1. 1. 5 1. The Russian language is the national language of the Russian people 1 (P). Today, the Russian people have more opportunities to travel the world, and gradually other nations are getting to know our culture. Nevertheless, it cannot be said that the Russian language is actively studied in the world. It cannot be said that Russia is especially popular with tourists. Our country has always been receptive to foreign traditions, while in many countries of the world there is still a rather distorted idea about Russia and Russians. So, to some extent, this statement is still relevant today. 2 (2). Considering a people as a being of a spiritual order, we can call the language it speaks its soul, and then the history of this language will be more significant than even the history of the political changes of this people, with which, however, its history is closely connected. The history of the Russian language, perhaps, will reveal to us the character of the people who speak it. Free, strong, rich, it arose before serfdom and despotism were established. .. 3 (3). Considering, razhbet. 4(4). Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary: A NATION is a historically formed part of humanity, united by a stable community of language, territory, economic life and culture. National - 1. State, belonging to the given country. 2. App. , by value associated with the socio-political life of nations and their relationships. 3. Belonging to a national minority 5 (5). In yaztka, the whole people and all their homeland are spiritualized; in it, the creative power of the people's spirit translates the intentions into the picture and sound of the pieces of the homeland, her dshdsh, her physical Sht, her kpimsh, her tsschsch, shrd and valleys, her grandfather and groves, her storms and [seams - all that fur coat, water thoughts and feelings, the voice of native nature, which speaks so loudly about a person's love for his sometimes harsh homeland, which speaks so clearly in his native song, In his native tunes. in the mouth of the platoon 992103,. But in the light ones, 111252: dancing; the depths of the national language reflect more than one pseudonym 6
2. 2. native country, but the whole history of the spiritual life of the people. Generations of the people pass one after another, but the results of the life of each generation remain in the language - as a legacy to descendants. In the treasury of the native word, one generation after another puts the fruits of deep spiritual life, their inputs: gshd, beliefs, you will look at the food: the mountain lived and lived in: drsti, - in a word, the whole sewn together of their spiritual life, the people carefully preserves in the folk word. (K. Ushinsky.) x 6. Language is the liveliest, most abundant and strong link, / connecting the obsolete, living and future generations into one great, historical, living whole /. (K. Ushinsky.) X g-‘t 2) In the linguistic sense, the people are all people, then; / . (N. Chernyshevsky.) 3) Cdk, breeze; and with all its imperfections;1 the language of every people whose mental life has reached a high level of development. (N. Chernyshevsky.) 0.0. 4) The language contains a rhea: both folk charanrer, and 9511.11, and nszovsho. and fvvosrfsho. and beliefs. and leading. and covenants in a long journey. (V. Rasputin.) Dry. noun dry noun 5) Language is people. Language is cabbage soup; civilization and culture. That is why the study and preservation of the Russian language IS N_Ё_TSYOZ_S) DTSYM_Z [email protected] DYAIE_M_ FROM PSChSGO do, our / days a necessity. (A-Buy) 7 (7). Orally. LANGUAGE. SPELLING. CULTURE OF SPEECH REPETITION OF STUDY IN GRADES 5-8 8 (8). |) Phonetics. 7) Morphology. 2) Orthoepy. 8) Syntax. 3) Lexicology. 9) Graphics. 4) Phraseology. |0) Spelling. 5) Morphemics. | 1) Punctuation. 6) Word formation.
3. 3. ‘9(9). a) Phonetics: vowel, syllable, stress, consonant. b) Lexicology: synonym, antonym, homonym. c) Punctuation: dot, dash, colon, comma. d) Spelling: hyphen, spelling. e) Word formation: suffixal method, prefix-suffixal method. e) Graphics: letter. g) Syntax: subject, object, definition, word combination. h) Morphology: noun Numeral, adverb, pronoun, verb. i) Orthoepy: correct pronunciation, orthoepic dictionary, stress, orthoepic norms. j) Morphemics: morpheme, root, ending. [d "i'f" ys] - 2 syllables [d"] - acc., voice, soft [and °] - vowel, unude [f"] - acc. , deaf. , soft [and] -- vowel. , ud. [c] - acc. , deaf. , tv. 5 sounds hyphen - 5 letters [d "] efis [arfagram] - 4 syllables [b] - vowel, unud. [p] - acc., voiced ‚ tv. [f] - acc., deaf. , tv [a] - vowel, unude [g] - acc., calling, tv [p] - acc., vowel, tv [a] - vowel, beat [m] - acc. , call, TV [b] - vowel, bezud 9 sounds Spelling - 10 letters Spelling [m]a
4. 4. [t "and ° re] - 2 syllables [t"] - acc. , deaf. , soft [and '] - vowel. , bezud. [p] - acc. , call. , tv. [e] - vowel. , ud. 4 sounds of Dash - 4 letters of Dash 10 (10). Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov (171 1-1765) is the creator of Russian linguistics. M. V. Lomonosov always emphasized that without grammar it is impossible to learn not only the native language, but also all other sciences. “All sciences need grammar,” wrote the scientist. All major linguists of the 18th and 19th centuries were influenced by Lomonosov's ideas. Alexander Matveyevich Peshkovsky (1878-1933) was an outstanding linguist of our century. The main book of A. M. Peshkovsky is devoted to syntax. Vladimir Ivanovich Dal (1801-1872) published the Explanatory Dictionary of Great Russian Musical Language, which included 200 thousand words. Izmail Ivanovich Sreznevsky (1812-1880) - the largest Russian philologist. His works on the history of the Russian language, ancient Russian literature, the folklore of the Slavic peoples, and dialectology are widely known in the scientific world. The works of Fyodor Ivanovich Buslaev (1818-4897) in the field of linguistics and the history of Russian literature, in the field of the history of ancient Russian art, constituted a whole era and still have not lost their significance. Dmitry Nikolayevich Ushakov (1873-1942) is best known as one of the founders and editor-in-chief of the four-volume Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language. All his life he studied living Russian speech, paying much attention to spelling and orthoepy. Alexander Nikolaevich Gvozdev (1892-1959) studied how children's speech develops, its sound and grammatical side. A. N. Gvozdev created scientific works on phonology, stylistics, orthography. The outstanding linguist Grigory Osipovich Vinokur (1896-1947) especially appreciated Pushkin's work, the study of which he devoted many years of his life: he participated in the preparation of a collection of essays.
5. 5. neniy, supervised the work on the creation of a card index of Pushkin's language dictionary. Philip Fedorovich Fortunatov (1848-1914) dealt with the issues of phonetics, vocabulary, grammar, etymology not only of the Indo-European languages, but especially of the Russian language. In his works on equalization-historical linguistics, he created the doctrine of the grammatical form of the word. Vasily Ilyich Chernyshev (1866-1949) most of all dealt with issues of lexicology, culture of speech, studied the language and style of the most prominent Russian poets and writers: A. Koltsov, A. Pushkin, N. Nekrasov, I. Turgenev and others. 11 (11 ). One way or another, every person on the planet explains his thoughts, desires. And although, of course, there are many languages, but, nevertheless, no matter how they sound, the essence does not change, to live without a language is. impossible. 5 2. Speech styles 12 (252). Orally. 13(253). 1) Baikal was created as the crown and mystery of nature not for production needs, but for us to get water from it. its main and priceless wealth, to the bottom; Encourage him with sovereign beauty and make him feel the reserved air. Baikal. Baikal. .. interfere. towers. leading. edge: full of many and many beauties, regal and nssshrtdsh, nezokorsshshsh - how good. that we have it! (V. Raeputin) Journalistic style 1. Crown, mystery, priceless wealth, sovereign beauty, sacred air, mighty, rich, majestic, beautiful with many beauties, regal, unrevealed, unconquered. 2. Crown - (high) successful completion of something. as a reward for hard work. (highest creation of nature) sovereign - (high) possessing supreme power, powerful (majestic). 4. The text perfectly combines the words of high vocabulary (crown, sovereign, Unconquered, royal, etc.) and the words of business vocabulary (production needs). "Emotional- 10
6. the “ness” of a literary text is here combined with the invocativeness and “standard” of a journalistic text. a. The sun was already beginning to hide behind the snowy ridge when I drove into the Koishaur valley. .. This valley is a glorious place! From all sides the mountains are impregnable, reddish rocks, common to I. VI „Ndd‚ YELLOW cliffs, and there is a high, high golden fringe of snow, and DOWN Aragsh submissive. ‚dvhseybezshmazdnoy.139513921 YPSHSHCH9DEYCHdL1Z9TSN9DSHSHSHYU FOOD‚ THANST‘ with a silver thread and sparkles like a snake with its scales. (M. Lermontov) Artistic style 2. A fringe of snow (an image with a word) Sparkles like a snake with its scales (an image with the help of words) 3) Until recently, a cell was studied with a microscope, ) But after (Shkony rast / dean ‚ deavolasststsigdoetschat U11Ё% SCHI „D0 „M. TsDLD01ЁTs) Z! .3‚ Began to CLICK INTO the finest details of the extremely complex structure of the cell. (A complex sentence with a subordinate tense, complicated by participial turnover). (A. Zuzmer) Scientific style | . a) light microscope, electron microscope, cell structure. b) study, design, detail. 14(254). Artistic 1. The sun squints, the forest squints (personifications) Eyelashes of needles (metaphor) 2. The sun squints sleepily in the forest, the forest squints sleepily with eyelashes of needles (a complex non-union sentence with the meaning of enumeration). You can believe the snow on the roads, and at noon it is oily on them: puddles (complex sentence with a connecting union). 15(256). "Language that SShZhLa" - says an English linguist. And indeed, they don’t go skiing in a tailcoat, no one will appear at an official ball, dressed in a veiled kurta.
7. 7. Ku, which is quite good for menial work in the garden. Doesn't the same thing happen with language? It is unlikely that at recess, when telling friends about a school tennis tournament, someone will use an official business style of speech: no one wants to listen to such a boring storyteller - colloquial, lively language is appropriate here. And here. for example. in an explanatory note addressed to the director, no one will dare to use casual colloquial vocabulary - the note should be clear and precise. It is the same with the description of a frosty winter day in an essay: it is really interesting to read it when it is written in figurative, artistic language, and absolutely no one wants to know what the temperature and atmospheric pressure were that day (clear information about weather are relevant in the forecast). 16 (257). 1. Define the style of the texts. Justify the answer. 2. Explain the setting of the dash in the first text. 3. Where do you think the conversation takes place (text M92)? Between who and whom? Try to rewrite direct speech, supplementing it with the words of the author. 5 3. Phonetics. Orthoepy. Graphics 17 (12). 1) Sound is the ultimate, indivisible unit of sounding speech. There are vowels and consonants. Sounds are made during exhalation: a stream of air exhaled from the lungs passes through the larynx and oral cavity. The pronunciation of vowels is characterized by the work of the vocal cords and the free passage of the air stream through the oral cavity. Therefore, in the composition of the vowel sound there is a voice and there is no noise. The specific sound of each vowel depends on the volume and shape of the oral cavity - the position of the tongue and lips. The pronunciation of consonants is necessarily associated with overcoming an obstacle in the path of the air strings, which is formed by the lower lip or tongue when they approach or close with the upper lip, teeth or palate. Overcoming the barrier created by the organs of speech (a gap or a bow). the air jet forms noise, which is an obligatory component of a consonant sound: for voiced, noise is combined with a tone, for deaf people, it is the only component of a sound. Thus, from the point of view of the ratio of voice and noise in the Russian language, three groups of sounds are presented: vowels consist of 12
8. 8. only from tone (voice), voiced consonants - from noise and voice, deaf consonants - only from noise. The ratio of tone and noise for voiced consonants is not the same: paired voiced noises have more than tones, unpaired noises have less noise than tones, therefore deaf and paired voiced consonants are called noisy in linguistics, and unpaired voiced [th "], [l], [l "], [m], [m "], O [n], [n '], [p], [p "] - sonorant. Voiced are composed of noise and voice. During their pronunciation, the air stream not only overcomes the barrier in the oral cavity, but also vibrates the vocal cords. The following SOUNDS are voiced: 161 1b'11811B'1 1g11g'1‚ 1d1 1d'1 1g1 131 13'11d'1 1111 1L'1 [m], [m'], [n], [n'], [r ], [R']. The sound [zh’] is also voiced, which occurs in the speech of individual todeys in the words yeast, reins and some others. Voiceless consonants are pronounced without a voice when the vocal cords remain relaxed and consist only of noise. The following consonants are voiceless: [k], [k'], [p], [n'], [s], [s' ], [t]. 1t’1 1F1 1f’1 1Х1 1х’1 1111 1Ч’1 1Ш1 1ш’1 to remember which consonants are deaf, there is a mnemonic rule (rule for remembering): in the phrase “Styopka. do you want a reaper? - "Fi! » contains all deaf consonants (paired in hardness / softness - only in hard or soft varieties). According to the presence or absence of a voice, consonants form pairs; sounds in a pair should differ in only one sign, in this case, deafness / sonority. There are 11 pairs of consonants opposed by deafness / voicedness: [b] - [n], 1b'1 - [P'1 181 - 1F1 18'1 - 1<1›"1 1г1 - 1к1 1г`1 - 1К’1 1д1 - 1т1 [д’] --- [т’], [з] -- [с], [з’] -- [с’], [ж] -- [ш]. Перечисленные звуки являются, соответственно, либо звонкими парными, либо глухими парными. Остальные согласные характеризуются как непарные. К звон- ким непарным относят [й"], [л], [н’], [м], [м’], [н], [н’], [р], [р’], к глухим непарным - звуки [х], [х‘], [ц], [ч’], [щ’]. Сказанное можно обобщить в следующей таблице: Твердые и мягкие согласные различаются особенностями ар- тикуляции, а именно положением языка: при образовании мягких согласных все тело языка сдвигается вперед, а средняя часть спинки языка приподнимается к твердому небу, при образовании твердых согласных тело языка сдвигается назад. Согласные образуют 15 пар, противопоставленных по твердо- сгн / мягкости: 161 --1б’1 181-18’1 1г1-1г’1 1111-1111 131-131 13
9. 9. 1k]-1k'1 1111-1171 [m]--1m'1 [n] - [n'1 [P] - [n'], 1s1-[p'], [s1-[s'] . [t] - [t'1 [F1-[f'1 [x1-[x'1-] Hard unpaired consonants include [c], [w], [g], and soft unpaired consonants [ h'], [u'], [y'] (an unpaired soft sound is also [g'], which occurs in some words in the speech of individual native speakers). The consonants [w] and [w’] (as well as [w] and [w’]) do not form pairs, as they differ not only in hardness/softness, but also in brevity/longitude. 2) Train [po y ’ ez t] Blizzard [v ’ y ` y ha] 3) Stress is the pronunciation of one of the syllables in the word (or rather, the vowel in it) with greater force and duration. Thus, phonetically Russian stress is forceful and quantitative (in other languages, other types of stress are presented: forceful (English), quantitative (POVOGRSCHSSKII), tonic (Vietnamese). Other distinguishing features of Russian stress are its diversity and mobility The versatility of Russian stress lies in the fact that it can fall on any syllable in a word, in contrast to languages ​​with a fixed place of stress (for example, French or Polish): tree, dorosa, milk. In the forms of one word, the stress can move from the stem to the ending: novi - nail In compound words (that is, words with several roots) there may be several stresses: instrumentation and aircraft construction, however, many compound words do not have a secondary stress: steamboat [parahot] Stress in Russian can perform the following functions: - organizing - a group of syllables with a single stress constitutes a phonetic word, the boundaries of which do not always coincide with the boundaries of the lexical word and can combine independent words together with auxiliary ones: in the fields [fpal "a], oi-to [onta]; - unintelligible - stress can distinguish a) different words, which is associated with the heterogeneity of Russian stress: flour - flour: castle - castle, b) forms of one word, which is associated with the heterogeneity and mobility of Russian stress: zenith - earth: fourteen
10. 10. 4) reborn [rising dnts] nsu-burn [buzz '] a-ly [alg] sister [si ° stra] The word “scarlet” cannot be transferred, because the transfer rules are not allow you to transfer or leave one vowel on the line. 18 (13). 1) In Russian, 6 vowels are distinguished under stress: [a], [o], [y], [i], [s], [a]. Storm, soap, circus. 2) Without stress, fewer vowels are distinguished than under stress. Sounds [and], [s], [y] are distinct: vinaigrette, widely. desert In place of the letters o, e, and in unstressed syllables, a weakened sound [a] is pronounced, which is less distinct. Horses, therefore, itself 3) Voiced pairs are deafened (or rather, they change to deaf ones) --- at the absolute end of the word: pond [rod]; - in front of the deaf: booth [butka]. 4) Deaf paired consonants before voiced ones, except for [c]. [B’1‚ [d’1.[l1. [l’1‚ [m]. [M'1. [H]. ENCH. [R]. [v’1‚03V0NCHAT”, THAT is, they change to voiced: threshing [malad’ba]. 5) In words of foreign origin, in principle, the consonant before the letter e can be pronounced both hard and soft, while the orthoepic norm sometimes requires a hard pronunciation (for example, [de] kada, [te1ip), sometimes - soft ( for example [d "e] claration, [t "e] temperangp, m_) › [e "e] d). 19 (14). Do not touch the puppy, put it on the floor, shave off your mustache, plant a currant bush, congratulate on happy birthday, my birthday, my last name, high prices, low prices, outstanding artist, film development, very handsome, autobiography, monument, Drofa publishing house printed, issued, indicates that 20 (15) I recall the results of a relatively recent sociological survey in St. Petersburg: When asked how you feel about declaring St. Petersburg a free economic zone, more than 50% of the respondents answered “positively”, and means the phrase “free economic zone”, only 15 were able to answer correctly
