Pushkarev Yury Viktorovich, Latuha Olga Aleksandrovna, Pushkareva Elena Aleksandrovna Modern science and education in the knowledge society: philosophical economic, psychological approaches

Polskie Forum Psychologiczne, 2015, tom 20, numer 1, s. 128-133DOI: 10.14656/PFP20150109

MODERN SCIENCE AND EDUCATIONIN THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY: PHILOSOPHICALECONOMICS, PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACHESYury Viktorovich Pushkarev1, Olga Aleksandrovna Latuha2Elena Aleksandrovna Pushkareva11Pedagogical University, Novosibirsk, Russian FederationState Medical University, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation

2

Summary. In the center of author’s attention there is the problem of forminga modern education system in the knowledge society. Education system should beconsidered in a context of a systematic method of approach, the essence of which isthat relatively independent components are considered not separately, but in theirinterconnection, in the system with other components. In the center of the author’sattention there is a fundamental problem of the system interaction between modern science and education in the knowledge society.In the modern world, there is a radical difference between science and traditionalforms of culture – scientific knowledge plays a significant role in solving technical, industrial, and organization management problems. The majority of people’sfields of activity in the society are becoming rationalized and coordinated. Scienceand higher education have the same social functions: the manufacture and transfer of knowledge. Knowledge becomes a basis for the organization of the people,a necessary condition of their joint activity. In the increasing degree, it acquires thesignificance of an integrating factor in social life, substituting traditional forms ofpeople’s association.Key words: Science and higher education, system interaction between modern science and education, social functions, transfer of knowledge, the knowledge society.

IntroductionWhat are the characteristic features of the current state of knowledge as a general area of science and education?The processes of scientific-technical changes led to the formation in the secondhalf of the twentieth century, the so-called information society (Ursul, 1975; Webster, 2004). Information component leaves its mark on all aspects of life, includingthe sphere of science and education (Neimatov, 2002; Leonov, 2004). On what baAdres do korespondencji: Yury Viktorovich Pushkarev, e-mail, pushkarev73@mail.ru Olga Aleksandrovna Latuha, e-mail, latuha@mail.rustrona 128

sis is the company called “news”? asks Zamyshlyaev: “The exchange of information between people has always existed. The phases of information exchange inthe historical process are the following: verbal, written, book, computer. <...> Thetotality of the processing of any information by technical means, obviously, is theFoundation of the information society. And widely-used term “Informatization”,“computing” acknowledge the dependence of the contained concepts on the degreeof development of technical, material media” (Zamyshlyaev, 2005, p. 90). In otherwords, the emergence of the concept of “information society” is associated primarily with the impact of modern information technology on the development of thesocial organization of society. The term information society (according to Webster,2004; Levin, 2004; Mayer, 2012) refers to a society in which the majority of citizensparticipate in the process of creating, collecting, storing, processing, or distributinginformation.

The idea of information societyThe concept of information society is fairly well developed, but continues tobe filled with new content in connection with the advent of all the new features ofthis civilization. The beginning of formation of the information society is considered to be the statistical report, which appeared in the late 1950s, the Departmentof Commerce of USA, showing that for the first time in the history of the number of employees exceeded the number of production workers. The new state ofsocial development was characterized as “post-industrial” (D. Bell), “technology”(J.P. Grant), “programmable” (A. Touraine), “postbourgeois” (J. Lithium), “postpatriarchal” (Q. Risman), “the third wave”, “superindustrial” (O. Toffler), “post-capitalist” (R. Dahrendorf and others). In the works of such authors as D. Bell, O. Toffler,E. Masuda, M. Castells, P. Drucker and other researchers optimistic prospects forhuman development were associated with the recognition of the increasing role oftheoretical knowledge, information and services (in the broad sense) in the modernworld (Masuda, 1981, 2006; Drucker, 1993, 1993a; Castells, 1997, 1997a, 2000, 2001,2004; Stern, 2001; The Information Society, 2014).Speaking about the knowledge society, first and foremost, as a rule, refers tothe importance of scientific and scientific and technical expertise for all aspects ofthe transformation of social life (Sycheva, 1984; Titova, Latuha, 2007; Hoffmann,2008).Let us note that the modern knowledge of mankind represents a huge file of information which is difficult to comprehend in detail and estimate expertly. In mostcases, in relation to any separate person, information of various kinds turns out tobe not only superfluous, but also, in its certain part, harmful and dangerous. Eachconcrete person has found him (or her)self among the immense amount of information related to him(or her). In other words, no single person today can master theentire corpus of social information. As a result, differentiation and specialization ofknowledge is only amplifying.More and more, even the experts from close areas speak different scientificlanguages and cease to understand each other. In other words, the total amount of

