Social responsibility of a scientist presentation. Professional ethics of a scientist and teacher. General characteristics. Robert Merton, in his works on the sociology of science, created four moral principles

Purpose and objectives of the lesson Purpose: based on parallels between the life and work of the writer A. Belyaev, real life and scientific discoveries, to bring students to an understanding of the harm science can cause if it ends up in the hands of irresponsible scientists. Objectives: 1. to teach students to extract information from works of science fiction as literature that reflects real-life phenomena and warns people about terrible events in the future; 2. form your own opinion, position, give reasons for them; express your thoughts in oral and written speech; create texts various types; 3. Learn to hear the author’s voice in a work of fiction, to distinguish the author’s position in relation to discoveries in the field of science.

1. Motivation for learning activities What is the connection between these concepts? Can science be useful? Can science be harmful? Where can we read about an upcoming scientific discovery? Who is responsible for a scientific discovery? Formulate the topic of the lesson. Define your goal. BENEFITS HARM SCIENCE

Updating knowledge ADVENTURE literature FANTASTIC literature LITERARY HERO Objective: to show human behavior in an extreme situation What does extreme mean? LITERARY HERO Task: to show human behavior in a simulated situation. What does it mean - simulated?

About Alexander Belyaev Born in 1884 in Smolensk, into the family of a priest. I dreamed about flying in the sky, dreamed about them in my sleep and in reality. He threw himself from the roof on an open umbrella, on a parachute made from a sheet, paying with significant bruises. Later he made a glider and flew an airplane. I took to reading early. Having taken a liking to books, I almost immediately discovered science fiction. Favorite writer: Jules Verne. “My brother and I even decided to go traveling to the center of the Earth, moved tables, chairs, beds, covered them with blankets, stocked up on a small oil lantern and delved into the mysterious depths...”

About A. Belyaev Sasha studied willingly; the boy’s mind at that time was occupied with theater, music, literature, and technology. Soon I became interested in photography. At first he followed in his father’s footsteps, studied at a theological seminary, but did not become a priest. Manila theater. He played many roles. He entered the legal lyceum, after which he worked as a lawyer in Smolensk and published his articles about theater and literature. In 1916 he became very ill. A bruise received in childhood took its toll. The doctor inadvertently touched a vertebra with a needle when taking a puncture. The result is terrible: I lay motionless in bed for 6 years. All these years I read and thought a lot. Exercise. Draw a parallel between this fact from the life of A. Belyaev and his book “The Head of Professor Dowell”

The connection between the writer’s life and his book For three years, A. Belyaev lay in a cast, shackled in his arms and legs. From these years he probably took away all the tragedy of Professor Dowell, deprived of a body, deprived of everything except facial expressions, eye movements, speech... Hence, probably, those sensations, those sufferings.

Identifying the place and cause of the difficulty. What event is the beginning of the work? (what important event does it begin with?) Plot Marie Laurent, a young doctor, goes to work with Professor Kern. In the laboratory, she sees a head separated from the body. Marie Laurent and the head of Professor Dowell

Work on content What can you think about when reading A. Belyaev’s book? Professor Kern's attitude to science; Professor Dowell's attitude to science; the attitude towards science of the young doctor Marie Laurent, assistant to Professor Kern; real and not real scientists; novel-fantasy and reality novel-warning

Independent work with self-test Why is A. Belyaev’s book “The Head of Professor Dowell” a novel - a warning? 1. Be careful with science. 2. Science can serve evil. 3. Scientists are responsible for their scientific discoveries. 4. Scientists are responsible for the future.

Homework Optional: 1. Write a reflection “What should a real scientist be like?” 2. What is unusual about A. Belyaev’s fiction? What techniques does the author use to create a fantastic world (give examples) (combination of the unusual and the real; exaggeration, special words-terms, vivid comparisons, contrast, inconsistency, etc.)

Informational resources

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

The problem of a scientist's responsibility to society is complex and diverse, it consists of a considerable number of factors, and is closely intertwined with the broader problem of the ethical aspects of science.

In his activities, a scientist naturally bears responsibility of a universal human nature. He is responsible for the usefulness of the scientific “product” he produces: he is expected to have impeccable demands on the reliability of the material, correctness in using the work of his colleagues, rigor of analysis and solid validity of the conclusions drawn. These are elementary, self-evident aspects of a scientist’s responsibility, his personal ethics.