11. 11. about 5%. It is easy to see that in this case a very significant part of the Russian-speaking today did not understand very well what they really approved of. There are countless examples of such use of words, which are either obscure to the speaker himself or different from the commonly used meaning, both in fiction and in real life. A banner will be stretched across the spring Tverskaya Street in Moscow: “Maslenitsa is a broad noblewoman.” All the words are clear, it is also clear that Shrovetide is similar to the noblewoman. Just what does "wide noblewoman" mean? Thick, chubby? Probably, it should be different: “Shrovetide is wide - the noblewoman,” since everyone knows that the wide Shrovetide is called its last, most reckless, most delicious, most similar to the boyars, days. (I. Miloslavsky.) 21 (16). 2. a) [oil" n "its] --- 4 syllables [m] - acc. , call. , tv. [a] - vowel. , ud. [c] -- acc. , deaf. , tv. [l "] - acc., voiced, soft. [b] - vowel, unude [l"] - acc. , call. , soft [and] - vowel. , bezud. [c] - acc. , deaf. , tv. [b] - vowel. , bezud. 9 sounds Maslenitsa - 9 letters ° / b) Maslenitsa. c) Gbgvetfery ‹-th ‹- o. d) 1. Maslenitsa is a noun. (What?) Carnival. Thing. 2. N. f. - Maslenitsa. 3. Narit. , unsatisfactory, well. r., 1 cl. 4. Unit h., im. item 5. (What?) Maslenitsa. e) Shrovetide wide - noblewoman. sixteen
12. 12. 3. Ill. fifty, five R. p. fifty, five D. p. fifty, five V. p. fifty, five T. p. fifty, five P. p. about fifty, about five verb n. parsch. "Rt- "Rt- 4. without ltata compared to 22 (p). . gShyana shish real common people's antiquity, And dreams, and card fortune-telling, And the moon that arrived - Be shish food; Mysteriously, all objects are something, Foreshadowing shish chest. (A. Pushkin.) 2)[= -1;[-=1.[-=1- [pr"i'dan3"bm] 54. Vocabulary. Morphempka. Word formation 23 (18). 1) The word is the main a language unit that is a sound or a complex of sounds that has a meaning and serves to name objects, phenomena, actions, signs, quantities, states, etc. Each word has: 1) its own sound shell, 2) a certain morphological structure. The totality of all the words of the Russian language forms its vocabulary.2) The same words can be used in different ways in speech, receiving different meanings.Direct and figurative meanings of words are distinguished. directly correlates with the phenomena of objective reality.Thus, the words table, black, boil have the main meanings: 1. A piece of furniture in the form of a horizontal board on high supports, legs; 2. Color sazhn, coal; 3. Seething, bubbling, Evaporating from strong heating (about liquids). These values ​​are stable, although they may change historically. For example - 17
13. 13. measures, the word table in the Old Russian language meant "throne", "reigning". Direct meanings of words less than all others depend on the context, on the nature of connections with other words. Figurative (indirect) meanings of words are those meanings that arise as a result of the conscious transfer of a name from one phenomenon of reality to another on the basis of similarity, commonality of their features, functions, etc. Thus, the word table is used in several figurative - readings: 1. A piece of special equipment or a part of a cold-formed machine (operating table, raise the machine table); 2. Food, food (to rent a room with a table); 3. Department in the institution, in charge of a special range of affairs (reference desk). 3) Native Russian vocabulary refers to those words that were formed directly in the Russian language in different periods of its development. Ravine, roof, lace. In addition to the original vocabulary in the vocabulary of Russian ide| - there are also borrowed words that make up no more than ten percent of the total number of words. Borrowing occurs as a result of economic, political, cultural contacts with other nations. Guitar. serenade. ‚nantilla, carshiel. 4) Synonyms - words that are different in sound, but the same in meaning ("horse - horse"; "brave - brave - brave - courageous - fearless", etc.). Antonyms (from anti... and oput - name) --- words with mutually opposite meanings that serve to designate contrasting phenomena. For example, “quiet” - “loud”, “appear” - “disappear”, “many” - “little”. Homonyms are words that coincide with each other in their sound with a complete mismatch of meanings. Example: "bow" (weapon) --- "bow" (plant). 5) Some words (or meanings of words) are perceived as obsolete (archaisms and historicisms). Words that have ceased to be actively used in the language do not immediately disappear from it. For some time they are still understandable to those who speak this language, they are known from fiction, although everyday speech practice no longer needs them: speech, right hand, shkrab - in the 20s the word teacher was replaced, rabkrin - Worker-peasant inspection; Other words - as new, not yet quite "usual", not fully entrenched in the literary language. In passive co- 18
14. 14. becoming vocabulary includes neologisms - new words that have not yet become the usual and everyday names of the corresponding objects, concepts. riot police, special forces, SNL GK ChP. 6) Common vocabulary, or interstyle vocabulary, is used in any style of speech without any restrictions. For example, the word "house" can be used in any context: in an official business document (House M" 7 is subject to demolition); in an article by a journalist (This house was built according to the project of a talented Russian architect and is one of the most valuable monuments of national architecture). Russian folk dialects, or dialects (gr. site / no: - adverb, dialect), have in their composition a significant number of original folk words known only in a certain area. So, in the south of Russia, a stag is called a grip, a clay pot is called a consumption, a bench is a uslon, etc. The use of terminological and professional vocabulary used by people of the same profession working in the same field of science and technology is socially limited. Terms and professionalisms are given in explanatory dictionaries marked “special”, sometimes the scope of use of a particular term is indicated: physical. physician, mathematician, astronomer. etc. The speech of certain socially closed groups (thieves, vagabonds, etc.) is called slang (Fr. 01:30! - closed, inactive). This is a secret, artificial language of the underworld (criminal music), known only to the initiated and also existing only in oral form. "7) Stable combinations - phraseological units. They have a number of features: a) phraseological units are always complex in composition: puzzle, blood and milk, ate a dog; b) semantic - chesky and indivisible: spread with the mind - “think”, the fifth wheel in the cart is “superfluous”; c) they are characterized by the constancy of the composition: instead of “the cat cried”, you cannot say “the cat cried”, they have options: from the bottom of their hearts - from the bottom of their hearts, cast a shadow on the wattle fence - cast a shadow on a clear day 8) There are two types of dictionaries: encyclopedic and philological (linguistic).The first explains the realities (objects, phenomena), provides information about various events: Great Soviet Encyclopedia, Literary Encyclopedia, Children's encyclopedia, political dictionary, philosophical dictionary.Secondly, words are explained, their meanings are interpreted.Linguistic dictionaries, in turn, are divided into 19
15. 15. two types: bilingual (more rarely multilingual), i.e. translation, which we use when studying a foreign language, when working with a foreign text (Russian-English dictionary, Polish-Russian dictionary, etc.) .); and monolingual. 24 (19). 1) Tradition in folk poetry is a narrative containing information about real persons and events. An omen is a special sign. to proclaim - to proclaim, to announce publicly, publicly, publicly. 2) oppress, oppress, oppress, constrain, crush. press. to suppress, to press, to press, to press, to press down. squeeze, push. lean on, attack, lean on, gnaw, oppress, pinch. Premonitions overwhelmed Tatyana, other thoughts were crowded in her mind. 25 (20). Go to the forest - climbed onto the windowsill; heard crying - do not cry loudly; a learned man - a famous scientist; three oaks - three carefully; within a few seconds --- in the course of the river; come to a meeting with a stranger - towards the wind; no glass --- liquid glass; the wounded groaned - the wounded officer; guarded carelessly - an old-timer of the village. 26(21). Zagorodiyai, Yodelat, shipblak, pigeon, morpheme analysis, knowledge, him ii, pan / a, intelligibly, telling you, to squeaking (January), Yoa to go (to go, EYYAT), Attentive. He was fenced off - to fence, fence, fence, fence, fence, fence, fence off, fence off, fence off, fence off, fence off, fence off, fence off, fence off, fence off, fence off, fenced off, fence off, partition, partition. partition, suburb, suburbanization, partitioning off, etc. 27 (22). Prefixed: stir, sloppy, go over, comrade. 20
16. 16. Suffixal: rider, trap, huge, boring, squirrel, nosy. Prefix-eto-suffixal: boundless. Build: road, major general, self-improvement, automatic telephone exchange, Russian Federation, evergreen. Transition from one part of speech to another: ice cream (n.). ЁЁЕБЭ / дё) theater, w "eve ›‹> @&, tt $ Zh4 (@ 5 5. Morphology and syntaxns. Spelling and punctuation 28 (23). What does Examples of Self- What, who, name the subject. dsyst- 1 noun - standing - what, outside, quality, state and other (home) nouns how much, etc. or indicate them 2. adjective what to do, (pink) what to do - 3. numeral name to do, how, (seven) when. va- 4. pronoun (I) than. how- 5. verb (sing) 6. adverb (high) 7. participle (running, doing and thinking) etc. 8. gerund (humming , laughing) They serve to express from- Prepositions (over) femininity between concepts - conjunctions (and) mi, express significant particles (or) meaningful words, and used only in conjunction with them, Interdoo combines unchangeable Oh, hey stop MSTIA words, EXPRESSING our feelings, VOLSITYAVLSNNYA, etc., NS NZZVZYA THEM categories specific to a given category of words), syntactic feature (features of syntactic functioning); 21
17. 17. 2) independent (significant) parts of speech --- these are categories of words that name an object, action, quality, state, etc. or indicate them and which have an independent lexical and grammatical meaning, and are members of the sentence (main or secondary) Service parts of speech are categories of words that serve to express the relationship between concepts that express significant words, and are used only in conjunction with them. They are not members of the proposal. 29 (24). 1. Noun: results, survey. Adjective: sociological, free. Name Numeral: fifty, five. Pronoun: you, she. Verb: remembered, understood. Adverb: comparatively, easily. Special forms of the verb: interviewed, speaking. Union: a, or. Preposition: on, about. Particle: Nope. 1. Remember - verb. The results (what are they doing?) are remembered. Action. 2. N. f. - to be remembered. 3. Return , nesov. view‚ uninterrupted, | ref. 4. I3jav. incl. ‚ present temp. , pl. h.‚ 3 l. 5. The results (what do they do?) are great. 1. Sociological - adjective. Poll (what?) Sociological. Subject sign. 2. N. f. - sociological. 3. Relates. 4. Unit h., m. r., genus. item 5. Poll (what?) | . And the union. Serves to connect homogeneous members of the proposal. 2. Compose. 3. Simple. 22
18. 18.30 (25). Conjugation 2 conjugation Number - y. Yu singular em - em plural Yu ut‚ ut 3! (26). Fall (1) snow from the sky in different ways. Vskiyo (1) head, and it seems (|) that I am (1) flakes from the clouds. And be (1) snow, to which the face is not suitable (2): hard white balls hurt this (1) forehead. (N. Nadezhdina.) 32 (27). Early spring morning - cool and dewy. Not a cloud in the sky. Only in the east, where the sun is now emerging in a fiery glow, are the gray predawn clouds still crowding, vigilantly and taying like a sad bear. The whole boundless expanse of the steppe seems. In the thick, lush grass they tremble here and there. Tsevelddaasdjvetsiknvad different: flowery lights, large dew diamonds.<. ..>In the morning coolness, the bitter healthy smell of wormwood, nezhyysh is poured. Everything shines and basks, and joyfully reaches for the sun. Only in some places, in deep and narrow beams, between steep cliffs, lumps still lie, NZTs9.M. I.NYOZ_.9Yo. USCHSDSHZY-1199.11!” V-CHZZHNYS Bluish shadows. High in the air, invisible to the eye, larks tremble and ring. The restless grasshoppers have long ago raised their hasty, dry chatter. The steppe woke up and came to life, and it seems as if it is breathing deep, even and powerful sighs. Yoledn / YOYO, 931), 3 front / honey, Yopykivaya ‘, w, din? mother y. 9 b-e iёb i1‘-1‚‹b›)?5to-= ›. 23
19. 19. 13.3196: +111 961121352. Simple, narrative. ‚ nevosyutts, odnosost. ‚ impersonal. , repr. , non- FULL, NCOMPLICATE. >< Х Х Наречие + глагол: радостно тянется, еще лежат. Х Х Х Прилаг. + сущ. : раннее утро, весеннее утро. Х Х СУЩ. + СУЩЦ ЗЗПЗХ ПОЛЫНИ, С ароматом ПОВИЛИКИ. Х Х Х ГЛЗГОЛ 4‘ СУНЬ} ДРОЖЗТ В траве, ТЯНСТСЯ К СОЛНЦУ. 33 (28). 1) отделяющие знаки: Раннее весеннее утро - прохладное и роснстое. Тире разделя- ет подлежащее «утро» и сказуемое «прохладное» и «росистое». Раннее весеннее утро - прохладное и роснстое. В небе ни об- лачка. Точки являются отделяющими знаками, разделяющими 2 предложения. Неугомонные кузнечики давно подняли свою торопливую. сухую трескотню. Запятая разделяет однородные члены предло- жения «торопливую» и «сухую». 2) выделяющие знаки: В утренней прохладе разлит горький здоровый запах полыни, слсеиганньжг? с нежным, похожим на миндаль, ароматом повили- ки. Запятая после слова «ПОЛЫНИ» выделяет причастный оборот. В густой буйной траве там и сям дрожали, переливаясь и вспыхивал разноцветными огнями, бриллианты крупной росы. Запятая после слова «дрожат» выделяет деепричастный оборот. 34 (29). |. Выплыва. .т -› что делать? - выплывать --› на ать -› | спр. --› выплываЫ. Каж. .тся --› что делать? - казаться -› на ать -› 1 спр. _› кажася. Блещ. .т --› что делать? - блистать --› на ать -› | спр. чблеша. Неж. .тся -› что делать? - нежиться -› на ить -› 2 спр. _› Тян. .тся -› что делать? - тянуться -«› на уть -› 1 спр. --› тянЁся. Трепещ. .т -› что делать? - трепетать -› на ать -› 1 спр. --› трепекцШ. Дыш. .т --› что делать? -- дышать -› на ать (искл.) -› 2 спр. -› дышШ. 24
20. 20. “E? , ‘prophetic, $4) 36312); 93%? Yogyoian sch nёugomon 35 (30). Spelling of vowels in word roots. Checked unstressed spring, dewy, vowels crowd, steppe gtt. Unchecked unstressed in the east, minute, . / "7 vowels bshtdiant, wormwood C CHSRSDOVZNISM IN ROOT GE GYO -lag-/ /-loose- adjective, addition, sch p attach, warp KT GYO KT -rast-/ /-growth-birth, algae, grow - Their gzh ' overgrown, overgrown -steel-/ /-steel-a to separate - to separate, CT to underlay - UNDER TH -ber-/ /-bir-a and others. hissing yellow, Yoporny, nok, Mrs. Acorn, black, 'sho oh 36 (31). Pechorin This man does not indifferently, not apathetically (apathy) bears his suffering: he is madly chasing (pursuing) life, looking for it everywhere bitterly (duty) he accuses himself of his (his) delusions. In him, internal questions are incessantly heard (will be heard), disturb him, torment him, and in reflection he seeks their resolution: he peeps every movement (move) of his ( own) of the heart, considers every thought of his (own) (V. Belinsky.) Adjacency: bears unequals, chases furiously, bitterly accuses Management: bears suffering, chases after life, blames himself 37 (32).
21. 21. / . . In suffix: artificial. 38(33). a) Dividing b: pouring, blizzard, trees. Ants, birds, I fight. b) b indicates a certain grammatical meaning: youth, run, jump, only. Multiply, do not cry, backhand. c) b denotes the softness of the consonant: horse, swamp, take, earrings. Skates, nail, role. 39 (34). |) Uniform spelling of prefixes: Eat Eat, inscription, push, move. 'eleven . ‚ --| 2) Prefixes ending in s-/s-: tasteless, beautic. Run away, appeal, in: tanie. 3) Prefixes pre- / pre-: run, wise, ytkleit, transgress (law), iritvorit (door). 40 (35). |. pronouns: no one, no one, no one, no one, no one, iiktb. Adverbs: nowhere, nowhere, nowhere, nowhere, no way, never, never. 2. No one, no one, no one, no one, not once, not once. A A 41 (36). Adjectives: knitted cap, autumn / A ",‚ SUMRZK, TsSRSVYANNEDYA KROVZT, STNNNNYN PNTrNOT, YOUNG CITIZEN, / A _/ BSSHSNOS RESISTANCE ‚ SKUSNZYa KTSRNZTURZ, PSKUSEPVSNOS irrigation, apggaiiyoinpy appeal, linen suit. Taking communion: doing a thing well, liberated tettoria, the river is ice-bound, a privilege acquired, a tyazraine generation. a widespread ideology, organized a campaign to collect books, confident in the future, awarded. Adverbs: the tour was organized, you feel / u / constrained, the stars twinkled mysteriously, cars raced furiously. 42(37). a) Prepositions: due to failures, like a support, agree on NZCHST HELP, WALK towards the WIND, STAY DUE TO the rain. b) Forms of nouns: include new documents in the investigation, agree in gender and number, deposit in a bank account, come to a meeting with veterans, keep in mind, hope 26
22. 22. only for good luck, stand at the end of the line, concentrate in a moment of danger. c) Adverbs: go blindly, move towards, make your way at random, completely lie, do it in an instant, build in a new way. d) Other parts of speech: like (particle) fell ill, got into a blind (adj.) old woman, in view of the fact that (union), go along a new (adj.) PATH. 43 (38). Not a day, not a month, but a whole year we spent away from our homeland. Nothing comforted us: neither the beauty of nature, nor meeting interesting people, nor the mild climate. I wanted to go home, where it is cold and snowy, where tropical fruits do not grow, but where everything is yours and you never leave the confidence: no matter what happens, reliable, true friends are around, always ready to help. 44 (39). Nothing on; nothing happened: neither the beauty of the coirrdt, nor the meeting with interesting seams, nor the soft k. climate. Narrative , unexclamatory , simple, two-consist. , repr. , complete, complicated by homogeneous subjects with a generalizing word. Scheme: [®: below ‚ below ‚ neither 9 ]. Away from (preposition), Yzhdut (-rast-/ /-ros-), YS (at the junction of the root and the suffix). Coordination: the whole year, with interesting people, mild climate, tropical fruits, reliable friends. Landing: I wanted to go home, never leaves, always come. _ Management: nothing consoled us, didn't console us, doesn't leave you. 45 (40). As now the prophetic Oleg is going to Mark the unreasonable Khazars: Their villages and fields for a violent raid He doomed to swords and fires; - . . noun drkhёёvey ЁЁЁЕ, shevsЁЁЁЁЁґеа ёшшш, noun, with sch. vb. drank. noun To ide o plu rides on a horse to the house 46 (41) - To my poems, nalisalnshdakrano, That I didn’t know that I was a poet, Sorlavts1imsaka1ebr „y1z_gkhshlyontana. Joedlvizshraea 27
