientific communities on the possession of scientific knowledge. Scientific precarious loudly declare themselves in the public space, demonstrating the boldness and unusual nature of the ideas expressed. Inspired seekers of scientific truth embark on a free voyage through the vastness of the unknown. Traditional scientific communications, while retaining their significance, are enriched with new, non-standard ideas of precarious scientists who, ignoring rules and hierarchies, bring the creative spirit of freedom into modern science. However, the activities of such scientists may have an ambiguous assessment: a precarious scientist completely loses touch with the existing methods and approaches of classical science, and flight from work standards instead of expanding the horizons of scientific creativity turns into new problems caused by “multi-task” and instability of the labor activity of a “free” scientist. Despite the fact that in the conditions of the development of modern society and technology, the opposition of the pair of individual and collective is leveled, many scientists need common structures that determine the development of science, which at the present stage of the development of scientific knowledge are rather represented not by a social organization, but by an intellectual, linguistic and methodological unity focused on the creative development of the world.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,611

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

On the Perspectives of the Scientific Precariat.Svetlana V. Shibarshina - 2022 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 59 (3):55-60.
Semantics and social science.Graham Macdonald - 1981 - Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Edited by Philip Pettit.
Creativity and Digitalization.Evgeniy V. Maslanov - 2022 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 59 (3):38-45.
The Ubiquity of Public Science.Raphael Sassower - 2020 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 57 (4):62-69.
Individualismus oder kollektivismus?Josef Meran - 1979 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 10 (1):35-53.
Creativity in Science as a Social Phenomenon.Ilya T. Kasavin - 2022 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 59 (3):19-29.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-09-24

Downloads
9 (#1,261,065)

6 months
6 (#531,961)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references