The responsibility of a scientist becomes much broader when the question arises about the forms and results of using his works through technology and economics. It is naive to think that the actions and behavior of an individual scientist will affect the emergence or course of a particular crisis. We are talking here about the voice of the community of scientists, about their professional position.

The responsibility of a scientist is the other side of the freedom of his scientific creativity. On the one hand, responsibility is unthinkable without freedom, on the other hand, freedom without responsibility becomes arbitrariness.

One of the necessary conditions and features of the development of science is freedom of scientific creativity. In all its aspects - psychological (free will), epistemological (freedom as a recognized necessity), socio-political (freedom of action), interconnected, freedom in the field of science manifests itself in special concrete forms and acts as a necessary basis for responsibility not only scientist, but also humanity as a whole.

Freedom must manifest itself not only externally and with the help of science, but also within it itself in all forms of freedom of thought (posing scientific problems, scientific imagination, foresight, etc.), freedom of choice of research objects and methods of scientific work, freedom of action, social freedom of the scientist as an individual.

One of the manifestations of freedom of scientific creativity, and therefore responsibility, is the ability of a scientist to free himself from preconceived opinions, the ability to practically analyze his own work and treat the work of others favorably, to see the grains of truth in it. Constant doubt about the correctness and reliability of conclusions and discoveries is one of the foundations of scientific integrity, a scientist’s sense of responsibility for the truth of scientific views. The victory of doubt, which was preceded by intensive work of thought to verify conclusions, expresses true freedom of creativity.

It should be noted that scientific activity requires certain qualities from a person. This is not only boundless hard work, inquisitiveness and obsession, but also high civil courage. A true scientist wages an uncompromising fight against ignorance, defends the sprouts of the new, progressive against attempts to preserve outdated views and ideas. The history of science carefully preserves the names of scientists who, without sparing their lives, fought against the backward worldview that hampered the progress of civilization. Giordano Bruno, a great thinker and materialist who boldly declared the infinity of the Universe, was burned at the stake of the Inquisition.

In an exploitative society, science and scientists had and still have one more enemy - the desire of those in power to use the work of scientists for the purpose of their enrichment and for the purposes of war. When a modern scientist, armed with all the power of modern technology and supported by all the “assets” of modern states, loses clear moral criteria, when he is “in the interests of science” and not out of morality, and often out of a purely “aesthetic” interest in the “case”, in discovery and creativity, as such, invents sets of poisons, atomic, bacterial, psychopathogenic weapons, this is deadly for humanity, not to mention that it is also deadly for science. responsibility scientist scientific weapon

Among the regions scientific knowledge, in which the issues of social responsibility of a scientist and the moral and ethical assessment of his activities are especially acutely and intensely discussed, a special place is occupied by genetic engineering, biotechnology, biomedical and genetic research of humans, all of which are quite closely related to each other.

It was the development of genetic engineering that led to a unique event in the history of science, when in 1975 the world's leading scientists voluntarily entered into a moratorium, temporarily suspending a number of studies that were potentially dangerous not only to humans, but also to other forms of life on our planet. The moratorium was preceded by a sharp breakthrough in molecular genetics research. However, the other side of this breakthrough in the field of genetics was the potential threats hidden in it for humans and humanity. These kinds of fears forced scientists to take such an unprecedented step as establishing a voluntary moratorium. However, discussions around the ethical issues of genetic engineering have not subsided.

Responsibility of scientists to society for the development of weapons of mass destruction

Scientists have always spoken out for preventing wars and bloodshed, as well as for stopping the use of nuclear technology. Thus, in December 1930, Albert Einstein expressed the thought: “If it were possible to get only two percent of the world’s population to declare in peacetime that they would refuse to fight, the question of international conflicts would be resolved, for it would be impossible to imprison two percent of the world's population, there would not be enough room for them in the prisons of the entire earth." Nevertheless, Einstein's call left a noticeable mark: it was an inevitable and necessary stage in the difficult process of scientists realizing their civic duty to humanity.

A. Einstein and a number of other prominent scientists, including Paul Langevin, Bertrand Russell, were part of the initiative committee for the preparation of the World Anti-War Congress, held in Amsterdam in August 1932. A significant step towards uniting scientists against the war was made by the anti-war congress in Brussels in 1936. During this congress, representatives of the scientific community from thirteen countries discussed the issue of the responsibility of scientists in the face of military danger.