23. 23. V.<Ц2ВЗ. В.ПП. ИМ911› -Б? ‘_’$! ?&д’1911‘:1‘2ё" 939?! “- Вдняшлцттте, где сои и фимиаьт, Моим стихам о юности и смерти, - Нечитанным стихам! -- Разбросанньтм в пыли по магазинам (Где их никто не брал и не берет!) Моим стихам, как драдоцентдьтддвдтнам, Настанет свой черед. (М. Цветаева.) Х Х Х НЗПИСЭННЫМ СТИХЗМ, написанным ТЗК рано, сорвавшимся СТИ- Х Х хам, ВОРВЗВШИМСЯ СТИХЗЬЯ, ворвавшимся В СВЯТНЛИЩС, НВЧНТЗН- Х Х НЫМ СТНХЗМ, разбросанным В ПЫЛИ ПО МЗГЗЗИНЭМ. 1, Написанным -- причастие. Стихам (каким?) написанным. Признак предмета по действию. 2. Написать. 3. Страд. , невозвр. , сов. внд, прош. вр. 4. Мн. ч., датл. 5. Стихам (каким?) нациоанньш. ё 6. Типы речи 47 (258). Устно. 48 (259). 1. -- повествование - описание состояния окружающей среды - повествование -- описание состояния человека - повествование -- описание состояния человека --- рассуждение-разм ы шление - повествование 49 (260). 1. Повествование. 1. Я как безумный вьшктщил (сов. в. , пр. вр.) на крыльцо, (сов. в. , пр. вр.) на своего Черкеса, которого водили по двору, и (сов. в. , пр. вр.) во асов дух по дороге в Пяти- горск. Я беотдощадно (несов. в. , пр. вр.) измученного ко- “яо КОТОРЫЙ, ХНЗЛЕ. Ц.ВЁС. Ь-. В-ПСЗ! Ё, МШШ (“ССОВ- 3-я "$1 ВР.) меня по каменистой дороге. Я скакал. (Носов. о, "Р- вр.), 111ДЫ2Ё1.89_Ь.9Т31©1ЁЕПСЫ}! !!- 28
24. 24. And meanwhile, I kept galloping (non-Sov. v., pr. vr.), chasing the devil; sparingly. And here I am Yo (non-sov. v., pr. vr.), that my horse is heavier than breathing: (non-sov. v., n. vr.); he’s already dreamers twice or twice (sov. v., pr. vr.) \u003d out of the blue. .. There were five miles left to Essentuki - the Cossack village, where I @ '(Sov. V., Bud. Vr.) on another horse. Everything would have been saved if my horse had had enough strength for another ten minutes. But suddenly, rising from a small ravine, at the exit of the mountains, at a sharp turn, he (sov. v., pr. vr.) on the ground. I deftly spared (Sov. V., Ave.), five (N.S., N.S.) of him, $415 (N.S., N.S.) per occasion - in vain: a barely audible groan escaped through his clenched teeth; in a few minutes he died (sov. v., pr. vr.); I stayed (Sov. v. pr. vr.) in the steppe oshsh. having lost. iceeddchyoeonadezhsch; u go too much (sov. v., pr. vr.) - my legs buckled; exhausted by the anxieties of the day and insomnia, I Yo (sov. v., pr. p.) on the wet ground and, like a child, cried (sov. v., pr. p.). I was returning (Sov. V., Ave.) to Kislovodsk at five o'clock in the morning, threw myself (Sov. V., Ave.) on the bed and ddschd (Sov. V., Ave.) to sleep Napoleon after Waterloo. 2. ---- to express "given" the author uses pronouns and nouns --- the author replaces the noun with a pronoun so as not to repeat the same word often - in "new" both the perfect form of the verb and the imperfect form of the verb are used, as the past time, as well as the present and the future. - synonymous verbs: set off - rushed - galloped fell - burst - rushed - homogeneous verbs and non-union complex sentences convey a quick change of events, movement Description of a person's state. | . The thought of not finding her in Pyatigorsk struck me like a hammer in my heart. One minute, one more minute to see her, to say goodbye, to shake her hand. .. I prayed, cursed, cried, laughed. .. No, nothing will express my anxiety, despair! With the possibility of losing her forever, Vera became dearer to me than anything in the world - dearer than life, honor, happiness! God knows what strange, what frenzied ideas swarmed in my head. .. And for a long time I lay motionless and wept bitterly, not trying to hold back tears and sobs; I thought my chest would burst; all 29
25. 25. MY TVTSZDOST, VSS MOS KHLZDNOKROVIS NSCHSZLI as DJPM; the soul was exhausted, the mind fell silent, and if at that moment someone saw me, he would have turned away with contempt. 2. Thought struck with a hammer in the heart; nothing will express anxiety and despair; Faith has become dearer than anything in the world - dearer than life, honor, happiness; I thought my chest would burst; composure and firmness vanished like smoke; the soul is weakened; mind is silent. Reasoning-thinking. 1. When the night dew and the mountain wind Refreshed my burning head and my thoughts returned to their usual order, I realized that it was useless and reckless to chase lost happiness (informative part). What else do I need? - to see her? - why? isn't it all over between us? One bitter farewell kiss will not enrich my memories, and after it it will only be more difficult for us to part (pictorial). 2. In the informative part, a complex sentence is used, in the pictorial part - a number of simple interrogative sentences. The complex sentence is quite specific (Pechorin says when and what he understood). The second part shows the train of thought and associations of the hero, his internal dialogue with himself. N. |. The main idea of ​​the text changes: from “to catch up at all costs, not to lose” to “chasing lost happiness is useless and reckless”. 2. Description of the state of the environment The sun has already hidden in a black cloud, otlthatzthi_syu__dd_a_dd_ds „b1e trap of palyur; the valley became dark and damp. Podkumok, Drobina; yastgokardayatdt, roared muffled and monotonous. - The state of the environment seems to tell the reader that the hero's happiness is no longer possible (the Sun hid in a black TAFS). - Language means animate nature, make it the hero of events. 50 (261). Pechorin, like a madman, jumped out onto the porch, jumped on his horse, the Circassian, and set off for Pyatigorsk. The hero galloped, gasping with impatience and mercilessly urging his horse on. The thought that he might not find Vera in Pyatigorsk struck him like a hammer in his heart: the possibility of losing Vera made her dearer to Pechorin than anything in the world. thirty
26. 26. The hero's horse began to breathe heavily, stumble on level ground, and suddenly, at the turn, crashed on the ground. Pechorin tried to lift him - in vain: the Circassian groaned and died a few minutes later. The hero was left in the steppe all alone. He decided to walk, but his legs buckled, he fell to the wet ground and wept like a child in despair. The soul of Peyaorin was weakened, all hardness and composure disappeared like smoke. But when the night dew and mountain wind refreshed the hero's head, he realized that it was useless and reckless to chase lost happiness. He returned to Kislovodsk, flung himself on the bed, and fell asleep in the sleep of Napoleon after Waterloo. This episode is important because in "A Hero of Our Time" it is written on behalf of Pechorin. We see a man in the steppe, completely alone; he is not surrounded by society, he is devoid of any "theatricality", he is sincere. This episode - an excerpt from the diary. Perhaps these confessional notes of the hero provide more for understanding his wi/ shi than the entire novel. We see that Pechorin is not devoid of human feelings, he “cries like a child”, he falls into despair at the thought that he will never see Vera again, who has become “the most precious thing in the world” for him. And at the same time it is obvious that he does not believe in his own happiness, that he consciously refuses about it; Pechorin's happiness is either "perished", as in this episode, or not found. 51 (275). 1. Idyllic - peaceful, happy (explanatory dictionary). 2. A combination of the indicated typical fragments. 3. A special tonality of the description is created by the author by using naming (“The school where you studied”, “The house where you lived”) and impersonal (“It was good”, “And, most importantly, simple”) sentences. It seems that the author closes his eyes and sees his childhood: here is the house, here is the school, here is the yard. The ellipsis also gives a special tone to this passage: it is felt that the author could tell a lot more about his childhood, that he is nostalgic for it. 4. The second description is an antonym to the first. Type of speech - description. The ellipsis in this passage allows the reader to imagine the horror of the war for himself. 5. The leading type of speech is narration. Other style inclusions: “The left edge of the field is located at a distance of so many meters in azimuth such and such from an iron barrel at the bottom of a ravine” (official business); “Who is tying minefields like that? 3|
27. 27. Today there is a barrel, but not tomorrow. .. Disgrace! ..” (colloquial). Their function is to make the text believable, visual. “And suddenly he stopped, not believing his eyes” - the author conveys surprise with a phraseological turn. 52(n). On one's own. SYNTAX AND PUNCTUATION COMPLEX SENTENCE 5 7. The concept of a complex sentence Mr.---t a. 6 53 (42). Vladimirskaya go, dscheeseneshtezh wait “gave; pita. _ S A S ---g ‚Cross: nsh. Vladimir found himself in a field and in vain wanted to mark the road again; stroking her steps at random, and every minute now vtdzhala on a snowdrift, then tumbled into a hole; noun constantly capsize; Vladimir stashtlsya only not to follow the present direction. It's still bad odkolodosyatttttdsch; the grove was all squeaking - Metsl did not subside, dsh did not clear up. Lontadt, began USTSVZT, and FROM NSGO 391 KZTNLS hail, PS- LOOKING AT THE THAT ONE MINUTE WAS TO THE BELT IN THE SNSSH. 54(43). 1) A simple sentence is a sentence with one grammatical basis (Vladimir tried not to lose the real direction). A complex sentence is a sentence with two or more predicative stems, and simple sentences as part of a complex one form a semantic and intonational whole. (But as soon as Vladimir left the outskirts in the field, the wind picked up, and there was such a snowstorm that he could not see anything). 2) In complex sentences, the information is richer (Simple: Vladimir rode through a field crossed by deep ravines. Complex: The horse began to get tired, and sweat rolled down from him in spite of the fact that he was constantly waist-deep in snow.) 3) According to the method of connecting simple sentences, complex sentences are divided into allied and non-union. (Allied: Lo-32
28. 28. The shad began to get tired, and sweat rolled down from him in hail, despite the fact that he was constantly waist-deep in snow. Non-union: About ten more minutes passed, the grove was still not to be seen.) 4) The coordinative connection gives simple sentences as part of a complex relative syntactic independence. (The horse began to get tired, and sweat rolled down on him in hail ...). In complex sentences, one simple sentence (subordinate) depends on another (main). From the main clause to the subordinate clause, you can ask a question. (But it seemed to him (it seemed what?) that more than half an hour had passed, and he had not yet reached the Zhadrinskaya grove.) 5) Simple sentences as part of a complex one form a semantic and intonational whole. 6) Commas, semicolons are used, in addition, colons and dashes can also be used. 55 (44) - Kazgatoa barely. stshschcht forest; cold bayonets hung. 55(c). 1. Compound. For example: The rain has almost passed, and the last large drops rarely and heavily fell on the foliage. Complicated. For example: A new house was built where a playground used to be. 2. The connection between the parts is closer in complex sentences. In compound - more free. 56 (45) - In one minute the road skidded; write in. disappeared into a cloudy and yellowish haze through which white flakes of snow flew; the sky merged with the earth. tzh. 7* and ‚gch ‚gp g". With the earth - Yoshi (pl.), to lose - loss, it seemed - it seems. R / "KZh yells, dawn, plain. narsch. and sdlog Stepped at random, ascends into the beams of rays. pr. dry He only hoped for luck. P. SECHTS. VZLYA NSO WANTED SHSL N VS 'rSCH) ' WITH NSZNZKOMTSM. 57 (46). The area of ​​scientific interests of the scientist is very extensive: he was engaged in the study of Russian grammar, learning the old languages, analyzing the work of great Russian writers. 2-12818 33
29. 29. ["° \u003d 11 [-ё‚ё‚ ё] - Narrative, non-exclamation, complex, union-free connection. In a publicly accessible form, the basics of the scientific syntax of the Russian LANGUAGE AND SH ZNCHSHZ OF THE SYNTHXXICAL SYSTEM OF THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE were set forth. . , complex: main part - Not | , subordinate clauses - Мз 2 and 3 (homogeneous definitives) Ш, that DN Ovsyaniko-Kudikovsky "a reliable way to scientific and school processing of our syntax"? sa. | hgt 2 [- \u003d 1‚ (what - \u003d) - Narrative, non-exclamatory, complex: main part - Mg 1, subordinate - Ko 2 (explanatory) Dmitry Nikolayevich was not only a talented critic and scholar, sh of high culture , kind, soft, humane, with whom, according to his colleagues and students, it was easy and joyful to work. KVKIM Ga 3 [: =], [ai], (with whom =). unionless (Not 1 and La 2) and subordinating (Not 2 and Not 3) (Not 3 attributive). 58(47). The rapid development of modern science. Now it is not uncommon for a recent dream to become a reality, and this has been happening before our eyes for only decades.<___>In 1947, the well-known American polar explorer R. Byrd wrote: “On the edge of our planet lies, like a sleeping PRINCSSZ. ZSMLVZh Ominous and beautiful, she lies in her frosty slumber in the folds of MZNTY "SNSGZ, such is Antarctica ... - a continent that is equal in area to South America, and inside the region of which we know in fact no less than the illuminated side of the moon."<. ..>But just two decades later, people not only saw Zemto from space, they saw not only the reverse side of Lu-34
30. 30. We, but also visited it, made a map of the Moon, sent automatic stations to Venus and Mars. In recent years, our knowledge of Antarctica has increased immeasurably. We [pushed her shots, hissed her all at once to voeshyaraootsvedinid, The map is invisible and avshoennihshchayolov. Moreover, it has already been possible to estimate the thickness of the glaciation and get the first idea of ​​its under-ice relief. (A. Gusev.) e 8. Types of complex sentences. Means of communication between parts of a complex sentence 59 (48). In the swamp, there are urns of frogs for all the voices, and near the shore in the lake there are flat pike: they spawned. Homey hedgehog [DRINK IN HIS MINK, TZSCHZ on KOLTOCHKZH Juicy SPSLYS yaoloki, which mouth; nrshel in someone's garden. A (N. Sladkov.) ZSP-| . Yokyom is uncultivated land. cr. incl. Land TtEkem not_processed. / H-worked land. 60 (49). a) Layered sentences with non-union connection. 4) In vain the eye is looking for a new object: 5553911621, dshdtrda, nidaooooa - VЁЁEaGo but visible - b) Thought and mooooo all intensify. shtshodv weak dohsh sost. sk. __""m" SHENOVITE)! SHZHO. . completeness 7) The horses will get better, the snow will grow more and more. .. 8) The wind howled furiously; snow, both from a scoop, and sprinkled on the floors of a fur coat. b) Compound sentences with coordinating conjunctions. CONST. SC. 1) The blizzard was getting stronger and stronger, and from above the snow was coming and the Odyssey 5) It seems that through the fog there are stars; but the asterisks are ube- ODIOSOSGG. they rise higher and higher from the gaze, and only see snow. .. SOSTESK. 9) The sky on the right in the east was even, temio: color; but the bright red-orange slanting stripes were more and more clearly marked on it. 35 2*
31. 31. C) COMPLEX: SUBMISSIONS WITH SUBJECT OR ALLIED WORDS. 2) From time to time the sleigh tapped on the bare ice-covered skull - ODIOSOST ku. from which the snow was mixed. Since I. without spending the night, I was already driving for the sixth HUNDRED 10 VSST, DESPITE THAT I was VERY interested in the OUTCOME of our wandering, I involuntarily closed my eyes and dozed off. 3) While I was taking a nap, the moon was choking and throwing its cold and bright light through the loose 131311 and the falling snow. (L. Tolstoy.) Schemes: 1)[--“1‚And[-=1- 2) [- = ], (from which -). (Since - ‘=), (despite the fact that = -), [- ё and ё]. 3) (While -- =), [yo - and yo]. 4) k - \u003d 1: m \u003d 1. 5) [ \u003d 1; but 1 - =1. And 1 t]. 6) - 61 (50). Autumn 915419121; already idols - she was already shaking off the last leaves from naked branches; Doshul autumn hschd - the road is frozen. The murmur is still running after the ore mill, But the awl has already frozen; my neighbor stalks the out-of-town fields with his eagerness, And guards the winters from mad fun, And the sleeping oak forests wake up the barking of dogs. The first sentence has four parts: it says that: 1) October has come, 2) the grove is shaking off the leaves, 3) the autumn chill has died, 4) the road is freezing. In the second part we find a consequence of what was said in the first (October has come, so that the grove shakes off the leaves). The second part is closely related to the first: it explains the reason why the grove shakes off the last leaves. Similarly with the third and fourth parts: they are also closely related, because in the fourth part we see the reason why
32. 32. swarm the road freezes through. Dependence in both cases is framed by an allied relationship, and a dash is indicated on the letter. In general, the sentence has the following structure: [-=1-[-=1;[= -1--[-=1- The second sentence has five parts: it says that 1) a stream runs behind the mill, 2) the pond is frozen , 3) the neighbor hurries to the outgoing fields with a hunt, 4) they suffer from the furious fun of winter, 5) the barking of dogs wakes up the oak forests. The first and second parts of the sentence are opposed to one another with the help of the adversative conjunction but. The third, fourth and fifth parts are characterized by a coordinative connection, and in the fourth and fifth parts the connecting union and is used. This sentence has the following structure: [= -1‚But[-= ]; [-=1‚ and [= -]‚ and [= -1. 62 (51). He spoke about him in such detail and with such enthusiasm that Odintsova turned to him and looked at him attentively. (I. S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”) (Narrative, non-exclamatory, complex, two two-part stems, complex with subordinate clauses and actions). Scheme: 63 (52). 2) On a sparkling white glider, we drove into a stone grotto, and the overturned body of the rock obscured the sky from us. (N. Zabolotsky.) | . Narrative ‚ non-exclamation. 2. Two grammatical bases - that means complex; bases are two-part. 3. Coordinating connection with the help of the connecting union And; verbose sentence. 4-[--=1‚Н[-=1- 2 4) "I love prose at the beginning of May, when the first shssh, as if frolicking and playing, [rumbles in the blue sky. (F. Tyutchev.) 1. Narrative ‚ non-exclamation 2. Main part - Not 1; subordinate - Not 2. 3. Complicated sentence with a clause of tense 4. [=], (when - =). ) 37