information and knowledge today accrues like an avalanche and can be characterized as an information explosion.The phenomenon of social information at the beginning of the third millennium turns out to be an extremely complex one and possessing a set of specialcharacteristics (Inozemtsev, 1999; Liberska, Farnicka, 2014). This complexity andpolysemy of information have given the reason to a number of scientists to call themodern society “information society” (Pryanikov, 2006).Knowledge is considered by modern scientists more and more broadly: notonly in historical culturological and research-on-science aspects, but also as themain intellectual base of the newest, innovative technologies of the XXI century –the technologies of humanitarian, social, and technological directions (Gaponenko,Orlova, 2008; Latuha, Pushkarev, 2013; Latuha, Pushkareva, 2014).Firstly, knowledge is the abilities, skills, and experience received by means ofstudy or practical usage of the activity algorithms; secondly, it is the informationimportant for the cognitive and practical activities; thirdly, it is a special gnoseological unit of the attitude of the person to the real world.What is the correlation between the educational and scientific knowledge? Bythe end of the second millennium of our era, there has been formed a disciplinarystructure of knowledge between science and education (Lednev, 2002; Leonov,2004). Furthermore, the disciplinary organization of educational knowledge is anapproximate copy and analogue of the disciplinary structure of science.Both the disciplinary structure of educational knowledge and the educationcontents are subjects to the principle of conformity with the science structure andcontents (Semenov, Semenov, Jurevich, 2004). As a result, the knowledge of themodern person is sort of separated into pieces; there is no integral knowledge inperson’s mind. Moreover, by the conformity principle, the educational knowledgealways lags behind the scientific one.This situation has been worrying scientists and philosophers for a long time.It is aggravated by the fact that there is no unity and no scientific disciplines themselves (Egorov, 1997). In science, there takes place continuous “splitting” of theoriesand their differentiation.

ConclusionObjectively, the division into disciplines in science is caused by a hierarchicalstructure of material and spiritual realities, in other words, of the very objects ofscience. The main reasons causing the difference in the growth rate of knowledgeand the scientific and educational information are the following.Firstly, any subsequent generation of people cannot, at the existing ways oftraining, master the volume of knowledge and information, exceeding psycho-physical and physiological capabilities even of the most gifted individuals (but they arelimited in their capabilities too).Secondly, the physical time of training has an upper limit and should be, inprinciple, constant for each category of pupils or even decreasing.

Thirdly, there are no special technologies of grasping the entire volume ofknowledge by each individual (Segal, 2014; Sudorgina, Thurley, Pushkareva, 2014).The general and group technologies (techniques) are those that are working.What knowledge can and should become the basis of modern science and education? The academic community as a decisive factor of modern integration ofscientific and educational knowledge emphasizes its system qualities. At the givenstage of its historical development, the mankind masters science in an essentiallynew way and makes its achievements serve its interests, its practice of industry andmanagement, and development of social and spiritual life of the society.Moreover, this universality in science application and “pragmatization” of thescientific knowledge demand nowadays the development and application of newmethodological means of the appropriate level. Those are the urgent needs of development of the complex scientific and practical knowledge.ReferencesBlauberg, I.V., Yudin, E.G. (1973). Formation and the essence of a systematic approach.Moscow, Nauka Publ., 270 p. (In Russian).Castells, M. (1997). The Power of Identity. Vol. II of The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. Oxford, 584 p.Castells, M. (1997a). The Rise of the Network Society, With a New Preface. Vol. I: TheInformation Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. Oxford, 461 p.Castells, M. (2000). The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. Moscow, HSEPubl., 468 p. (In Russian).Castells, M. (2001). The Internet Galaxy. Reflections on the Internet, Business and Society.Oxford UP, 304 p.Castells, M. (2004). Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, business and society.Yekaterinburg, U-Factoria Publ. (In Russian).Drucker, P.F. (1993). Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practice and Principles. 1-stHarper Business ed., N.Y., Harper Business Publ., 293 p.Drucker, P.F. (1993a). Post-capitalist Society. N.Y., Harper Business Publ.Egorov, Yu. L. (1997). Systems principle: the nature and function in the knowledge. Moscow, Exceedingly Publ., 175 p. (In Russian).Gaponenko, A.L., Orlova, T.M. (2008). Knowledge Management. How to turn knowledgeinto capital. Moscow, Eksmo Publ., 400 p. (In Russian).Hoffmann, A.B. (ed.) (2008). Traditions and innovations in modern Russia: the sociological analysis of interaction and dynamics. Moscow, 543 p. (In Russian).Il’inskii, I.M. (2002). Educational Revolution. Moscow, Moscow Humanitarian-SocialAcademy Publ., 592 p. (In Russian).Inozemtsev, V.L. (1999). Broken Civilization: Preexisting conditions and opportunitiesin post-economic consequences of the revolution. Moscow, pp. 39-41. (In Russian).Knyazev, N.A. (2008). Philosophical problems of essence and existence sciences. Monograph. Krasnoyarsk, Siberian State Aerocosmic University Publ., 270 p. (In Russian).