In a resolution adopted by the scientific committee of the congress, they condemned the war as undermining the international character of science and pledged to direct their efforts to prevent war. Congress participants called on scientists to explain the harmful consequences of using scientific achievements for war purposes, to conduct anti-war propaganda, and to expose pseudoscientific theories with the help of which certain forces are trying to justify war.

This decision, made on the eve of the Second World War, did not have any serious practical consequences, but it forced many Western scientists to think about the socio-economic causes of the war, about the role that scientists can play in educating the general public about the causes and consequences of war , in facilitating the organization of resistance to forces interested in starting a war.

These thoughts pushed anti-fascist scientists to action, which from today’s perspective can be assessed as a manifestation of the desire to prevent atomic weapons from falling into the hands of Hitler and his allies.

Hitler's Germany could create nuclear weapons and use them to enslave peoples - many scientists thought so, especially those who learned in practice what fascism was. They did everything to prevent Hitler from using this powerful force. The brave son of the French people, Frederic Joliot-Curie, whose research on the fission of the uranium nucleus into two fragments under the influence of a neutron revealed the last link in the chain reaction, took all measures to prevent the Nazis from seizing the uranium reserves and heavy water needed in France. creation of a nuclear reactor.

Concern for the fate of nations and the possibility of Germany acquiring nuclear weapons prompted progressive scientists in the United States, many of whom were refugees from Europe, to appeal to the American government with a proposal to immediately create atomic bomb.

This decision was made, and a special organization called the Manhattan Project was created to develop and manufacture the atomic bomb. The leadership of this organization was entrusted to General L. Groves, a representative of the Pentagon.

On April 23, 1957, the famous scientist, Nobel Prize laureate, physician and philosopher A. Schweitzer drew public attention in an address broadcast by Norwegian Radio to the genetic and other consequences of ongoing tests nuclear weapons. Joliot-Curie supported this appeal, emphasizing the urgent need to stop test explosions of nuclear weapons. This appeal received a positive response from scientists in many countries. Soviet scientists also categorically stated that they supported the prohibition of nuclear weapons and demanded the conclusion of an agreement between countries on the immediate cessation of testing of atomic and hydrogen bombs, believing that any nuclear war, wherever it occurred, would necessarily turn into a general war with dire consequences for humanity.

A modern scientist cannot be imagined without a high sense of citizenship, without heightened responsibility for the results of his activities, without serious concern for the fate of the world and humanity. A scientist of any specialty, under any circumstances, must consider concern for the welfare of humanity as his highest moral duty.

Responsibility of scientists for developments in the field of genetic engineering and cloning.

Genetic engineering emerged in the 1970s. as a branch of molecular biology associated with the targeted creation of new combinations of genetic material capable of multiplying in a cell and synthesizing final products. A decisive role in the creation of new combinations of genetic material is played by special enzymes that make it possible to cut the DNA molecule into fragments in strictly defined places, and then “stitch” the DNA fragments into a single whole.

Genetic engineering has opened up prospects for constructing new biological organisms- transgenic plants and animals with pre-planned properties. The study of the human genome is also of great importance.

The responsibility of scientists during the development of genetic engineering can be characterized by the fact that they must maintain the confidentiality of genetic information about specific people. For example, some countries have laws restricting the dissemination of such information.

Although significant work has been done in the laboratory to engineer transgenic microbes with a wide variety of properties, scientists have a public responsibility to ensure that transgenic microbes are not used in the open. This is due to the uncertainty of the consequences that such a fundamentally uncontrollable process can lead to. In addition, the world of microorganisms itself has been studied extremely poorly: science knows, at best, about 10% of microorganisms, and practically nothing is known about the rest; the patterns of interaction between microbes, as well as microbes and other biological organisms, have not been sufficiently studied. These and other circumstances determine the increased sense of responsibility of microbiologists, expressed not only towards transgenic microorganisms, but also towards transgenic biological organisms in general.

The importance of awareness of the responsibility of scientists involved in cloning cannot be underestimated either. IN Lately Many predictions, wishes, guesses and fantasies about the cloning of living organisms are being circulated in the media. The discussion of the possibility of human cloning gives particular urgency to these discussions. Of interest are the technological, ethical, philosophical, legal, religious, and psychological aspects of this problem, as well as the consequences that may arise when implementing this method of human reproduction.