The destroyed scientific and technological potential, the one that our country had in the days of the USSR, cannot be restored, and it is not necessary. The main task today is to create in Russia a new, powerful scientific and technological potential at an accelerated pace, and for this it is necessary to know exactly the true state of affairs in science and higher education. Only then will decisions on management, support and financing of this area be made on a scientific basis and give real results - says the chief researcher of the Institute for Scientific Information in Social Sciences (INION) of the Russian Academy of Sciences, head of the Center for Informatization, Social and Technological Research and Scientific Analysis (Truth Center ) Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology and Ministry of Education Anatoly Ilyich Rakitov. From 1991 to 1996, he was an adviser to the President of Russia on issues of scientific and technological policy and informatization, and headed the Information and Analytical Center of the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation. In recent years, under the leadership of A. I. Rakitov and with his participation, several projects have been carried out devoted to the analysis of the development of science, technology and education in Russia.

SIMPLE TRUTH AND SOME PARADOXES

All over the world, at least, so the majority thinks, science is done by young people. Our scientific staff is rapidly aging. In 2000, the average age of academicians of the Russian Academy of Sciences was over 70 years. This can still be understood - great experience and great achievements in science are not given immediately. But the fact that the average age of PhDs is 61 and candidates 52 is alarming. If the situation does not change, then by about 2016 the average age of researchers will reach 59 years. For Russian men, this is not only the last year of pre-retirement life, but also its average duration. Such a picture is emerging in the system of the Academy of Sciences. In universities and branch research institutes on a nationwide scale, the age of doctors of science is 57-59 years, and candidates - 51-52 years. So in 10-15 years science may disappear from us.

