 . 2017
  


     
            .        -   ,      .     .

   ,  ,  ,  ,  - .







 .   . 2017





     




.. 



    .

 

.      : (1) ,    - ,           ( ); (2)   - , -,       ,    ( ); (3)       , ,    -    ( ).              .      .    , ,  -    .  ,       .        .             .       ,  , -        .

Abstract. There are three types of modern societies: (1) prosperous, with high level of scientific and technological development, well-being of the population and good conditions for personal and creative selfrealization (the green zone); (2) societies of satisfactory scientific and technological level, low-conflict, but giving a reason for the emigration of talented youth, the level of well-being is average (the yellow zone); (3) societies with a backward technological base and science, highly controversial, without clear prospects for socio-economic and cultural progress (the red zone). Currently, all highly developed countries provide significant financial support for the development of science and technology. In this respect, Russia lags far behind. It needs new, young, elite, scientific, technical and higher educational staff. Unfortunately, the support and quality of higher education are also falling. At the same time, there is an increase in scientific publication activity. In the long term, robotization and automation of all socially significant domains of activity are expected to grow. This creates special problems for forecasting in science, higher education, social and economic development and is fraught with the complication of the social situation in the country.

 :      ;     ;    ;    ;        .

Keywords: forecast of science and higher education development; financing of science and higher education; young staff in science; elite and poly-elite society; robotization and automation of various domains of socially significant activity.

    ,     . , ,      , ,          .        ,   ,     .       ,           -  ,     .    ,     -      ,      ,  ,   ,     .

  ,          .    XX .  ,    ,           ,      ,    ?      : 1975 .           ,    .   .    Apple,       ().             ,     ,    ,     ,    .    XIX .           -  ?             ,   1904 . ,   . . ,          .        .           -  - ,       ,   ,   , , - ,  ,    ..         ,      ,    ,    ,        - .

      ,       .               ,     ,  .           80 ,   50,   20,     ,   ,      [3].

        2035 [2]     ,    - ,              ,         .                   .     ,       ,      ,    ,     ,                ,     .    ,          ,    -        ,      .          ,      ,   ,               .       ,        ,      .          ,   .           ,      . ,  ,          .            .    ໠        .           .         ,    ,    ,    .    ,      ,     -     .  , ,   ..     .         .         ,        ,  -       ,   30-        ,      ,   ,     .     ,   ,       .   ,  ,    ,          -  -  ,  ,    . ,    ,     ,          ,          -         .     , ,      ,     ,       .     ,     ,   , ,  ,     -   - .

       ,       . ,  ,     ,    2035,        .      ,   .       :    ,   ,   .        ,       ,          ,              .

       -   .         :  , , , ,   ..            .              ,         ,  ,   ..         .    .   .          . .  ,         ,   ,         ,         ,          .    ,  ,     .   ,  ,  -,  ,    , , ,         ..       , , ,         .           .   ,    -           .          ,   ,    ,        :  ,        (),  (),  ()  ..             -   ,  , , ,    .        ; ,        .               ,    ,   -   .        - ,   ,    ,     , ,      .

        ,      ,          .          () [1]. ,             ,    ,       ,    -        .           ,    ,   ,  .        .   -         .              ,  ,   -,     ,    ,    .                      - .          , , - ,           . ,          , ,  ,   ,     ,    , .

      ,    ,     .           .     , ,  ,     ,            .              ,                   .           -,    ?  2016 .     .        :              (0,9% ),   (0,76%)   (0,65%).    0,18% (   0,17%     )    2014 .        -   ,    (0,54% )   (0,56% ),     (0,37% ),  (0,31% ),  (0,31% ),  (0,28% ),  (0,27% ),  (0,23% ),  (0,23% ).  ,     - ,      ,      0,28% ϻ [6].

   ,     :             2,8% ,    2,1%,    3,4%,     3,8%,          2,54% [6].   ,             3%, ,  ,      . ,       2015 .              0,54% [7].   ,      - ,  .    ,                . ,  2012 .      0,53%,  2013  0,60,   2014  0,56,   2015 (  )  0,54%.    ,      ,            . , ,    2017 .,    ,         1:56,          ,              .   ,  ,     . ,              .  2016 .        2,41%;  ,    ..              2,44%,         .   ,         [8].      ,      ,  ,           .   2014 .   ,      . ,  .          5,5 .          39   43%.     ,  ,              ,           . , ,  ,     ,       .       ,  ,   ,     .   2017 .   896   ,   530 .     ,     -        .     10    ()  29    ().

    ,         ,   - .          ,       ,          ,            .          (. .).






.      



  , , ,  ,         .   ,  ,      ,   .      ,      ,    ,           ,      ,            .                .  ,  ,           -  () , ,     .                 ,           . ,                800900    .                   .  ,            ( , )  ,               40/40/20.  ,  40%         , 40%    ,    ,  ,    ,     ..,  20%    , ..     ,     ,   ,      ..              .  ,           .         ,            1417 .      ,            ,   ,     ,              .      ,         , ,      ,         ,       ,   .   ,  ,           . ,   , ,         -  - . , ,          - .