Of course, scientists defend themselves by the fact that in the 20th century many successful experiments were carried out on cloning animals (amphibians, some species of mammals), but all of them were carried out using the transfer of nuclei of embryonic (undifferentiated or partially differentiated) cells. It was believed that it was impossible to obtain a clone using the nucleus of a somatic (fully differentiated) cell of an adult organism. However, in 1997, British scientists announced a successful, sensational experiment: the production of living offspring (Dolly the sheep) after the transfer of a nucleus taken from the somatic cell of an adult animal.

Particular attention should be paid to the responsibility for human cloning. Despite the fact that there are no technical capabilities to clone a person yet, in principle, human cloning looks like a completely feasible project. And here many not only scientific and technological problems arise, but also ethical, legal, philosophical, and religious ones.

Posted on Allbest.ru

...

Similar documents

Deontology as the doctrine of duty and proper behavior. The origins of obligation in human existence. The concept of duty and responsibility of a social worker to society and the state, to the profession and professional group, to the client and to himself.

test, added 11/09/2015

Measures of responsibility of a social worker to the client and his relatives. The main requirements of a specialist’s professional duty. Features of ethical attitude towards clients in social work. Politeness in relationships, principles of humanism and tact.

abstract, added 04/20/2015

The role of information in the development of society. Why did the advent of writing give impetus to the development of science and culture? How are the development of technology and the information development of society related? What new information opportunities have the means of communication opened up for society?

presentation, added 09.27.2017

general characteristics the youthful period of a person’s life, the formation of the intellectual basis of his personality and the creation of a value system. A new social situation in the development of adolescence, the problem of personal responsibility to modern youth.

test, added 06/08/2009

G.V. Osipov as one of the most authoritative Russian scientists, a world-famous sociologist. The conditions in which the scientist’s life took place, his formation as a sociologist and scientific activity. Awards and prizes of the scientist. Contribution of G.V. Osipov in the revival of sociology.

course work, added 02/20/2012

Staff loyalty and implementation of the social responsibility program. Conditions of social responsibility in modern society. Levels of implementation of social responsibility programs. Social responsibility program at Baltika.

abstract, added 12/04/2007

The principle of the scientific and technological revolution as a sociocultural characteristic of the West in modern times. The path to science: paradoxes of the self-awareness of science and the problem of the relationship between theology and science. Hypothesis of the origin of experimental science. Problems of application of experienced knowledge.

test, added 02/03/2011

Robert Owen (1771-1858) as a utopian, socialist, social reformer of the 19th century. Owen's thoughts on the need to restructure the entire society based on the formation of productive associations. The inevitability of the replacement of capitalism by a new society in the works of the scientist.

article, added 05/11/2009

The concept and characteristics of corporate social responsibility, its external and internal sources. Realization of the interests of the company (corporation) by ensuring social development its team and the company’s active participation in the development of society.

abstract, added 05/25/2016

History of the study of mass consciousness, specific and interesting examples its formation. The problem of studying mass consciousness in sociological science. Two main levels of scientific knowledge: empirical and theoretical. Methods of analysis and synthesis.

Slide 1

Ethics of science - the fate of great discoveries Author: student of the 9th "B" class Alex Popov Supervisor: chemistry teacher Shelukhanova Irina Nikolaevna State Educational Institution Education Center 1423, South-Eastern Administrative District, Moscow, 2011.

Slide 2

Abstract Topic: “The ethics of science is the fate of great discoveries.” Author: student of class 9 “B” Alex Popov Supervisor: chemistry teacher Irina Nikolaevna Shelukhanova Purpose of the work: to study the problem of correlation moral choice and social responsibility of a scientist. Objectives: 1. Assess the scientific and social activities of Fritz Haber and Nikolai Dmitrievich Zelinsky. 2. Familiarize yourself with the moral position of scientists regarding discoveries that pose a threat to the survival of humanity. 3. Draw attention to the problem of increasing social responsibility and moral choice of a scientist. Hypothesis: first of all, moral criteria should play a major role in the life of a scientist. If humanity does not make a choice in favor of moral principles, it will destroy itself. Methods: comparison analysis, induction, deduction, observation. The relevance of the work lies in the fact that the important issue of the scientist’s social responsibility for his inventions is being considered. Namely, the development of our technical civilization requires real professionals in their field. But, if you ignore their personal qualities and deny morality, then the self-destruction of not only the human person, but also the entire civilization is quite possible. Ignoring psychology and moral education in the training of specialists leads to a continuous increase in the number and scale of man-made disasters. Practical orientation: the work can be used in social studies, history, chemistry, biology lessons, as well as in extracurricular activities.

