ON THE UNITY OF NORMATIVE AND COGNITIVE EXPECTATIONS IN SCIENCE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5840/eps20256215Keywords:
normative expectations, cognitive expectations, encyclopedia, classification, open nature of knowledge, reliable knowledge, authorityAbstract
In this remark to the article by A.Yu. Antonovsky, doubts are expressed about the thesis about the separation of cognitive and normative expectations. It seems controversial to assert that the forms of presentation of scientific results depend on these types of expectations. Using the example of encyclopedic publications that became widespread in different periods of the history of philosophy and science, the epistemological attitudes of rejection of authority, openness and replenishment of knowledge are analyzed. According to the author, the basis of the unity of normative and cognitive expectations in science is the authoritative component of knowledge. Science is a monopoly on authoritative reliable knowledge, distinguishing classes and categories of objects. The author emphasizes that the difference between the forms of presentation of scientific results (for example, a scientific article / encyclopedic article) lies in the goals pursued by the authors, making a choice in favor of one or another format.
References
Антоновский А.Ю. «Виды природы» и коммуникативные измерения дисциплинарной дифференциации // Эпистемология и философия науки. 2025. Т. 62. № 1. С. 22–38.
Бертон Р. Анатомия Меланхолии / Пер. с англ., вступ. статья и коммент. А.Г. Ингера. М.: Прогресс-Традиция, 2005. 832 с.
Бурдье П. Поле науки // Бурдье П. Социальное пространство: поля и практики. СПб.: Алетейя, 2005. С. 473–517.
Гадамер Х.-Г. Истина и метод: Основы филос. герменевтики / Пер. с нем. М.: Прогресс, 1988. 704 с.
Игнер А.Г. Summa Меланхолии // Бертон Р. Анатомия Меланхолии / Пер. с англ., вступ. статья и коммент. А.Г. Ингера. М.: Прогресс-Традиция, 2005. С. 15–37.
Штер Н. Мир из знания // Социологический журнал. 2002. № 2. С. 31–35.
Antonovski, A.Yu. “‘Vidy’ prirody’ i kommunikativnye izmereniya disciplinarnoj differenciacii” [“Types of Nature” and Communicative Dimensions of Disciplinary Differentiation], Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 2025, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 22– 38. (In Russian)
Bourdieu P. “Pole nauki” [The Field of Science], in: Bourdieu, P. Social’noe prostranstvo: polya i praktiki. Saint Petersburg: Aletejya, 2005, pp. 473–517. (Trans. into Russian)
Burton R. Anatomiya Melanxolii [The Anatomy of Melancholy]. Moscow: Progress-Tradiciya, 2005. (Trans. into Russian)
Gadamer, H.-G. Istina i metod: Osnovy filosofskoi Germenevtiki [Truth and Method: Fundamentals of Philosophical Hermeneutics]. Moscow: Progress, 1988. (Trans. into Russian)
Igner, A.G. “Summa Melanxolii” [The Summa of Theology], in: Berton R. Anatomiya Melanxolii [The Anatomy of Melancholy]. Moscow: Progress-Tradiciya, 2005, pp. 15–37. (In Russian)
Pannabecker, J.R. “Diderot, the Mechanical Arts, and the Encyclopédie: In Search of the Heritage of Technology Education”, Journal of Technology Education, 1994, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 45–57.
Stehr, N. “Mir iz znaniya” [The World of Knowledge], Sociologicheskij zhurnal, 2002, no. 2, pp. 31–35. (Trans. into Russian)
Williams, R.G. “Disfiguring the Body of Knowledge: Anatomical Discourse and Robert Burton’s The Anatomy of Melancholy”, ELH: English Literary History, 2001, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 593–613.