Thanks to the highest performance, supercomputers are able to solve the most complex problems. The most powerful computers of this class with a performance of up to 12 teraflops (1 teraflop - 1 trillion operations per second) are produced in the USA and Japan. In August of this year, Russian scientists announced the creation of a supercomputer with a performance of 1 teraflop. The photo shows frames from TV reports dedicated to this event.

But here's what's interesting. According to official data, over the past 10 years competitions for universities have grown (2001 was a record year in this sense), and postgraduate and doctoral studies "baked" highly qualified young scientists at an unprecedented rate. If we take the number of students studying at universities in the 1991/92 academic year as 100%, then in 1998/99 their number increased by 21.2%. The number of graduate students of scientific research institutes has increased during this time by almost a third (1,577 people), and graduate students of universities - by 2.5 times (82,584 people). Admission to graduate school tripled (28,940 people), and the output was: in 1992 - 9532 people (23.2% of them with a dissertation defense), and in 1998 - 14,832 people (27.1% - with a dissertation defense). dissertations).

What is happening in our country with scientific personnel? What is actually their real scientific potential? Why do they age? The general picture is this. Firstly, after graduating from universities, not all students are eager to go to graduate school, many go there to avoid the army or live freely for three years. Secondly, the defended candidates and doctors of science, as a rule, can find a salary worthy of their title not in state research institutes, design bureaus, GIPRs and universities, but in commercial structures. And they go there, leaving their titled supervisors the opportunity to quietly grow old.

Leading universities provide students with the opportunity to use modern computer technology.

Employees of the Center for Informatization, Socio-Technological Research and Scientific Analysis (Truth Center) studied about a thousand websites of firms and recruiting organizations with job offers. The result was as follows: university graduates are offered an average salary of about $300 (today it is almost 9 thousand rubles), economists, accountants, managers and marketers - $400-500, programmers, highly qualified banking specialists and financiers - from $350 to $550, qualified managers - $ 1,500 or more, but this is already rare. Meanwhile, among all the proposals there is not even a mention of scientists, researchers, etc. This means that a young candidate or doctor of science is doomed either to work at an average university or research institute for a salary equivalent to 30-60 dollars, and at the same time constantly rush to looking for third-party earnings, part-time jobs, private lessons, etc., or get a job in a commercial company not in their specialty, where neither a candidate's degree nor a doctoral degree is useful to him, except perhaps for prestige.

But there are other important reasons why young people leave the scientific field. Man does not live by bread alone. He still needs the opportunity to improve, to realize himself, to establish himself in life. He wants to see the future and feel at least on the same level with foreign colleagues. In our Russian conditions it is almost impossible. And that's why. First, science and the high-tech developments based on it are in very little demand in our country. Secondly, the experimental base, educational and research equipment, devices and devices in educational institutions are physically and morally obsolete by 20-30 years, and in the best, most advanced universities and research institutes - by 8-11 years. If we take into account that in developed countries technologies in science-intensive industries replace each other every 6 months - 2 years, such a lag may become irreversible. Thirdly, the system of organization, management, support of science and research and, most importantly, information support remained, at best, at the level of the 1980s. Therefore, almost every really capable, and even more so talented young scientist, if he does not want to degenerate, seeks to go into a commercial structure or go abroad.

According to official statistics, in 2000, 890.1 thousand people were employed in science (in 1990, more than 2 times more - 1943.3 thousand people). If we evaluate the potential of science not by the number of employees, but by results, that is, by the number of patents registered, especially abroad, sold, including abroad, licenses and publications in prestigious international publications, then it turns out that we are inferior to the most developed countries by tens or even hundreds of times. In the USA, for example, in 1998, 12.5 million people were employed in science, of which 505,000 were doctors of science. There are no more than 5% of them from the CIS countries, and many grew up, studied and received degrees there, and not here. Thus, it would be wrong to say that the West lives at the expense of our scientific and intellectual potential, but it is worth assessing its real state and prospects.

SCIENTIFIC-INTELLECTUAL AND SCIENTIFIC-TECHNOLOGICAL POTENTIAL

There is an opinion that, despite all the difficulties and losses, aging and outflow of personnel from science, we still retain the scientific and intellectual potential that allows Russia to remain among the leading powers of the world, and our scientific and technological developments are still attractive to foreign and domestic investors, however, investments are scanty.

In fact, in order for our products to win the domestic and foreign markets, they must qualitatively surpass the products of competitors. But the quality of products directly depends on technology, and modern, especially high technologies (they are the most profitable) - on the level of scientific research and technological development. In turn, their quality is the higher, the higher the qualifications of scientists and engineers, and its level depends on the entire education system, especially higher education.

If we talk about the scientific and technological potential, then this concept includes not only scientists. Its components are also the instrumentation and experimental park, access to information and its completeness, the system for managing and supporting science, as well as the entire infrastructure that ensures the advanced development of science and the information sector. Without them, neither technology nor the economy simply can work.

A very important issue is the training of specialists in universities. Let's try to figure out how they are prepared using the example of the most rapidly developing sectors of modern science, which include biomedical research, research in the field of information technology and the creation of new materials. According to the latest "Science and engineering indicators" handbook published in the USA in 2000, in 1998 spending on these areas alone was comparable to defense spending and exceeded spending on space research. In total, $220.6 billion was spent on the development of science in the United States, of which two-thirds ($167 billion) were spent by the corporate and private sectors. A significant part of these gigantic funds went to biomedical and especially biotechnological research. Hence, they were highly cost-effective, since money in the corporate and private sectors is spent only on what makes a profit. Thanks to the implementation of the results of these studies, health care, the state of the environment have improved, and agricultural productivity has increased.

In 2000, specialists from Tomsk State University, together with scientists from the ISTINA Center and several leading Russian universities, studied the quality of biologist training in Russian universities. Scientists came to the conclusion that traditional biological disciplines are taught in classical universities. Botany, zoology, human and animal physiology are available in 100% of universities, plant physiology - in 72%, and such subjects as biochemistry, genetics, microbiology, soil science - only in 55% of universities, ecology - in 45% of universities. At the same time, modern disciplines: plant biotechnology, physical and chemical biology, electron microscopy - are taught only in 9% of universities. Thus, in the most important and promising areas of biological science, students are trained in less than 10% of classical universities. There are, of course, exceptions. For example, Moscow State University. Lomonosov and especially Pushchino State University, which operates on the basis of the campus, graduate only masters, postgraduates and doctoral students, and the ratio of students and supervisors in it is approximately 1:1.

Such exceptions emphasize that biology students can receive professional training at the level of the beginning of the 21st century only in a few universities, and even then they are not perfect. Why? Let me explain with an example. To solve the problems of genetic engineering, the use of transgene technology in animal husbandry and crop production, and the synthesis of new drugs, modern supercomputers are needed. In the United States, Japan, and the European Union countries, they are powerful computers with a performance of at least 1 teraflop (1 trillion operations per second). At St. Louis University, students had access to a 3.8 teraflop supercomputer two years ago. Today, the performance of the most powerful supercomputers has reached 12 teraflops, and in 2004 they are going to release a supercomputer with a capacity of 100 teraflops. In Russia, there are no such machines, our best supercomputer centers operate on computers of much lower power. True, this summer Russian specialists announced the creation of a domestic supercomputer with a capacity of 1 teraflop.

Our backwardness in information technology is directly related to the training of future intellectual personnel in Russia, including biologists, since computer synthesis, for example, of molecules, genes, decoding of the human, animal and plant genome can only give a real effect on the basis of the most powerful computing systems.

Finally, one more interesting fact. Researchers from Tomsk selectively interviewed professors of biological departments of universities and found that only 9% of them more or less regularly use the Internet. With a chronic shortage of scientific information received in the traditional form, not having access to the Internet or not being able to use its resources means only one thing - a growing backlog in biological, biotechnological, genetic engineering and other research and the absence of international relations absolutely necessary in science.

Today's students, even at the most advanced biological faculties, receive training at the level of the 70-80s of the last century, although they enter into life already in the 21st century. As far as research institutes are concerned, only about 35 biological research institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences have more or less modern equipment, and therefore only there research is carried out at an advanced level. Only a few students of several universities and the Educational Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences (created within the framework of the "Integration of Science and Education" program and has the status of a university) can participate in them, receiving training on the basis of academic research institutes.

Another example. The first place among high technologies is occupied by the aerospace industry. Everything is involved in it: computers, modern control systems, precision instrumentation, engine and rocket science, etc. Although Russia occupies a fairly strong position in this industry, the lag is noticeable here too. It concerns to a large extent the aviation universities of the country. The specialists of the MAI Technological University who participated in our research named some of the most painful problems associated with the training of personnel for the aerospace industry. In their opinion, the level of training of teachers of applied departments (design, engineering, calculation) in the field of modern information technologies is still low. This is largely due to the lack of an influx of young teaching staff. The aging teaching staff is not able to intensively master the constantly improving software products, not only because of gaps in computer training, but also because of the lack of modern technical means and software and information systems and, which is far from unimportant, due to the lack of material incentives. .

Another important industry is the chemical industry. Today, chemistry is unthinkable without scientific research and high-tech production systems. Indeed, chemistry is new building materials, medicines, fertilizers, varnishes and paints, the synthesis of materials with desired properties, superhard materials, films and abrasives for instrumentation and mechanical engineering, the processing of energy carriers, the creation of drilling units, etc.

What is the situation in the chemical industry and especially in the field of applied experimental research? For which industries do we train specialists - chemists? Where and how will they "chemize"?

Scientists from the Yaroslavl Technological University, who studied this issue together with specialists from the ISTINA Center, cite the following information: today the entire Russian chemical industry accounts for about 2% of the world's chemical production. This is only 10% of the volume of chemical production in the United States and no more than 50-75% of the volume of chemical production in countries such as France, Great Britain or Italy. As for applied and experimental research, especially in universities, the picture is as follows: by 2000, only 11 research projects had been completed in Russia, and the number of experimental developments had fallen to almost zero with a complete lack of funding. The technologies used in the chemical industry are outdated compared to the technologies of developed industrial countries, where they are updated every 7-8 years. Even large plants, such as those producing fertilizers, which have received a large share of investments, operate without modernization for an average of 18 years, while in the industry as a whole, equipment and technologies are updated after 13-26 years. By comparison, the average age of US chemical plants is six years.

PLACE AND ROLE OF BASIC RESEARCH

The main generator of fundamental research in our country is the Russian Academy of Sciences, but its more or less tolerably equipped institutes employ only about 90,000 employees (together with service personnel), the rest (more than 650,000 people) work in research institutes and universities. Basic research is also being carried out there. According to the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation, in 1999, about 5,000 of them were completed in 317 universities. The average budget cost for one fundamental research is 34,214 rubles. If we take into account that this includes the purchase of equipment and research objects, electricity costs, overheads, etc., then only 30 to 40% is left for salaries. It is easy to calculate that if at least 2-3 researchers or teachers participate in fundamental research, then they can count on an increase in wages, at best, 400-500 rubles per month.

As for the interest of students in scientific research, it rests more on enthusiasm than on material interest, and there are very few enthusiasts these days. At the same time, the subject of university research is very traditional and far from current problems. In 1999, universities conducted 561 studies in physics, and only 8 in biotechnology. That was thirty years ago, but it should not be today. In addition, fundamental research costs millions, and even tens of millions of dollars - with the help of wires, cans and other home-made devices, they have not been carried out for a long time.

Of course, there are additional sources of funding. In 1999, 56% of scientific research in universities was funded by self-supporting work, but they were not fundamental and could not radically solve the problem of creating a new human resources potential. The leaders of the most prestigious universities that receive orders for research work from commercial clients or foreign firms, realizing how much “fresh blood” is needed in science, have begun in recent years to pay extra to those graduate and doctoral students whom they would like to keep at the university for research or teaching work, to purchase new equipment. But only very few universities have such opportunities.

BET ON CRITICAL TECHNOLOGIES

The concept of "critical technologies" first appeared in America. This was the name of the list of technological areas and developments that were primarily supported by the US government in the interests of economic and military superiority. They were selected on the basis of an extremely thorough, complex and multi-stage procedure, which included the examination of each item on the list by financiers and professional scientists, politicians, businessmen, analysts, representatives of the Pentagon and the CIA, congressmen and senators. Critical technologies were carefully studied by specialists in the field of science, science and technometry.

A few years ago, the Russian government also approved a list of critical technologies prepared by the Ministry of Science and Technical Policy (in 2000 it was renamed the Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology) of more than 70 main headings, each of which included several specific technologies. Their total number exceeded 250. This is much more than, for example, in England - a country with a very high scientific potential. Neither in terms of funds, nor in terms of personnel, nor in terms of equipment, Russia could create and implement such a number of technologies. Three years ago, the same ministry prepared a new list of critical technologies, including 52 headings (still, by the way, not approved by the government), but we cannot afford it either.

To present the true state of affairs, here are some results of the analysis performed by the TRUE Center of two critical technologies from the last list. These are immunocorrection (in the West they use the term "immunotherapy" or "immunomodulation") and the synthesis of superhard materials. Both technologies are based on serious fundamental research and are aimed at industrial implementation. The first is important for maintaining human health, the second - for the radical modernization of many industrial productions, including defense, civil instrumentation and engineering, drilling rigs, etc.

Immunocorrection involves, first of all, the creation of new drugs. This also includes technologies for the production of immunostimulants to fight allergies, cancer, a number of colds and viral infections, etc. It turned out that, despite the general similarity of the structure, the studies conducted in Russia are clearly lagging behind. For example, in the United States, in the most important area - immunotherapy with dendritic cells, which is successfully used in the treatment of oncological diseases, the number of publications has increased by more than 6 times over 10 years, and we had no publications on this topic. I admit that research is underway, but if they are not recorded in publications, patents and licenses, then they are unlikely to be of great importance.