Slide 3

Each of the historical eras - from distant ones to those closer to our time - gives birth to its own genius, whose invention in some way changes the course of history. But isn't the first most successful discovery the “beginning of the end” in a long series of events? Is it possible to prohibit a genius from inventing? XX–XXI centuries - the apotheosis of human military ingenuity. Will this end? Will reason prevail? "We did the devil's work." Robert Oppenheimer R. Oppenheimer

Slide 4

Probably, at all times there was no person who was so directly (or indirectly) to blame for the death of millions of people as Fritz Haber. He was called the "father of German chemical weapons." “He strangled thousands and saved millions from starvation.” He's a genius, like you and me. But genius and villainy are two incompatible things. Is not it? “Mozart and Salieri” A.S. Pushkin

Slide 5

On April 22, 1915, German troops released about 180 tons of chlorine from cylinders in 5 minutes. On a 6 km wide front in the Ypres River valley, about 15 thousand people were hit, of which 5 thousand were immediately killed. The Anglo-French front was destroyed in this sector. The German command did not expect such a terrible effect and did not take advantage of the real chance of victory in the battle.

Slide 6

It was Fritz Haber who created the infamous gas, Zyklon B, originally developed as a pesticide but then used as a means for the “Final Solution of the Jewish Question.” At the trial against the manager of the Degesch company, which produced Zyklon B, it was calculated that 4 kilograms of Zyklon B was enough to kill 1000 people.

Slide 7

For the first time, Zyklon B was used for mass extermination of people in September 1941 in the Auschwitz extermination camp on the initiative of the first deputy commandant of the camp, Karl Fritzsch, on 600 Soviet prisoners of war and 250 other prisoners. Camp commandant Rudolf Hoess approved Fritzsch's initiative, and subsequently it was in Auschwitz that this gas was used to kill people in gas chambers. The main gate of the Auschwitz camp.

Slide 8

Type of ammonia molecule. However, at the same time, Fritz Haber saved humanity from nitrogen starvation. He came up with a way to synthesize ammonia from hydrogen and atmospheric air. Haber's invention dramatically increased agricultural production throughout the world. Thanks to this discovery, Germany was able to continue the war, since it began to produce saltpeter from ammonia, which it had previously imported from Chile.

Slide 9

Now let’s consider the fate of the discovery of another genius - the great Russian chemist N.D. Zelinsky. We are talking about his creation of a coal gas mask, which he himself, the author of over 700 scientific works and inventions, considered the best and most important work of his life.

Slide 10

Anticipating the growing danger at the height of the First World War confronted N.D. Zelinsky, as a Russian patriot and outstanding natural scientist, with a fundamentally new task. But it had to be resolved very quickly. “Where can we look for protection, an antidote?” - the scientist asked himself. And here Nikolai Dmitrievich came to a saving decision: to find protection in Nature itself. This method of converting ordinary charcoal into Activated carbon and was the essence of N.D. Zelinsky’s discovery, not to mention the very idea of using coal in the fight against poisonous gases.

Slide 11

Academician A.D. Sakharov is one of the creators of the hydrogen bomb (1953) in the USSR. Since the late 50s. actively advocated for an end to nuclear weapons testing. Since the late 60s. one of the leaders of the human rights movement. In his work “Reflections on Progress, Peaceful Coexistence and Intellectual Freedom” (1968), Sakharov examined the threats to humanity associated with its disunity and the confrontation between the socialist and capitalist systems.

Slide 12

Academician P.L. Kapitsa refused to participate in the creation of the Soviet atomic bomb, for which in 1945 he was fired from his post as director of the Institute of Physical Problems of the USSR Academy of Sciences, which he created, and was under house arrest for eight years. He was deprived of the opportunity to communicate with his colleagues from other research institutes. I studied physics at the dacha with my son S.P. Kapitsa.

Slide 13

“I don’t know with what weapons the Third will be fought World War, but it is quite obvious that the fourth is only with sticks and stones.” Albert Einstein After the explosions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a horrified Einstein sent a telegram to major businessmen banning the use of nuclear weapons. But it was already too late...

