Open Science and Humanism: Decolonization of Knowledge and Fractality of Identities
Yurii Mielkov
Institute of Higher Education of the National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine
uka7777@gmail.com
Abstract
The paper is dedicated to philosophical analysis of the value foundations of the Open Science concept and its link to the more general concept of humanism, as the means for building up the common knowledge of humanity while still not sacrificing the diversity of existing cultures and traditions. The philosophical methods used in the investigation include dialectics and post-non-classical approach as it is argued that solving the problem of the coexistence of humans and human cultures and enabling the openness of human knowledge requires understanding the dialectical relation of unity and plurality. It is argued that openness as a major feature of contemporary scientific knowledge corresponds to both the classical principles of ethos of science – first of all, to universalism – and to the new trends in research and education that emerged thanks to the development of information technologies. Openness is shown to be a characteristic of a community that does not put its own private or corporate goals and values above the common human values – Open Science is thus closely linked with the idea of humanism. It is shown that at the same time such universalism is not opposed by, but rather presupposes decolonization of knowledge, as the alternative, local, traditional forms of knowledge augment universal knowledge of science based on rational inquiry rather than replace it. Human knowledge, as well as human culture and human identities in general, are argued to be fractal phenomena: diversity of alternative forms of knowledge, cultures, languages, world views etc. is in no way something that opposes the unity of humanity and vice versa, and that is a necessary way to achieve mutual respect, mutual recognition and mutual understanding of the humans.
Keywords
open science, values of universalism, humanism, fractality of identities
References
Amsterdam Call for Action on Open
Science (2016). Retrieved from
https://www.ouvrirlascience.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Amsterdam-call-for-action-on-open-science.pdf
Dewey, J. (2016). Democracy
and Education. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New York:
The MacMillan Company.
Dijk, W. V., Schatschneider, C., & Hart, S.
A. (2021). Open Science in Education Sciences. Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 54(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219420945267
Drakulić, S. (1993). The Balkan Express: Fragments from the Other
Side of War. New York: W.W.Norton & Co.
Eco, U. (1995). Ur-Fascism. The
New York Review of books, June 22. Retrieved from https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
Fecher, B., & Friesike, S. (2014). Open
Science: One Term, Five Schools of Thought. In S. Bartling & S. Friesike
(Eds.), Opening Science (pp. 17–47). Cham: Springer International
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_2
Fuchs,
C. (2022). Digital humanism: A philosophy for 21st century digital society
(First edition). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing.
IHEU Bylaws (2009). International Humanist and Ethical Union. Retrieved from
https://web.archive.org/web/20130117101233/http://iheu.org/bylaws
Krymskiy, S. B. (2001). The Civilizational Status of Globalization.
Praktychna Filosofia, 2(3), 133–138. [In Russian]
Mandelbrot, B. (1967). How Long Is the Coast
of Britain? Statistical Self-Similarity and Fractional Dimension. Science, New Series, 156(3775), 636–638.
Merton, R. (1973). The Normative Structure of
Science. Merton, R. The Sociology of
Science. Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago; London: The
University of Chicago Press, pp. 267–278.
Mielkov, Y. (2021). The Notion
of ‘Open Science’: its Values and Meaning for the Higher Education System.
Philosophy of Education, 27(2),
8-23. https://doi.org/10.31874/2309-1606-2021-27-2-1
Mielkov, Y., Tolstoukhov, A., Parapan, I. (2016). The Many-Faced
Democracy. Saarbrücken: Lambert Academic Publishing.
Stepin, V. S. (2005) Theoretical knowledge. Dordrecht:
Springer Verlag.
Vicente-Saez, R., Martinez-Fuentes, C. (2018).