Over the past decade, the Pharmacological Committee of Russia has registered 17 domestic immunomodulating drugs, 8 of them belong to the class of peptides, which are now almost not in demand on the international market. As for domestic immunoglobulins, their poor quality makes it necessary to satisfy demand with foreign-made drugs.

And here are some results related to another critical technology - the synthesis of superhard materials. Research by the well-known science expert Yu. V. Granovsky showed that there is an "introduction effect" here: the results obtained by Russian scientists are implemented in specific products (abrasives, films, etc.) produced by domestic enterprises. However, even here the situation is far from favorable.

The situation with the patenting of scientific discoveries and inventions in this area is especially alarming. Some patents of the Institute for High Pressure Physics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, issued in 2000, were claimed as early as 1964, 1969, 1972, 1973, 1975. Of course, it is not scientists who are to blame for this, but systems of examination and patenting. A paradoxical picture has emerged: on the one hand, the results of scientific research are recognized as original, and on the other hand, they are obviously useless, since they are based on technological developments long gone. These discoveries are hopelessly outdated, and it is unlikely that licenses for them will be in demand.

This is the state of our scientific and technological potential, if you delve into its structure not from amateurish, but from scientific positions. But we are talking about the most important, from the point of view of the state, critical technologies.

SCIENCE SHOULD BE FAVORABLE TO THOSE WHO CREATE IT

Back in the 17th century, the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes wrote that people are driven by profit. 200 years later, Karl Marx, developing this idea, argued that history is nothing but the activity of people pursuing their own goals. If this or that activity is not profitable (in this case we are talking about science, scientists, developers of modern technologies), then there is nothing to expect that the most talented, first-class trained young scientists will go into science, who will move almost for nothing and in the absence of a proper infrastructure. her forward.

Today, scientists say that it is unprofitable for them to patent the results of their research in Russia. They turn out to be the property of research institutes and, more broadly, of the state. But the state, as you know, has almost no funds for their implementation. If new developments nevertheless reach the stage of industrial production, then their authors, at best, receive a bonus of 500 rubles, or even nothing at all. It is much more profitable to put the documentation and prototypes in a briefcase and fly to some highly developed country where the work of scientists is valued differently. “If ours,” one foreign businessman told me, “we would pay 250-300 thousand dollars for a certain scientific work, then we will pay yours 25 thousand dollars for it. Agree that this is better than 500 rubles.”

Until intellectual property belongs to the one who creates it, until scientists begin to receive direct benefits from it, until they make radical changes on this issue to our imperfect legislation, to the progress of science and technology, to the development of scientific and technological potential, and therefore , and it is pointless to hope for an economic recovery in our country. If the situation does not change, the state may be left without modern technologies, and therefore without competitive products. So in a market economy, profit is not a disgrace, but the most important incentive for social and economic development.

BREAKING TO THE FUTURE IS STILL POSSIBLE

What can and should be done so that science, which is still preserved in our country, begins to develop and becomes a powerful factor in economic growth and improvement of the social sphere?

First, it is necessary, without postponing for a year, or even for half a year, to radically improve the quality of training for at least that part of students, graduate students and doctoral students who are ready to remain in domestic science.

Secondly, to concentrate the extremely limited financial resources allocated for the development of science and education on several priority areas and critical technologies focused exclusively on boosting the domestic economy, social sphere and state needs.

Thirdly, in state research institutes and universities, to direct the main financial, personnel, information and technical resources to those projects that can give really new results, and not to scatter funds on many thousands of pseudo-fundamental scientific topics.

Fourth, it is time to create federal research universities based on the best higher educational institutions that meet the highest international standards in the field of scientific infrastructure (information, experimental equipment, modern network communications and information technologies). They will prepare first-class young specialists for work in the domestic academic and industrial science and higher education.

Fifth, it is time to make a decision at the state level to create scientific, technological and educational consortiums that will unite research universities, advanced research institutes and industrial enterprises. Their activities should be focused on scientific research, innovation and radical technological modernization. This will allow us to produce high-quality, constantly updated, competitive products.

Sixth, in the shortest possible time, by a government decision, it is necessary to instruct the Ministry of Industry and Science, the Ministry of Education, other ministries, departments and administrations of regions where there are state universities and research institutes to start developing legislative initiatives on intellectual property issues, improving patenting processes, scientific marketing, scientific educational management. It is necessary to legislate the possibility of a sharp (stage-by-stage) increase in the salaries of scientists, starting primarily with state scientific academies (RAS, RAMS, RAAS), state scientific and technical centers and research universities.

Finally, seventh, it is urgent to adopt a new list of critical technologies. It should contain no more than 12-15 main positions focused primarily on the interests of society. It is they that the state should formulate, involving in this work, for example, the Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology, the Ministry of Education, the Russian Academy of Sciences and state industry academies.

Naturally, the ideas about critical technologies developed in this way, on the one hand, should be based on the fundamental achievements of modern science, and on the other hand, take into account the specifics of the country. For example, for the tiny Principality of Liechtenstein, which has a network of first-class roads and a highly developed transport service, transport technologies have not been critical for a long time. As for Russia, a country with a vast territory, scattered settlements and difficult climatic conditions, for it the creation of the latest transport technologies (air, land and water) is really a decisive issue from an economic, social, defense, environmental and even geopolitical point of view, because our country can link Europe and the Pacific region with the main highway.

Taking into account the achievements of science, the specifics of Russia and the limitations of its financial and other resources, we can offer a very short list of truly critical technologies that will give a quick and tangible result and ensure sustainable development and growth in people's well-being.

Critical ones include:

* energy technologies: nuclear energy, including the processing of radioactive waste, and the deep modernization of traditional heat and power resources. Without this, the country may freeze out, and industry, agriculture and cities may be left without electricity;
* transport technologies. For Russia, modern cheap, reliable, ergonomic vehicles are the most important condition for social and economic development;
* information Technology. Without modern means of informatization and communication, management, development of production, science and education, even simple human communication will be simply impossible;
* biotechnological research and technology. Only their rapid development will make it possible to create a modern profitable agriculture, competitive food industries, to raise pharmacology, medicine and healthcare to the level of the requirements of the 21st century;
* environmental technologies. This is especially true for the urban economy, since up to 80% of the population lives in cities today;
* rational use of natural resources and exploration. If these technologies are not modernized, the country will be left without raw materials;
* mechanical engineering and instrument making as the basis of industry and agriculture;
* a whole range of technologies for light industry and the production of household goods, as well as for housing and road construction. Without them, it is completely meaningless to talk about the well-being and social well-being of the population.

If such recommendations are accepted and we start financing not priority areas and critical technologies in general, but only those that society really needs, then we will not only solve Russia’s current problems, but also build a springboard for jumping into the future.

EIGHT CRITICAL TECHNOLOGIES THAT CAN BOOST THE ECONOMY AND WELFARE OF RUSSIANS:

3. 4.

5. Rational nature management and exploration. 6.

Academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences A. RAKITOV.

Literature

Alferov Zh., acad. RAN. Physics on the threshold of the XXI century. - No. 3, 2000

Alferov Zh., acad. RAN. Russia cannot do without its own electronics. - No. 4, 2001

Belokoneva O. Technology of the XXI century in Russia. To be or not to be. - No. 1, 2001

Voevodin V. Supercomputers: yesterday, today, tomorrow. - No. 5, 2000

Gleba Yu., acad. NASU. Once again about biotechnology, but more about how we get out into the world. - No. 4, 2000

Paton B., President of NASU, acad. RAN. Welding and related technologies in the XXI century. - No. 6, 2000

(analytical report by V.V. Ivanov and G.G. Malinetsky to the Izborsk Club)

PREAMBLE

At present, the problems of the development of science are in the center of public attention. A heated discussion in the society was caused by the discussion in the State Duma of the bill "On the Russian Academy of Sciences, reorganization of state academies of sciences and amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation", prepared by the Government of the Russian Federation, which is intended to form a new image of Russian science and determine the fate of fundamental research for decades to come .

Economy and entrepreneurship determine the present day of society and the state; technologies and level of education - tomorrow's (5-10 years). Fundamental science and innovative activity - the day after tomorrow (10 years and more). Speaking about today's problems of domestic science, we discuss and plan the future of Russia.

Currently, there are two approaches to determining the place of science in modern society. Or science is an essential part of the "brain of society", solving problems important for the country, allowing to change for the better its prospects and place in the world, to expand the corridor of opportunities. In this case, Russian science on the part of the state and society should set large-scale tasks and achieve their implementation. Either science is part of the "gentleman's set" of "decent countries", which must be imitated mainly for reasons of prestige, then the struggle for citation, places in ratings, invitations of foreign scientists who should teach us "how to work", and the main the goal is the integration of domestic science into the world scientific space.

The most important metaphor in this problem is innovation reproduction cycle (Fig. 1).

For the researcher, science is the goal and meaning of activity. For society, this is a means to ensure its prosperous, safe life and prosperity now and in the foreseeable future. In response to the challenges faced by society, it, relying on science, acquired knowledge, creates new goods and services (the result of the introduction of inventions, innovations, which are now often called innovations), generates new organizational strategies, goals, changes the worldview and ideology.

The need to do this quickly and on a large scale led in the second half of the 20th century to the creation national innovation systems(NIS) , which can be represented in the simplest form as in Fig. 2.

First, the area of ​​our knowledge and technologies is comprehended, the threats, challenges and opportunities that the study of the unknown can give. This is a very important process that requires dialogue and mutual understanding between the authorities, scientists and society.

Then fundamental research is carried out, the purpose of which is to obtain new knowledge about nature, man and society. The difficulty of planning such work is due to the fact that it is often unclear what efforts and how long the next step into the unknown will require. In parallel with this, specialists are trained who are focused on obtaining and using new knowledge. We will conditionally assume that the block of fundamental science and education costs 1 ruble.

Rice. 1. The cycle of reproduction of innovations

Rice. 2. Organizational structure of the NIS at the macro level.

Then the knowledge gained in the course of research and development (R&D) is embodied in inventions, operating models, new strategies and opportunities. This is done by applied science, which costs about 10 rubles. It is in this sector that about 75% of all inventions are made.

After that, as a result of experimental design developments (R&D), technologies for the production of goods, services, products are created based on the results of applied research, giving new opportunities to society and the state. These goods and services are brought to national or world markets by large public or private high-tech companies. It costs about 100 rubles.

Then the created is sold on the market or used for the benefit of society in another way. Part of the funds received from this is then invested in fundamental and applied research, in the education system and experimental design. The circle closes.

The described cycle of innovation reproduction, which is the core of the national innovation system, can be compared with a car. The goal-setting and prioritization system can be compared to a windshield. (In Russia, it is absent - too many priorities are mentioned in government documents. There are simply no resources for them.) The car has a steering wheel. Coordination of efforts and resources should be carried out in the country, analysis of the results obtained and development of managerial actions on this basis. In the USSR, this function was performed by the State Committee for Science and Technology under the Council of Ministers. There is no such structure in the Russian Federation - about 80 departments can order research at the expense of the federal budget, without coordinating their plans in any way and without bringing together the results ...

Fundamental science and the education system are more like a navigator showing a map of society's possibilities. Luckily, they have survived.

Applied research plays the role of a motor. They were almost completely destroyed at the very beginning of the 1990s by the Yeltsin-Gaidar government. The latter went down in history with the catchphrase that "science will wait." In the last 20 years, Gaidar's strategy has been largely implemented. Russian science is still "waiting"!

The role of the “wheels” is played by large high-tech companies. There are practically none in Russia.

The problem is that for the movement of the "innovative car" all the components are needed. Attempts of non-systemic actions do not lead to positive results. No matter how much you reform the "navigator", the car will not go without an engine and wheels. If you do not use the steering wheel, then you get a waste of Russia's scientific budget on an especially large scale. If you ignore fundamental science and customers who are able to bring the results of applied developments to the Russian and world market, then the engine will run idle. The stories of Rosnano and Skolkovo confirm this.

The systemic nature of the development of science and technology is also manifested in the fact that they are very closely connected with other spheres of life, so we have to talk about the synthesis of efforts in different areas, about innovation development policy(PIR) see fig. 3.

Rice. 3. Components of the innovation development policy.

The latter is a combination of social development policy, scientific, educational and industrial policy, based on available resources and to the maximum extent using the specific competitive advantages of the state - human, geographical, financial, energy and other resources. These resources are directed to the development of science, education, science-intensive production. As a result, new technologies and types of products are being created to ensure the growth rate of the quality of life and the sustainability of socio-economic development at the level of the world's leading countries in this area.

Science, technology and the future

Blessed is he who has visited this world

In his fatal moments!

He was called by all the good

Like an interlocutor at a feast.

F.I. Tyutchev

The results of the development of science and technology can be judged by the number of people on Earth and the average life expectancy. And from this point of view, the achievements of mankind are grandiose.

The number of people on the planet is growing rapidly: every second in the world 21 people are born and 18 people die. Every day the population of the Earth increases by 250 thousand people, and almost all of this increase is in developing countries. In a year, we become more than 90 million people. The growth of the world's population requires at least the same rate of food and energy production, as well as the extraction of minerals, which leads to increasing pressure on the planet's biosphere.

However, even more than absolute numbers, global demographic trends are impressive. The priest, mathematician and economist Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) put forward the theory of population growth at the end of the 18th century. In accordance with it, the number of people in different countries is increasing the same number of times over equal intervals of time (that is, exponentially), and the amount of food increases by the same amount (that is, arithmetic progression). This discrepancy, according to T. Malthus, should lead to devastating wars, reducing the number of people and returning the system to balance.

In conditions of excess resources, the number of all species, from amoebas to elephants, is growing exponentially, as Malthus predicted. The only exception is man. The size of our population over the past 200 thousand years has grown according to a much faster (so-called hyperbolic) law - the red curve in Fig. 4. This law is such that if the trends that have developed over hundreds of thousands of years were preserved, then there would be an infinite number of us with t f= 2025 (in a theory that considers such superfast processes, this date is called moment of exacerbation or point of singularity).