     ,         .   ,        -         ,            ,       .   ,               .  ,      ,         ,                   .           ,             .  ,          . ,  2014 .        437  .,    2017 .      336 , ..    .           .         : 1) - ,              ; 2)  ; 3)     (  ,   ,    ,  ,   ,  ..); 4)       ; 5)           ; 6)     ,   ,     ,  ,  ,   ; 7)     , ,    .         -   .                ,   ,         ,       .         ,    .         .         :             310 .    1,4     [5, . 30].       ,   ,  ,   ,  ,    ,     .          ,  , ,  (    )  ..                    , , ,      ..

    .        ,           ,   ,      ..                   ,        ,        ,       (),       (),           .

    ,       . ,            20-     30-   .    ,     ,      , ..   1015 ,               ,         ,              .


 

1. .   :      Homo sapiens. .:  -, 2015. 304 .

2.  2035 / . , . , . , . , . , . , . , . , . , . , . , . , .  / .  .. .:    , 2016. 240 .

3.  ..  .  : . . , 2016. 230 .

4.  . :  2 . .: , 1990. . 1:   / ,  ., . . . .. ;   . .: , 1990. 829 .

5.  .   / [. . . ]. .: , 2017. 287 .

6.    /    . ., 2016.  29.  : http://www.poisknews.ru/theme/science-politic/19624/

7.      .  : http://www.gks.ru/wps/wcm/connect/rosstat_main/rosstat/ru/statistics/science_and_innovations/science/#

8.           43%.  : http://tass.ru/nauka/4146890




     




.. -

.           ,       ,      () ,     .               .                     ,          .

Abstract. The article deals with the history of scientific development in the light of the problem of the scientific method that arose as a result of the historical disintegration of comprehensive knowledge, as it was in the proto-scientific (philosophical) paradigm, on natural and social sciences. The options proposed by the philosophy of science for solving this problem are described, and the bases for integrating polydisciplinary scientific knowledge are explored. A conclusion is made about the decisive significance of the social basis, namely, the progress of communication technologies, in maintaining a stable integration trend in scientific development, which in modern society has resulted in the formation of a transdisciplinary paradigm of science.

 :    ;  ;   ;  ;  ;  ; ; .

Keywords: social and natural sciences; scientific method; paradigms of scientific development; precedent reality; probabilistic knowledge; communication technologies; globalization; transdisciplinarity.

  () -          ,    -   .    ,   , ,             .          ,       ,   ,        .

          ,       / ,       ,       ,  ,    .   ()   ( )       (   )    .      ,     ,  ,            . ,                .

    ? ,  ,  -       ,    .         ()         , ,      ,  c    .     ,     () ,        ,                ,    , - () . ,  ( ) . , ,  ,   ,    . , . , . .   ,           ,        .

  ,                    ,      ,    .               .            . :

   () ,             , ,  (    )  ;

  ,     ,  ,   ,   ,       , ,      ,    (    )     ,  .

 ,   ,       ,     - ,    ,     .    ,        : (1)     - ,        ; (2) ,   ,       ,     ,     - .

         ,    .    (1)   ,  ()      ()   ,   ,         ,      ,  (   )  () .    (2),     ,         (   ,     ),    . ,    (1),              ,     ,                       ,    .

   (2)           ( )    /  ( ).              ,           , ,           . ,    (.. )             - ,         ,        ,   ,     - .     ,   , , ,    ,    ,    ()   ,    (    )  ,      .

                 ,    ,     ()   ,         .    ( - )    ,    , - (     )       - .       - ,   -  ,      ( )        ,         .   ,     ? , .             ,       .     ,   ,    ,   .    (  )           .

      ,  -    .       ,          .                       . ,     .      ,   - (transhumanism)         Homo sapiens.  . ,              ,  ,  ,  ,               . .     , ,     (, )   ,      ,       [1 - Doede R. Technologies and species transitions: Polanyi, on a path to posthumanity? // Bulletin of science, technology & society. 2011. Vol. 31, N 3. . 225235. DOI: 10.1177/0270467611406050; Mode of access: http://bst.sugepub. com/content/31/3/225]




  .


   .

   ,     (https://www.litres.ru/kollektiv-avtorov/naukovedcheskie-issledovaniya-2017/)  .

      Visa, MasterCard, Maestro,    ,   ,     ,  PayPal, WebMoney, ., QIWI ,       .



notes



1


Doede R. Technologies and species transitions: Polanyi, on a path to posthumanity? // Bulletin of science, technology & society. 2011. Vol. 31, N 3. . 225235. DOI: 10.1177/0270467611406050; Mode of access: http://bst.sugepub. com/content/31/3/225


