Tatiana Sokolova

Overcoming disciplinary separation, organizing and conducting successful inter- and transdisciplinary research is a growing trend in contemporary scientific practices, which is viewed as a necessary condition for the progress of scientific knowledge, and therefore requires philosophical reflection. If it is the growing scientific specialization that has been considered as a constant identification of the progress of science since the 19th century, it is a disciplinary separation that has become an obstacle for the study of complex objects since the end of the XX century. As an epistemological platform for overcoming disciplinary separation, one can consider historical epistemology in its French version. The classical approach within historical epistemology, proposed by Gaston Bachelard, considers progress as an integral property of scientific knowledge, arising from the very essence of science. Scientific progress is due to the historicity of which, which means a rejection of the interpretation of scientific truths as timeless, absolute and universal. In this article, I discuss (1) disciplinary separation as a philosophical problem; (2) approaches to the conceptualization of scientific progress; and (3) French historical epistemology as a possible philosophical setting for resolving disciplinary separation.

The role of sustainable development in the export intensity of small and medium-size enterprises represents an open research question. We consider sustainable development through the environmental, social, and governance dimensions as well as via firms’ innovative activity indicators. Our objective is to reveal the sustainability determinants of export intensity of SMEs in emerging markets subject to financial constraints, which is one of the major obstacles for SMEs. Our sample is based on the 2018–2020 Business Environment Enterprise Performance Survey data. The Heckman model allows us to reveal the factors relevant for SMEs to gain access to foreign markets under the control of financial constraints specific for SMEs. We also analyze the determinants of the SMEs’ share of direct exports in revenue. Our results demonstrate that innovative activity and corporate social responsibility facilitate entry to foreign markets, while equity concentration is a major deterrent. In particular, we reveal a significant positive effect of research and development investment on export intensity. Our findings highlight the complex nature of the interrelations between the SMEs’ share of direct exports in revenue and ESG consciousness. We find that other significant factors are political links of the top management, the gender composition of production and administrative units, employee training facilities, and ownership structure.

We investigate whether the determinants of small and medium enterprises’ trade credits taken for purchasing fixed assets suffered substantial changes due to the global financial crisis. The geographical focus of this paper covers 18 former Eastern bloc countries. The data sample comprises opinions of the SMEs top managers relative to the trade credit financing. The two-step Heckman procedure is applied to study complexity of the trade credit determinants. We find that before the GFC the equity concentration and inflation have negatively impacted the trade credit while foreign ownership and company’s longevity have had a positive effect. The GFC has changed this complex relationship. We evidence that, after the GFC, equity concentration and state subsidies have a positive effect.

The paper is devoted to the concept of a priori and a priori knowledge within the framework of the classical model of science proposed for conducting research on the history of concepts, and in particular, the concept of “science” by digital humanities [de Jong, Betti, 2010]. In the first part of the article, I refer to the concept of model and (1) consider the classical model of science in terms of its heuristic potential for philosophical (and in particular, epistemological) research, and (2) define the main structural parts of the model for studying the concept a priori. In the second part, I consider the theoretical aspects of the classical model science in the context of a priori functional and historical concepts and the possibility of its adaptation to the analysis of the a priori in the history of science In the third part I propose a possible model for research of a priori in the classical model of science in two aspects: (1) a priori as universal principles underlying all sciences and (2) a priori as a set of propositions for a specific scientific discipline.

The article analyzes the conflict between the “analytic” and “continental” approaches in philosophy on the example of the development of historical epistemology, which can be considered as “French style” in the philosophy of science. The French tradition is especially interesting due to the specificity of the reception of analytic philosophy that took place in it, where analytic philosophy did not receive an institutional form. The phrase “analytic philosophy” was problematized in the French academy in the 1950s and indicates the existence of a number of differences between the two types of philosophizing, as well as the absence of any stable connection between the French and Anglo-Saxon philosophical communities. One of the main reasons of this divide is that the philosophers interested in logical positivism and seeking to acquaint the French philosophical public with its ideas have suddenly passed away. The author’s argumentation is based on the material of historical epistemology in France, which was traditionally associated with the philosophy of science much more than epistemology in other countries. The article considers two approaches to defining the difference between analytic and continental philosophy: theoretical approach and institutional. The author demonstrates the inconsistency of the theoretical approach to the definition of analytic and continental philosophical traditions.

The article is devoted to the analysis of research approaches and attitudes to the study of the a priori in the philosophy of science. In the first part, I outline the basic premises of this study: (a) scientific knowledge as the highest manifestation of rationality; (b) the normative nature of scientific knowledge. In the second part, I turn to the difference in the subject of philosophical research on the history of science – the history of science as a “history of facts” vs the history of science as a history of scientific thought. The third part discusses the main theoretical and technical difficulty associated with changing the subject of research – the possibility of a transition from historical fact to “scientific thought at the time of its birth” (in Helene Metzger terminology). The forth part is devoted to the analysis of the “model approach” (Arianna Betti, Hein van den Berg) in philosophy as a possible way to overcome this difficulty and includes both theoretical and technical aspects of the future direction of research. In conclusion, consequences are drawn about the possibility of using the “model approach” for reconstruction a priori in the history of science as “constitutive elements of scientific knowledge” (David Stump).