What is it that separates humans from many other species? It is the ability to create, improve and transmit technology. The outstanding Polish science fiction and futurist Stanisław Lem defined them as “methods determined by the state of knowledge and social efficiency to achieve the goals set by society, including those that no one had in mind when getting down to business.” Unlike all other species, we have learned to transfer life-saving technologies in space (from one region to another) and in time (from one generation to another), and this has allowed us to expand our habitat and ecological niche for hundreds of centuries.

Technique, technosphere (from the Greek. techne - art, craftsmanship) we are increasingly considering as artificially created by us "second nature". At the end of the 18th century, the outstanding French mathematician G. Monge combined technical and theoretical knowledge (obtained as a result of fundamental research) in higher education and the activities of engineers, thereby laying the foundations of modern engineering.

The rate of growth in the number of people on the planet for hundreds of thousands of years has grown according to the same law. And surprisingly quickly, within the lifetime of one generation, this trend "breaks" - the rate of population growth in the world as a whole decreases sharply (blue curve in Fig. 4). This phenomenon has been named global demographic transition. This transition is main content of the era. There has never been such a sharp turn in the history of mankind.

What is the future of humanity? The answer to this question is given world dynamics models. The first such model, linking the number of mankind, fixed assets, available resources, the level of pollution, the area of ​​agricultural land, was built by the American scientist J. Forrester in 1971 by order of the Club of Rome, which brings together a number of politicians and entrepreneurs. It was assumed that the relationships between the studied quantities would be the same as in the period from 1900 to 1970. Computer studies of the constructed model made it possible to make a forecast for the 21st century. In accordance with it, the world economy is expected to collapse by 2050. Simplifying the situation, we can say that a negative feedback loop closes: depletion of resources - decrease in production efficiency - decrease in the share of resources allocated to the protection and restoration of the environment - deterioration in public health - degradation and simplification of the technologies used - further depletion of resources that begin to be used with even lesser return.

Later, J. Forrester's employee D. Meadows and his colleagues built a number of more detailed models of world dynamics, which confirmed the conclusions drawn. After 30 years, in 2002, the results of the forecasts were compared in detail with reality - the agreement turned out to be very good. On the one hand, this means that the model correctly reflects the main factors and relationships, on the other hand, that there have been no radical technological shifts that would allow humanity to turn off a dangerous unstable trajectory.

If in the 1970s the conclusions made by scientists seemed unexpected, now they seem obvious.

In a year, humanity produces a volume of hydrocarbons that nature took more than a million years to create. Every third ton of oil today is produced on the sea or ocean shelf down to a depth of 2 km. In the 1980s, an important milestone was passed - the annual volume of oil produced exceeded the annual increase in reserves explored by geologists (see Fig. 5).

If the whole world wants to live by the standards of California, then some minerals on Earth will be enough for 2.5, others - for 4 years ... The edge is very close.

What's the matter? In an inefficient socio-economic structure. The rapid development of science and technology has given rise to the illusion of unlimited possibilities, chances to build a "consumer society", unjustified expectations of society for an easy solution to difficult socio-economic problems with the help of knowledge and technology.

In 2002, the American researcher Mathis Wackernagel proposed a number of methods for evaluating the concept ecological footprint- the land area necessary to obtain the required amount of resources (grain, food, fish, etc.) and "recycle" emissions produced by the world community (the term itself was introduced by William Reese in 1992). Comparing the obtained values ​​with the territories available on the planet, he showed that humanity is already spending 20% ​​more than the level of self-sustenance allows (see Fig. 6).

In the recently published book by Ernst Ulrich von Weizsacker, Carlson Hargrose, Michael Smith "Factor 5. The Formula for Sustainable Growth" it is proved that if the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) consume in the same way as the United States, then humanity will would need five planets like ours. But we have only one Earth...

Is there a way out? Yes, and this way out was found by a group of researchers from the Institute of Applied Mathematics of the USSR Academy of Sciences (now the Institute of Applied Mathematics named after M.V. Keldysh RAS) under the guidance of Professor V.A. Egorov in 1973.

Exploring models of world dynamics, scientists have shown that this is possible. A necessary condition in order not to leave a huge dump or desert to posterity is the creation of two gigantic industries in the world. The first is engaged processing of created and created waste for the purpose of their repeated use. The second puts the planet in order and deals with reclamation of lands taken out of economic circulation. Recently built by Academician V.A. Sadovnichy and foreign member of the RAS A.A. Akaev, the model shows that in a favorable scenario, humanity after 2050 will have to spend more than a quarter of the gross global product on environmental conservation.

Humanity is rapidly moving towards a technological crisis. Science and technology have never faced such large-scale and urgent tasks. Over the next 15-20 years, scientists need to find a new set of life-supporting technologies.(including energy production, food, waste recycling, construction, health, environmental protection, management, monitoring and planning, alignment of interests and many others). Modern technologies provide the current standard of living for mankind, at best, within the next decades. We will have to turn to renewable resources, to new sources of development and create technologies that allow us to develop at least for centuries. There has never been a comparable challenge to science.

Scientific and technological prospects of the first half of the 21st century

The only thing my long life has taught me is that all our science in the face of reality looks primitive and childishly naive - and yet this is the most valuable thing we have.

A. Einstein

At this point, technology and related applied research should be separated from basic science.

The complexity of the dynamics of society is due to the fact that processes that unfold at different characteristic times play a significant role in its development. Overlapping the global demographic changes discussed above are cycles of technological renewal. At the beginning of the 20th century, the outstanding economist Nikolai Dmitrievich Kondratyev showed that the economies of the leading countries were developing long waves duration of 45-50 years. Based on the developed theory, the Great Depression of 1929 was predicted, which played a huge role in the history of the 20th century.

Developing these ideas, Academicians D.S. Lvov and S.Yu. Glazyev developed the theory of global technological modes (GTU), which gives a new look at macroeconomics and long-term forecasting of technological development.

In the transition between modes, some inventors play a key role, changing the face of the economy, and with it the world as a whole, as well as the scientific achievements that made these innovations possible. In the transition from the first to the second order, this is the steam engine and thermodynamics, from the second to the third - the electric motor and electrodynamics, from the third to the fourth - atomic energy and nuclear physics, from the fourth to the fifth - computers and quantum mechanics.

The current change in socio-economic formations is radically changing the structure of a promising technological order. It will be based on fundamental research, and the core will be technological sectors, which are a set of technologies focused on the priorities of Russia's socio-economic development and based on the results of fundamental research (Fig. 7).

Note that both the key invention and the fundamental scientific theory for a given technological order are created during the development of the previous one, sometimes 50 years before they change the world.

More N.D. Kondratiev believed that it was the transitions between ways that were the causes of financial and economic crises, wars and revolutions. This is one of those irregularities in the development of the world system that the classics of Marxism wrote about. Indeed, the transition to the next order is a re-dealing of History cards - an opportunity to create and capture new markets, develop new types of weapons, change the face of war and competition. And, of course, geopolitical actors do not miss the chance to participate in this "race of innovations."

Where is the world now? In crisis, on the way to a new technological order. The locomotive branches of the latter, around which the rest of the industry will be built, can become biotechnologies, nanotechnologies, new environmental management, new medicine, robotics, high humanitarian technologies(allowing the most effective development of the potential of individuals and teams), full scale virtual reality technologies.

From a systemic point of view, the global financial and economic crisis of 2008-2009 and its subsequent waves are connected with the fact that the industries of the fifth technological order no longer give the same return, and the industries of the sixth are not yet ready to invest the gigantic funds available in the world.

Technological forecasts serve as benchmarks, assemblage points, efforts of many and???? organizations. On their basis, entrepreneurs judge the demands of the state, officials - about development priorities, military and engineers - about future opportunities, universities - about the needs of specialists. An example of one of the generalized forecasts made several years ago is shown in Fig. eight . Of course, this does not mean that the listed achievements will be obtained precisely in these terms, however, it is easier to move into the future with such a compass than without it. Unfortunately, now in Russia such work is seriously carried out only by individual enthusiasts.

	around 2012	Hybrid power plant based on fuel cells and gas turbines with efficiency over 60%
	Around 2015	Commercial high temperature superconducting cables. Telemedicine
	Around 2018	Practical Quantum Encryption Techniques
	Closer to 2020	Vehicles without human control
		Quantum computers Cancer treatment
	2022 plus or minus 5 years	Growing and replacing artificial human organs
	around 2025	Efficient water desalination technologies
		Mass commercial operation of maglev trains
	Closer to 2030	hypersonic aircraft
		Achievements of positive energy at thermonuclear installations
		Hydrogen technologies
	Around 2032	Lunar colony
	Around 2037	Flight to Mars
	Closer to 2040	Average life expectancy over 120 years

Rice. 8. Technological forecast for the first half of the XXI century.

In addition, the development of science and technology is not only predicted in the leading countries, it is planned and directed. A striking example is the National Nanotechnology Initiative, substantiated by more than 150 experts and reported to the US Congress by Nobel laureate Richard Smalley (one of the authors of the discovery of C 60 fullerene).

This initiative was put forward by President B. Clinton and approved by Congress in 2000. Unfortunately, the level of elaboration, organization and results obtained from the implementation of a similar initiative in Russia are strikingly different from those obtained in the United States and a number of other countries.

Being realists, we can assume the possibility of breakthroughs precisely in those areas of the global technological space where the groundwork is greatest and changes are occurring very quickly. There are three such areas.

In the 1960s, Gordon Moore, one of the founders of Intel, drew attention to the following pattern in the development of computer technology: every two years, the degree of integration of elements on a chip doubles, and with it the speed of computers grows. This pattern, called "Moore's law", has been operating for more than half a century (Fig. 9). Current computers count 250 billion times faster than the first computers. No other technology has developed at such a pace before.

Rice. 9. Moore's law.

In technological development, an effect is known, sometimes called tangential success. It is usually illustrated with an example from US railroad history. During the railway boom in this country, the greatest benefits and dividends went not to those who produced steam locomotives, and not to those who built railways, but ... to farmers who got the opportunity to deliver grain from the American hinterland to large cities. Apparently, in the modern computer industry in the foreseeable future, we are waiting for "tangential success" and unexpected applications that can fill the current innovation movement in this area with new meaning.

Another area where technological breakthroughs are taking place has to do with the sequencing of the human genome. The bulk of the fundamental knowledge that led to explosive technological growth came from the Human Genome Program (which cost $3.8 billion in the US).

During the implementation of this program, the cost of deciphering the genome decreased by 20,000 times (Fig. 10).

Rice. 10. The cost of decoding the human genome by years.

The creation of an industry that grew around this scientific and technological achievement has already had a very significant impact on the healthcare system, pharmaceuticals, agriculture, and the defense industry. In the United States, 14 million people are arrested every year, DNA samples are taken from them, which are then entered into a database. Forensic specialists then turn to this database when searching for criminals ...

The achievements associated with the Human Genome Project have become a factor in geo-economics and geopolitics. In February 2013, Barack Obama told fellow citizens: “The time has come to reach a new level of research and development not seen since the space race ... Now is not the time to gut investments in science and innovation ... Every dollar we have invested in mapping the human genome , put $140 back into our economy - every dollar!"

Another field of promising technologies and applied research can be characterized by the words interdisciplinarity and self-organization. It is these two concepts that distinguish a promising technological order from the previous ones. Until the 1970s, science, technology, and organizations moved mainly in the direction of increasing specialization (disciplinary organization of science, sectoral management of industry, etc.).

However, then the situation began to change rapidly - the same principles and technologies turned out to be universal, applicable to solving a huge number of different problems. A classic example is the laser, which can cut steel and weld the cornea of ​​the eye. Another example of a technology that is rapidly growing in scope is additive manufacturing methods (3D printing, 3D printers). With its help, pistols are now “printed” along with cartridges, houses, afterburners and even prosthetic limbs.

On the other hand, in many cases, solutions to scientific and technological problems are initially sought at the intersection of several approaches. Thus, nanotechnological initiatives are being implemented all over the world, which are aimed at developing the entire block of nanoinfobiocognitive (NBIC - NanoBioInfoCognito) technologies. However, the last decade has shown that this is not enough, that social technologies (SCBIN - SocioCognitoInfoBioNano) must be added to this synthesis. The simplest examples are robotic biotechnology laboratories in which robots do analyzes and research (the laboratory operates under the slogan "People must think. Machines must work"). In telemedicine, it has become possible to use robots for surgical operations and carry them out in a situation where the doctor is thousands of kilometers away from the patient.

The philosophy of technology was actively developing in the 20th century, however, the rapid, largely paradoxical development of technology in the second half of the 20th and in the 21st century allows us to talk about technology ecology. The latter develop, interact, support and displace each other, sometimes "close" the former methods of production or organization. Along with the classical Darwinian evolution, which is based on the triad heredity - variability - selection, this is where development goals, social and economic feasibility, risk management, fundamental physical limitations and human limits come into play.

The 19th century was dominated by the illusion of the vast possibilities of organization, both in social space and in the field of technology. But the data of psychology suggest that a person is able to follow only 5-7 values ​​that slowly change over time. He can, when making a decision, take into account only 5-7 factors. Finally, actively, creatively, he can interact only with 5-7 people (with the rest indirectly or stereotypically). And this imposes very serious restrictions on the organizations that we can create, and on the tasks that can be solved with their help.

The main idea of ​​nanotechnology - as formulated by the Nobel laureate Richard Feynman in 1959 - is to make perfect materials that do not have defects at the atomic level, which gives them amazing properties. (For example, carbon nanotubes are 6 times lighter and 100 times stronger than steel; aerogels - excellent heat insulators - are 500 times lighter than water and only twice as heavy as air.) Now scientists have learned how to manipulate individual atoms (for example, you can lay out congratulations on xenon atoms on a single crystal of nickel and see it).

But if we are talking about the creation of materials, then the number of atoms that must stand in their places should be comparable to Avogadro's number. And organizing them, placing them "from top to bottom", from the macro level to the micro level, it is impossible to do this. (It will take longer than the universe exists.)

How to be? The answer and the main hope in both cases is the same. This is self-organization. We need to learn how to move not “from top to bottom”, but “from bottom to top”, - to create such conditions under which the atoms themselves will take the positions in which we want to see them. And in some cases it succeeds!