Slide 14

The Fukushima reactors were manufactured according to designs by General Electric. During their design in the 70s, a conflict arose among a group of American engineers: three engineers signed a memo stating that the reactor was designed incorrectly, technically illiterate and dangerous. General Electric ignored the dissenting opinion of the engineers, as a result of which the nuclear scientists resigned without signing the “Version 1c” drawing. And General Electric built a nuclear power plant in Japan based on a virtually emergency project. Fukushima I nuclear power plant accident

Slide 15

“Why should we hate each other? We are all at the same time, carried away by the same planet, we are the crew of one ship. It’s good when something new, more perfect, is born in a dispute between different civilizations, but it’s monstrous when they devour each other.” A. de Saint-Exupery People have produced and created so much that they can no longer cope with this wealth. Currently, it is necessary to reduce the processes of creation and switch to the processes of saving planet Earth. And it becomes obvious that scientists are becoming more personally responsible for their actions and their immediate and possible future results.

Slide 16

List of references 1. “Educate a scientist” Zagorsky Vyacheslav Viktorovich - Education: researched in the world, 2003 2. Kulikov V.A. “The history of weapons and weapons of peoples and states from ancient times to the present day.” - Ufa: Eastern University, 2003. - 764 p. 3. Novikov V.P. “Weapons of the Third World War” / Ed. V.P. Salnikova. – St. Petersburg: Lan, 2001. – 356 p. 4. Rastorguev S. “Formula of information war.”: - M.: White Alva, 2005. – 96 p. 5. Ablesimov N.E. "A 154 Concepts modern natural science: Textbook. manual for conducting seminars” / N.E. Ablesimov. – Khabarovsk: Publishing house DVGUPS, 2005. – 89 p. 6. Antoine de Saint-Exupery “The Little Prince” - Moscow 1982 7. Wikipedia website

Among the areas of scientific knowledge in which the issues of social responsibility of a scientist and the moral and ethical assessment of his activities are especially acutely and intensely discussed, a special place is occupied by genetic engineering, biotechnology, biomedical and human genetic research, all of which are quite closely related to each other.

Responsibility of scientists to society for the development of weapons of mass destruction

On April 23, 1957, the famous scientist, Nobel Prize laureate, physician and philosopher A. Schweitzer drew public attention in an address broadcast by Norwegian Radio to the genetic and other consequences of ongoing nuclear weapons testing. Joliot-Curie supported this appeal, emphasizing the urgent need to stop test explosions of nuclear weapons. This appeal received a positive response from scientists in many countries. Soviet scientists also categorically stated that they supported the prohibition of nuclear weapons and demanded the conclusion of an agreement between countries on the immediate cessation of testing of atomic and hydrogen bombs, believing that any nuclear war, wherever it occurred, would necessarily turn into a general war with dire consequences for humanity.

Responsibility of scientists for developments in the field of genetic engineering and cloning.

Genetic engineering has opened up prospects for the construction of new biological organisms - transgenic plants and animals with pre-planned properties. The study of the human genome is also of great importance.

The importance of awareness of the responsibility of scientists involved in cloning cannot be underestimated either. Recently, many predictions, wishes, guesses and fantasies about the cloning of living organisms have been spreading in the media. The discussion of the possibility of human cloning gives particular urgency to these discussions. Of interest are the technological, ethical, philosophical, legal, religious, and psychological aspects of this problem, as well as the consequences that may arise when implementing this method of human reproduction.

Responsibility of a scientist's work to society.

Scientists are usually called people professionally engaged in scientific activities, the “production” of scientific knowledge. Of course, not only scientists themselves are involved in the field of science. They are helped and served by laboratory assistants, administrators, engineers, etc. People of many professions are directly related to this special type of production. It is impossible to imagine modern science without scientific journals, almanacs, reference books, etc., which are edited, published, and designed with drawings, diagrams, and drawings. Important role in development modern science played by the media, which popularize its achievements, cover scientific problems etc. Nevertheless, the field of science cannot exist and develop without scientists.

From history we are familiar with the names of sages, talented scientists obsessed with finding answers to complex questions. Many of them were ready to give their lives for the sake of truth. One can at least recall the fate of Socrates or Giordano Bruno.