Kostyuk, V.N. (1997). Information as a social and economic resource. Moscow, MagistrPubl., 48 p. (In Russian).Latuha, O.A., Pushkarev, Y.V. (2012). Economic development of modern societyand the problem of innovation staff training. Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 5, 50-56 (In Russian).Latuha, O.A., Pushkareva, E.A. (2014). Business knowledge society: scientific andeducational development priorities (overview of the problem). Novosibirsk StatePedagogical University Bulletin, 5, 99-110, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15293/22263365.1405.11Latuha, O.A., Pushkarev, Yu.V. (2013). Role of higher educational institutions increation of innovations. Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 3 (13),66-72 (In Russian).Lednev, B.C. (2002). Science education. Moscow, 120 p.Leonov, A.M. (2004). Science of complexity in the postmodern era. Monograph. Yakutsk,Yakutsk University Publ., 560 p. (In Russian).Levin, A.I. (2004). Sustainable development and the information society: trends,challenges proto-insufficiencies. Philosophical sciences, 9, 5-16 (In Russian).Liberska, H., Farnicka, M. (2014). Processes which support the creation of an environment conducive to learning. Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin,4, 7-18, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15293/2226-3365.1404.01Masuda, Y. (1981). The Information Society: as Post-Industrial Society. World FutureSociety. Washington, DC: World Future Society.Masuda, Y. (2006). Information society as post-industrial society. Moscow, 587 p. (InRussian).Mayer, B.O. (2012). Technology Platform “Education”: ontological analysis. Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 2 (6), 36-47 (In Russian).Neimatov, Y.M. (2002). Education in the XXI Century: Trends and Forecasts. Moscow,Algo-rhythm Publ., 480 p. (In Russian).Pryanikov, B.P. (2006). Methodology theories of labor and capital: a retrospective of thenew time and the prospect of the knowledge economy. Monograph. Chelyabinsk,SUSU Publ., 224 p. (In Russian).Pushkarev, Y.V., Pushkareva, E.A. (2012). Development of education in the newsystem of values of global society. Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 4, 20-25 (In Russian).Segal, B.A. (2014). Polysemy of reorganizations of the higher school. Novosibirsk StatePedagogical University Bulletin, 2, 50-61, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15293/22263365.1402.05Semenov, E.V., Semenov, N.N., Jurevich, A.V. (eds.) (2004). Science in Russia: currentstatus and strategy for recovery. Series “Research reports”. Moscow, Logos Publ.,384 p. (In Russian).Stern, N. (2001). The World of Knowledge. Accessed, http: //filosof.historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000958/st000.shtml) (Available at: 15.08.14).

Sudorgina, L.V., Thurley, R., Pushkareva, E.A. (2014). Educational system of modern
school (the sight from Russia and the Great Britain). Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 2, 7-16, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15293/2226-3365.1402.01
Sycheva, L.S. (1984). Modern processes of formation of Sciences: the experience of empirical research. Novosibirsk, 160 p. (In Russian).
The Information Society. The Knowledge Society. Accessed, http: //vecam.org (Available
at: 15.08.14).
Titova, V.A., Latuha, O.A. (2007). Modern aspects of innovation governance of higher education institutions. Management in Russia and abroad, 6, 42-52 (In Russian).
Ursul, A.D. (1975). The problem of information in modern science. Moscow, Nauka
Publ., 386 p. (In Russian).
Webster, F. (2002). Theories of the Information Society. Second Edition. L., Routledge.
Webster, F. (2004). Theories of the Information Society. (Ed.) M.V. Arapova, N.V. Malykhina, E.L. Vartanova. Moscow, Aspect Press Publ., 400 p. (In Russian).
Zamyshlyaev, V.I. (2005). Humanities meanings Information Society. Philosophy of
Education, 1, 85-92 (In Russian).