The article deals with the phenomenon of French historical epistemology and Gaston Bachelard's role in its theoretical and institutional establishment. It analyses the place of history of sciences in French historical epistemology, which was considered in France as epistemology perse from the beginning of XX century. The article accompanies first Russian translation of Bachelard's lecture "Topicality of the History of Science" and argues that this text represents Bachelardian program for reformation of scientific history as an academic discipline. The importance of this text for French epistemological tradition bases on, firstly, the analysis of methodology of the historical investigation, which subject is a scientific discipline, and secondly, historian's and epistemologist's theoretical approaches.

As an independent philosophical discipline, historical epistemology had been forming in the French Academy from the early 20 century and to its middle developed to the point where it left behind other types of epistemologies, which succeeded to take revenge only in the late 1980s. However, historians and sociologists often consider French historical epistemology as a “marginal” discipline, compared to other areas of philosophical research. The focus of the study is the formation of the French version of historical epistemology as a philosophical discipline in the historical perspective, which includes not only recognized Maîtres of this direction, but also secondary figures associated with the development of this trend of philosophical thought. In the article we will try to demonstrate that historical epistemology, at least genetically, belongs to the general trend in the development of the philosophy of science, formed from the XIX century, and may well claim to be considered a “normal” version of epistemology and/or philosophy of science.

As an independent philosophical discipline, historical epistemology had been forming in the French Academy from the early 20 century and to its middle developed to the point where it left behind other types of epistemologies, which succeeded to take revenge only in the late 1980s. However, historians and sociologists often consider French historical epistemology as a “marginal” discipline, compared to other areas of philosophical research. The focus of the study is the formation of the French version of historical epistemology as a philosophical discipline in the historical perspective, which includes not only recognized Maîtres of this direction, but also secondary figures associated with the development of this trend of philosophical thought. In the article we will try to demonstrate that historical epistemology, at least genetically, belongs to the general trend in the development of the philosophy of science, formed from the XIX century, and may well claim to be considered a “normal” version of epistemology and/or philosophy of science.

The article is the introduction to the Russian translation of the preface and Book I of William Whewell’s classic work “Novum Organon Renovatum”. In his theory for the philosophy of science, Whewell of­fers a conception, which radically differs from a positivist or an inductivist models of science – the most influential doctrines of his time. Presupposing that the scientific activity is impossible without acceptance of a metaphysical doctrine, Whewell goes against the contemporary tendencies in phi­losophy. Nevertheless, eclecticism of his views on certain issues does not allow us to classify him as a representative of any particular philosophical “camp”. In the article, the author analyzes the “a priori” component in the system of the philosophy of science by William Whewell and the influence of Im­manuel Kant’s conception of a priori on it.

The article deals with Russian scientific classifications (GRNTI, VAK) of computer science in comparison with Western scien­tific classifications Fields of Science and Technology (FOS) and Universal Decimal Classification (UDS). The author analyzes the basics and principles of these classifications, identifies their strong and weak points as well as their influence on the devel­opment of computer sciences. She also provides some recom­mendations on adjustments of Russian scientific classifications aiming to make them more flexible and adaptive to the faster scientific and technological development and interdisciplinary cooperation.

The text continues the translation series of William Whewell's (1794-1866) book «The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, founded upon their history» (Book III The Philosophy of the Mechanical Sciences, Chapter VI On the Establishment of the Principles of Statics). The chapter devoted to the establishment of such concepts of statics and dynamics, as equilibrium, measure of statical forces, gravity, oblique forces, and the parallelogram of forces. Whewell substantiates the fundamental principles of mechanics by analogy with the axioms of geometry, but his justification of the necessity of mechanical laws is based on the idea of causality. Translated by A.L. Nikiforov, comments by I.T. Kasavin and T.D. Sokolova.

The new book by Professor David J. Stump explores and develops the theories of the a priori, which are rarely considered in contemporary epistemology and philosophy of science: the theories of pragmatic and functional a priori, proposed in the early XX century by Clarence Irving Lewis and Arthur Pap. The author begins with the analysis of «constitutive elements of science» and Henri Poincare's conventionalism. He consistently and historically examines the approaches towards the theories of the a priori within the philosophy of science in the XX-XXI centuries, and also develops his own original approach to a priori based on the philosophy of science.

The philosophy of logical empiricism has largely determined the direction and the range of problems of the philosophy, which later became known as analytic philosophy. Philosophers of the Vienna Circle and their followers had to dissociate their program from other philosophies predominant in the early twentieth century (particularly from neo-Kantianism and neo-Hegelianism). As a part of this task the revision of the concepts of classical epistemology, including the concept of apriori was carried out. The paper examines how, in the framework of logical empiricism, apriority became identified with analyticity, and discusses alternative theories of the a priori, which resulted of this identification.