Already in Ancient Greece, the legendary Academy of Athens was a recognized scientific center philosophical school, founded by the philosopher Plato in the Academa Grove. Platop’s students gathered here for conversations, debates, and reading reports on various fields of knowledge. A library was also organized here - a repository of books and manuscripts.

Later, the word “academy” began to refer to associations of scientists. Science is not only a special system of knowledge, but also a system of organizations and institutions in which science is created. Gone are the days of solitary scientists who, in the quiet of solitude, were busy searching for the “philosopher’s stone.” Specialized scientific institutions gradually emerged. At first they were universities, then laboratories, institutes, academies, and later scientific centers and even entire cities. Scientific institutions create an entire infrastructure of libraries, museums, testing stations, botanical gardens and so on.

Data. Russian Academy Sciences was established by order of Emperor Peter I by Decree of the Government Senate of January 28 (February 8), 1724 ᴦ. It was recreated by Presidential Decree Russian Federation dated November 21, 1991 ᴦ. as the highest scientific institution in Russia. And at present, the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAN) includes 9 departments (in areas of science) and 3 regional departments, as well as 14 regional scientific centers. In addition to the Russian Academy of Sciences, there are other state academies in our country, including the Academy of Medical Sciences, the Academy of Education, and the Academy of Agricultural Sciences. Scientific research is carried out not only by scientists of the Academy, but also by industry research institutes, as well as scientific teams of higher educational institutions. This is very important for the formation of specialists for future research, since scientists engaged in the search for science.1 pass on to their students not only knowledge, but also research skills and a desire for research.

Modern science goes beyond the boundaries of individual countries, and associations of scientists often include specialists in a certain field of knowledge from different countries. They communicate using modern means of communication and meet at international conferences, congresses, and symposiums. Scientists who have achieved outstanding results receive international awards. The most famous of them is the Nobel Prize.

Among our compatriots the Nobel Prize for scientific achievements awarded: Ivan Petrovich Pavlov, Ilya Ilyich Mechnikov, Nikolai Nikolaevich Semenov, Pavel Alekseevich Cherenkov, Ilya Mikhailovich Frank; Igor Evgenievich Gamm, Lev Davidovich Landau, Nikolai Gennadievich Basov, Alexander Mikhailovich Prokhorov, Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov, Leonid Vitalievich Kantorovich, Pyotr Leonidovich Kapitsa, Zhores Ivanovich Alferov, Vitaly Lazarevich Ginzburg, Alexey Alekseevich Abrikosov.

Moral principles of the work of a scientist.

Real scientists are not just educated and talented people who have achieved success in scientific research. Most of them are people with high moral principles.

At all times, the community of scientists has rejected plagiarism - the appropriation of other people's ideas. Scrupulous adherence to the truth, honesty before oneself and others distinguish real scientists. With regard to the honor of their name, most scientists are very demanding; they are not indifferent to how the truth is obtained.

One of the most important ethical issues facing scientists is the consequences of their work. Repeatedly well-known scientists have made public statements in connection with their concern about the possible use of spiders' achievements for inhumane purposes.

(work on the document for the lecture, see appendix)

The increasing role of modern science. The modern organization of scientific research differs markedly from that adopted in the 17th century. and even in the 20th century. Initially, science was limited to the search for true knowledge, and philosophy helped to understand and explain the structure of the world as a whole. It took science a lot of time to assert the right to shape a worldview and to establish a kind of delimitation of influence with religion. Today, without scientific ideas, the existence of spiritual culture is impossible.

Industrial society demanded that science have a closer connection with production and focus on the development of technical ideas. In turn, science received from production a powerful impetus for development in the form of technical equipment. In fact, many research centers began to look for ways to bring their new achievements closer to direct production. The so-called technology parks have become a progressive form of cooperation between science and production.

Today, there are over 50 technology parks operating in 25 regions of the Russian Federation, 25-30% of which are stably functioning structures. The founders of Russian technology parks are universities, research centers, industrial enterprises, non-state firms, authorities, banks, and public organizations. Russia's technology parks host about 1,000 small innovative enterprises (i.e., focused on introducing new technologies); there are about 150 small service enterprises; More than 10,000 new jobs were created. Russian technology parks produce products and provide services to 24 industries and social spheres, including most often in the fields of science, scientific services, ecology, mechanical engineering, fuel, energy, computer science, healthcare and education.