Open Science now: A systematic literature review for an integrated definition. Journal of Business Research 88, 428–436.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.043
World Virtual Indigenous Circle
on Open Science and the Decolonization of Knowledge: Webinar Report (2020). Retrieved from
https://en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/comments_osr_partner_world_virtual_indigenous_circle_on_os_and_decolonization_of_knowledge_report.pdf
uka7777@gmail.com
Abstract
The paper is dedicated to philosophical analysis of the value foundations of the Open Science concept and its link to the more general concept of humanism, as the means for building up the common knowledge of humanity while still not sacrificing the diversity of existing cultures and traditions. The philosophical methods used in the investigation include dialectics and post-non-classical approach as it is argued that solving the problem of the coexistence of humans and human cultures and enabling the openness of human knowledge requires understanding the dialectical relation of unity and plurality. It is argued that openness as a major feature of contemporary scientific knowledge corresponds to both the classical principles of ethos of science – first of all, to universalism – and to the new trends in research and education that emerged thanks to the development of information technologies. Openness is shown to be a characteristic of a community that does not put its own private or corporate goals and values above the common human values – Open Science is thus closely linked with the idea of humanism. It is shown that at the same time such universalism is not opposed by, but rather presupposes decolonization of knowledge, as the alternative, local, traditional forms of knowledge augment universal knowledge of science based on rational inquiry rather than replace it. Human knowledge, as well as human culture and human identities in general, are argued to be fractal phenomena: diversity of alternative forms of knowledge, cultures, languages, world views etc. is in no way something that opposes the unity of humanity and vice versa, and that is a necessary way to achieve mutual respect, mutual recognition and mutual understanding of the humans.Keywords
open science, values of universalism, humanism, fractality of identitiesReferences
Amsterdam Call for Action on Open
Science (2016). Retrieved from
https://www.ouvrirlascience.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Amsterdam-call-for-action-on-open-science.pdf
Dewey, J. (2016). Democracy
and Education. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New York:
The MacMillan Company.
Dijk, W. V., Schatschneider, C., & Hart, S.
A. (2021). Open Science in Education Sciences. Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 54(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219420945267
Drakulić, S. (1993). The Balkan Express: Fragments from the Other
Side of War. New York: W.W.Norton & Co.
Eco, U. (1995). Ur-Fascism. The
New York Review of books, June 22. Retrieved from https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
Fecher, B., & Friesike, S. (2014). Open Science: One Term, Five Schools of Thought. In S. Bartling & S. Friesike (Eds.), Opening Science (pp. 17–47). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_2
Fuchs, C. (2022). Digital humanism: A philosophy for 21st century digital society (First edition). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing.
IHEU Bylaws (2009). International Humanist and Ethical Union. Retrieved from
https://web.archive.org/web/20130117101233/http://iheu.org/bylaws
Krymskiy, S. B. (2001). The Civilizational Status of Globalization.
Praktychna Filosofia, 2(3), 133–138. [In Russian]
Mandelbrot, B. (1967). How Long Is the Coast
of Britain? Statistical Self-Similarity and Fractional Dimension. Science, New Series, 156(3775), 636–638.
Merton, R. (1973). The Normative Structure of
Science. Merton, R. The Sociology of
Science. Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago; London: The
University of Chicago Press, pp. 267–278.
Mielkov, Y. (2021). The Notion
of ‘Open Science’: its Values and Meaning for the Higher Education System.
Philosophy of Education, 27(2),
8-23. https://doi.org/10.31874/2309-1606-2021-27-2-1
Mielkov, Y., Tolstoukhov, A., Parapan, I. (2016). The Many-Faced
Democracy. Saarbrücken: Lambert Academic Publishing.
Stepin, V. S. (2005) Theoretical knowledge. Dordrecht:
Springer Verlag.
Vicente-Saez, R., Martinez-Fuentes, C. (2018).
Open Science now: A systematic literature review for an integrated definition. Journal of Business Research 88, 428–436.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.043
World Virtual Indigenous Circle
on Open Science and the Decolonization of Knowledge: Webinar Report (2020). Retrieved from
https://en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/comments_osr_partner_world_virtual_indigenous_circle_on_os_and_decolonization_of_knowledge_report.pdf
