Homo Academicus as a Bearer of Responsibility

Cover Page

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

The authors explore the problem of scientists’ and scholars’ responsibility for the emergence, development, achievements, and failures of the modern world-system. They hypothesize that this problem of homo academicus (understood as a collective subject) responsibility can be systematically researched in the context of scientists’ and scholars’ activities as personal social and anthropological practices concerned with re-pro-ducing the social. This article follows E. Levinas’s idea that every form of subjectivity a priori acts as a form of responsibility, while also using J. Caputo’s concept of “the end of ethics”, reframing it as a strategy of “open-ended responsibility” in which the structure and contents of responsibility always have the potential to be reconsidered. Homo academicus is one of the subjects of Modernity; it is intimately related to the production of the social. Scientists and scholars as experts, idea generators, consultants, tenured professors etc. take part in and are responsible (alongside other subjects of Modernity) for the production of images of the human being (homo economicus, politicus, religiosus etc.). They themselves act within one of those images — homo academicus. In general, since the beginning of the twentieth century the social sciences and the humanities have gone from the universal rationality of M. Weber to the idea of methodologies with limited responsibility of V. Rozin. Through our study of the existential nature of scientific activity, we come to the conclusion that scientific cognition does not just legitimize social being and point at its problems; it also establishes hope for a better way of being where there's a place for truth, values of freedom, responsibility, friendship, creativity.

About the authors

Oleg D. Agapov

Kazan Innovation University named after V.G. Timiryasova

42 Moskovskaya Str., Kazan 420111, Russian Federation

Igor O. Agapov

Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University

35 Kremlevskaya Str., Kazan 420111, Russian Federation

References

  1. Ингарден Р. Книжечка о человеке / пер. с нем. Е.С. Твердисловой. М.: Изд-во Московского ун-та, 2010.
  2. Касавин И.Т. Наука как политический субъект // Социол. исслед. 2020. № 7. С. 2–12.
  3. Карсавин Л.П. Философия истории. СПб.: АО «Комплект», 1993.
  4. Лаваль К. Человек экономический: Эссе о происхождении неолиберализма / пер. с нем. С. Рындина. М.: Новое лит. обозрение, 2010.
  5. Левинас Э. Время и Другой / пер. с фр. А.В. Парибка. СПб: Высшая религиозно-философская школа, 1998.
  6. Левинас Э. Избранное: Трудная свобода: пер. с франц. М.: РОССПЭН, 2004.
  7. Левицкий В.С. Конкуренция альтернативных проектов цивилизационного развития и роль институтов онтологической ответственности // Актуальные проблемы Европы. 2020. № 1. С. 32–45.
  8. Левицкий В.С. Особенности структуры и процессов конструирования социальной реальности модерна: автореф. дис. … д-ра филос. наук. Москва, 2022.
  9. Мамардашвили М.К. Стрела познания: Набросок естественноисторической гносеологии. М.: Школа «Языки русской культуры», 1997.
  10. Розин В.М. Введение в схемологию: Схемы в философии, культуре, науке, проектировании. М.: Либроком, 2011.
  11. Тишнер Ю. Избранное: Мышление в категориях ценности. М.: РОССПЭН, 2005.
  12. Узланер Д. Постсекулярный поворот: Как мыслить о религии в XXI веке. М.: Изд-во Ин-та Гайдара, 2020.
  13. Caputo J.D. The End of Ethics. The Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory, ed. by H. LaFollette. Oxford: Blackwell Publ., 2000.
  14. Chomsky N. Responsibility of Intellectuals. The New York Review of Books. 1967. Febr., 23. URL: https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1967/02/23/a-special-supplement-the-responsibility-of-intelle/ (date of access: 09.02.2023).
  15. Rorty R. The Historiography of Philosophy: Four Genres. Philosophy in History. Essays in the Historiography of Philosophy, ed. by R. Rorty, J.B. Schneewind, Q. Skinner. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. P. 49–76.

Copyright (c) 2023 Russian Academy of Sciences

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies