
	Philosophy and Culture Reference: Oleynikov Yu.V. The conceptual fruitlessness of social sciences // Philosophy and Culture. 2016. № 9. P. 1245-1252. URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=68200 Oleynikov Yu.V. The conceptual fruitlessness of social sciences Abstract: At the present stage, when the development of material means of transformation of the surrounding world substantiates the possibilities of the antithetical scenarios of evolution of the planetary socio-natural Universe, the extreme relevance gain the forecasting and practical functions of social sciences, which are called to adequately reflect the changes that take place in society, as well as aim at the positive solution of the new drastically new issues arising before them. The modern social sciences, remaining in the grip of the old-fashioned worldview paradigm, are unable to handle this task. Determination of the conceptual fruitlessness of social sciences should encourage the overcoming of their stagnation. The scientific, historical-philosophical, and specific-historical methods of analysis of conception and development of the Russian philosophy and social sciences in Russia, as well as methodology of paradigm shift of Thomas Kuhn, allow defining the actual reasons of the conceptual fruitlessness of socio-humanitarian sciences that take their roots in the uncritical borrowing of the Western theories of social development, organization of the Russian science and education, and their ideological bias and niche specialization of the social scientists. The sensory-visual change of the human place and role in being of the planetary socio-natural Universe justifies the crucial need for the drastic transformation of the dominant worldview paradigm, which will inevitably lead to the qualitative reformation of the entire combination of the paradigm concepts of social sciences, as well as contribute into their development in a completely new direction for the purpose of achieving the practical goal of the limitless development of a human in space and time. Keywords: ideology, development, creativity, education, science, paradigm, worldview, philosophy, expertise, denial This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here . References 1. Kasavin I.T. Sotsial'naya epistemologiya. Fundamental'nye i prikladnye problemy. – M.: Al'fa-M, 2013. – S. 467. 2. Oleynikov Yu.V. Stanovlenie novoy mirovozzrencheskoy paradigmy //Filosofskie nauki, 2015. № 10. – S. 53-60. 3. Oleynikov Yu.V., Borzova T.V. Ekologicheskoe vzaimodeystvie obshchestva s prirodoy (filosofskiy analiz). – M.: Izd-vo RGSU. – 460 s. 4. Panchin A. Summa biotekhnologii. Rukovodstvo po bor'be s mifami o geneticheskoy modifikatsii rasteniy, zhivotnykh i lyudey. – M.: Izd-vo AST: CORPUS, 2016. – 432 s. 5. Boyarintsev V.I. AntiEynshteyn. Glavnyy mif XX veka. – M.: Yauza, 2005.-320 s. 6. Krylova I.A. Nuzhno li reformirovat' RAN – «mozgovoy tsentr strany» /Filosofskie nauki. 2015. №4. – S. 21-31. 7. K. Marks, F. Engel's Sobr. soch. v 50 t. T. 1.-M., 1954.-S. 77. 8. Feyerabend P. Nauka v svobodnom obshchestve. – M.: AST, 2010. – S. 128, 198. 9. Il'enkov E. V., Korovikov V. Strasti po tezisam o predmete filosofii (1954 — 1955) /Avt.-sost. E.Illesh.-M.: «Kanon +» ROOI «Reabilitatsiya», 2016.-272 s. 10. Pozdnyakov E.A. Priroda i sushchnost' cheloveka (mysli mizantropa i obskuranta). – M.: Boslen. 2011. – S. 583. 11. Feyerabend P. Kak zashchitit' obshchestvo ot nauki //Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki. T. 3. № 1. 2015. – S. 219. 12. Fromm E. Velichie i ogranichennost' teorii Freyda /Per. s angl. A.V. Aleksandrovoy. – M.: AST: Astrel': Poligrafizdat, 2012. – S. 9-10. 13. Klyagin N.V. Sovremennaya antropologiya. – M.: Logos, 2014. – S. 188, 51. 14. Leotar Zh.-F. Sostoyanie postmoderna /Per. s frants. N.A. Shmatko. – SPb: Aleteyya, 1998. – S. 146. 15. Feyerabend P. Izbrannye trudy po metodologii nauki /Per. s ang. i nem. A.L. Nikiforova /obshch. red. I.S. Narskogo. – M.: Progress, 1986. – S. 499. 16. Ivin A.A. Vvedenie v filosofiyu istorii. – M.: Gumanist. Izd. Tsentr VLADOS, 1997. – S. 68, 113, 139, 192; 17. Karpov A.O. Obrazovatel'nyy institut, vlast' i obshchestvo v epokhu rosta kul'tury znaniy. – SPb.: Aleteyya, 2013. – S. 132. 18. Gegel' G.V.F. Filosofiya prava /Per. s nem. Red. i sost. D.A. Kerimov i V.S. Narsesyants. – M.: Mysl', 1990. – S. 56. 19. Atsyukovskiy V.A., Burkovich D.A. Nauku spasut diletanty. – M.: Izd-vo «Petit», 2007. – 267 s. 20. Monten' M. Opaty. Izbrannye glavy. – M.: Pravda, 1991. – S. 106. 21. Kamyu A. Zapiski buntarya. – M.: Astrel', 2011. – S. 98. 22. Vuds A., Grant T. Buntuyushchiy razum: Marksistskaya filosofiya i sovremennaya nauka /Per. s angl. Yu.V. Zhuliy. – M.: «Kanon+» ROOI «Reabilitatsiya», 2015. – S. 491. 23. Shpet G.G. Ocherk razvitiya russkoy filosofii //Shpet G.G. Sochineniya. – M.: Izd-vo «Pravda», 1989 . – S. 48-52. 24. Kara-Murza S.G. Krizisnoe obshchestvovedenie. V 2-kh chastyakh. – M.: Nauchnyy ekspert, 2012. Ch.1 – 464 s., Ch.2 – 384 s.

Journals

Books

Oleynikov Yu.V. The conceptual fruitlessness of social sciences