However, in order to follow these ideas, one must have a very good understanding of the mechanisms of self-organization and the corresponding models (in order to get exactly what we want). That's why self-organization theory, or synergy(from the Greek for "joint action"), is increasingly seen as the key to new technologies.

When it comes to basic research, the degree of uncertainty is much higher than in the technology space. However, here, too, a number of vectors can be distinguished that determine the most probable areas of scientific breakthroughs.

To look into the future, to imagine what scientists will be doing in the next 20-30 years, in which areas the main efforts will be invested, you can see the average citation of works in various fields of knowledge at the present time. The citation rate of articles shows how large and active communities are working in various scientific disciplines.

From school times, most people have the idea that mathematics is the largest and most complex subject, physics and chemistry are about half the size and simpler, and biology is half the size and simpler than physics and chemistry.

However, "adult science" looks completely different today (Fig. 11) . Let's take the "heirs" of school biology - molecular biology and genetics(citation 20.48), biology and biochemistry (16,09), microbiology (14,11), pharmaceuticals with toxicology(11.34) - they are 12 times superior physics(8.45), 8 times chemistry(10.16) and at 27 - mathematics(3.15) or informatics (3,32).

Rice. 11. Scientific priorities in the natural sciences in Russia and in the world.

It is interesting to compare the priorities of domestic and world science (Russia / world). Perhaps the 21st century will be the century of man. The development of the capabilities and abilities of people and collectives will become the main direction of progress. Both the main opportunities and the main threats will be associated with it, so the list of “outsiders” of the Russian scientific space is very indicative, in which the gap from the world level in terms of citation of articles is especially large. These are social sciences (1.02/4.23) and psychology and psychiatry (2.54/10.23). Here we are four times behind the world indicators. And the list is completed by interdisciplinary research, where the backlog becomes fivefold.

Many forecasters of the future of science pay attention to the sharp turn that is taking place in the development of scientific knowledge before our eyes. It can be assumed that the organization of the goal and ideals of science in the 21st century will be very different from both classical and modern (non-classical models).

The book of Jonathan Swift (1667-1745) - a writer, public figure, thinker who worked in the genre of fantastic satire, a contemporary of Isaac Newton - "Traveling to some distant countries of the world by Lemuel Gulliver, first a surgeon, and then the captain of several ships," identified two main directions of development of natural sciences. Firstly, this is a “journey to the midgets”, to the world of microscales. Molecular and atomic physics, quantum mechanics, nuclear physics, and the theory of elementary particles appeared along this path. Secondly, this is a “journey to the giants”, to the world of megascales, to space, to distant galaxies, to astrophysics and cosmology.

Note that here the opposites converge - today the research of matter on ultra-small and super-large scales merge with each other.

Indeed, the Hubble and Kepler telescopes brought into outer space made it possible to discover hundreds of different planets revolving around stars located at great distances from us. These tools showed that in order to explain the observed picture of the evolution of the universe, it is necessary to introduce the concept of dark matter and dark energy, which account for 80 to 95% of the matter of space.

Let's go back to the Gulliver analogy. How important for him was the knowledge gained from the midgets and giants? Humanity has its own characteristic dimensions, on which the most important processes for it unfold. From above they are limited by the diameter of the solar system, from below - by nuclear scales (~10 -15 cm).

The path that began with Democritus, leading deeper into the analysis of ever smaller components of matter, apparently, is coming to an end. "Analysis" in translation from Greek - "crushing, dismemberment". And when embarking on it, researchers usually keep in mind the next stage - synthesis, elucidation of the mechanisms and results of interaction between the studied entities and, ultimately, self-organization, collective phenomena - the spontaneous emergence of order at the next level of organization.

Apparently, here the area of ​​our ignorance is especially close, and the prospects are most impressive.

Twenty years ago, without claims to completeness, three super-tasks of science of the 21st century, which will probably generate research programs and represent, using the terminology of A. Einstein, a combination of "internal perfection" (following the internal logic of the development of scientific knowledge) and "external justification" (social order, society's expectations) . Let's pay attention to them.

Risk Management Theory. The most important condition for successful management is a threat map for the control object. The role of science here is enormous. Recent history, many events of the 21st century have shown that at a high rate of socio-economic and technological changes, control actions led to completely different results than planned.

neuroscience. One of the major scientific mysteries that is likely to be answered in the 21st century is understanding the mystery of consciousness and how the brain functions. Indeed, the brain is a mystery in a technological sense - the switching speed of a trigger in a microcircuit in million times less than the firing rate of a neuron in the brain. Information in the nervous system is transmitted to a million times slower than in a computer. This means that the principles of the brain radically different from those on the basis of which existing computers are built.

To clarify these and many other questions related to neuroscience, in 2013 a large research project "Brain Mapping" was launched in the United States, designed for 10 years with a budget of more than $ 3 billion. The goal of the project, using nanotechnologies, new generation tomographs, computer reconstructions and models, is to find out the structure of the brain and the dynamics of the processes occurring in it. A similar project is starting in the European Community.

The third task is to build mathematical history, including models of world dynamics. This research program was put forward by S.P. Kapitsa, S.P. Kurdyumov and G.G. Malinetsky in 1996. Its implementation implies the following:

· full-scale mathematical modeling of historical processes, taking into account emerging computer technologies and large databases relating to the present and past of mankind;

analysis on this basis of alternatives of historical development, similar to how it is done in the exact sciences, where theories and models make it possible to predict the course of processes under various parameters, initial and boundary conditions (at the same time, history has subjunctive mood);

building on the basis of these models of algorithms for historical and strategic forecasting (at the same time, history also has imperative mood).

Most scientific disciplines have gone through a sequence of stages: description - classification - conceptual modeling and qualitative analysis - mathematical modeling and quantitative analysis - forecast. Probably, in the 21st century, historical science (based on its own achievements, the results of other disciplines and computer modeling) will reach the level of forecasting.

Following the ideas of V.I. Vernadsky, who perspicaciously foresaw the opportunities and threats of the 20th century, over time, humanity will have to increasingly take responsibility for the planet and for its development. And here mathematical history is indispensable. This understanding appears in an increasing number of researchers.

Russian, Soviet, Russian science

“Here they are, the two most important needs of Russia: 1. Correct, at least bring it to D.A. Tolstoy, about 25 years ago, the state of enlightenment of Russian youth, and then go all forward, remembering that without its advanced, active science there will be nothing of its own and that in it, selfless, the loving root of diligence, since in science there are no great absolutely nothing can be done, and 2. To promote by all means, from loans, the rapid growth of our entire industry, including merchant shipping, because industry will not only feed, but also give a living to hard-working people of all ranks and classes, and will reduce idlers to the point that it will be disgusting for them to loaf around, teach them to order in everything, give wealth to the people and new strength to the state.

DI. Mendeleev, Treasured Thoughts. 1905

The attitude towards science in our country can be judged by how the attitude towards the academy has changed. This organization, originally called the Academy of Sciences and Arts, was founded on January 28 (February 8), 1724 in St. Petersburg by decree of Peter I. It is on February 8 that Science Day is celebrated in Russia now. Peter believed that it was urgent to master a number of technologies and sciences that were developed in Western Europe - to build ships, set up fortresses, pour cannons, and also learn navigation and bookkeeping, and then develop your own.

In the early years of the academy, also created according to Western European models, the great mathematician Leonard Euler and the outstanding mechanic Daniil Bernoulli worked there. In 1742, the great Russian scientist Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov was elected to the Academy of Sciences (AN). With his arrival, important features of this scientific center were identified - a wide front of research and a lively response of scientists to the needs of the state.

Since 1803, the highest scientific institution of Russia has become the Imperial Academy of Sciences, since 1836 - the Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, from February 1917 to 1925 - the Russian Academy of Sciences, from July 1925 - the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, from 1991 to the present time - RAS.

In the 19th century, the Pulkovo Observatory (1839), several laboratories and museums were organized at the Academy, in 1841 the departments of physical and mathematical sciences, Russian language and literature, historical and philological sciences were established. Outstanding mathematicians, physicists, chemists, physiologists worked in the academy; among them P.L. Chebyshov, M.V. Ostrogradsky, B.V. Petrov, A.M. Butlerov, N.N. Beketov and I.P. Pavlov.

By the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century, the work of Russian scientists received worldwide recognition. The most famous chemist in the world today is Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev, who discovered the Periodic Law. The Nobel laureates were the creators of the theory of conditioned reflexes I.P. Pavlov (medicine, 1904) and honorary members of the St. Petersburg Academy I.I. Mechnikov (theory of immunity, medicine, 1908) and I.A. Bunin (literature, 1933).

The science of the USSR was one of the most advanced in the world, primarily in the field of natural sciences. This made it possible to bring our country during the 20th century from the position of a secondary semi-feudal state to a number of leading industrial powers, to create the second (in terms of GDP) economy in the world. Much in the Soviet years had to start from scratch. In a country where about 80% of the population was illiterate, there were simply no personnel for the development of a full-fledged science.

In 1934, the academy was transferred from Leningrad to Moscow and became the "headquarters of Soviet science." Members of the academy coordinate entire branches of research, receive great powers and resources. They have a great responsibility. History has shown the far-sightedness of this decision related to the new look of the academy. The work of Soviet scientists played a huge role in the Great Patriotic War.

Significant funds were allocated to finance science. In 1947, a professor's salary was 7 times that of the most skilled worker. In 1987, the journal Nature reported that the USSR spent 3.73% of its budget on R&D, Germany - 2.84%, Japan - 2.77%, Britain - 2.18-2.38% (according to various sources).

A major role in the development of science in the USSR was played by a sharp increase in its funding in the early 1960s. The number of scientific workers from 1950 to 1965 increased more than 4 times, and from 1950 to 1970 more than 7 times. Since the mid-1950s, the growth in the number of scientific personnel has been linear - the country has entered the forefront. From 1960 to 1965, the number of scientific employees was tripled. The growth of national income was also very rapid and, according to Western experts, was mainly due to an increase in labor productivity. It was then that the country created the knowledge economy!

With a budget for science of 15-20% of the American one, Soviet scientists successfully competed with them in all scientific areas. In 1953, the USSR ranked second in the world in terms of the number of students per 10,000 inhabitants and third in terms of the intellectual potential of young people. Now, according to the first indicator, the Russian Federation has overtaken many countries of Europe and Latin America, according to the second - we are in 40th place in the world.

The number of publications in scientific journals is not a very good indicator of the effectiveness of science (for example, because different languages ​​are spoken by different numbers of people). However, in the 1980s, the leading group in terms of the number of publications looked like this: USA, USSR, Great Britain, Japan, Germany, Canada. The British and Germans were able to get ahead only during the period of reforms that disorganized science in the USSR.

But even more important is not quantitative, but qualitative indicators. The science of the USSR fulfilled its geopolitical task. It made it possible to create a strong army, economy, nuclear missile shield, significantly improve the life of society and expand the corridor of the state's capabilities. The first satellite, the first man in space, the first nuclear-powered icebreaker and the first nuclear power plant, leadership in many other scientific and technical projects, and much more. We have much to be proud of.

11 members of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR (1925-1991) became Nobel Prize winners - N.N. Semyonov (chemistry, 1956), I.E. Tamm (physics, 1958), I.M. Frank (Physics, 1958), P.A. Cherenkov (physics, 1958), L.D. Landau (Physics, 1962), M.G. Basov (physics, 1964), A.M. Prokhorov (physics, 1964), M.A. Sholokhov (literature, 1965), L.V. Kantorovich (economics, 1975), A.D. Sakharov (peace, 1975), P.L. Kapitsa (Physics, 1975).

The attitude towards science in the USSR is perfectly characterized by the words of the Soviet song: “Hello, country of heroes, country of dreamers, country of scientists!”

Among the main reasons for the rise and great successes of Soviet science, researchers usually distinguish the following:

high prestige of science in society;

high general level of education and science;

Relatively good material support;

· openness of science - in large scientific teams there was a free exchange of opinions on the work performed, which made it possible to avoid mistakes and subjectivism.

Among the main problems of Soviet science are the following:

· reproduction of innovations in the link "applied research - development of technologies and market launch". Some technologies were introduced into production "with a scratch", others "did not reach the hands";

· the absence of a rigid feedback between the assessment of the work of a scientist in a number of areas and the results obtained (the greatest success took place where the responsibility for the task assigned was high);

lagging behind in scientific instrumentation, the production of first-class reagents, and many other things necessary to ensure full-fledged scientific work;

The main problem was the change in attitude towards science and its financing in the 1970s. The pay scale for scientific workers has not been revised in the USSR since the late 1940s. Salary of a Doctor of Science in the 1970s-1980s did not exceed the salary of a driver at a construction site or a bus driver.

Nevertheless, by the beginning of the reforms in the 1990s, domestic science occupied one of the leading positions in the world.

The past 20-odd years of reforms make it possible to sum up the results as far as science is concerned. The analysis shows that we are not dealing with individual unqualified officials or unsuccessful decisions, but with a coherent holistic strategy. This strategy was built, voiced and defended on various platforms at the Higher School of Economics (HSE), the Institute of Contemporary Development (INSOR) and the Academy of National Economy (now the RANEPA under the President of the Russian Federation). It was she who was accepted for execution by the departments in charge of science in the Russian Federation. Its goal is the defeat of domestic science, depriving it of its systemic integrity, influence on government decisions and the education system, reducing it to a level at which research and development made in Russia can be used "on the hook" by the leading countries of the world and transnational corporations.

It should be recognized that these goals were achieved:

· the cycle of reproduction of innovations is completely destroyed;

· our country - a scientific superpower in the recent past - now has a "science of the second ten";

· science is directed along the colonial path, the development of scientific activity is largely blocked.

The recently adopted strategic documents, among which stands out the Strategy for Innovative Development of Russia for the period up to 2020, prepared by officials from the Ministry of Economic Development together with employees of the Higher School of Economics, also speak of the consistency and continuity of policy. In this, it would seem, the most important document, designed to ensure the country's entry into the ranks of the world's technological powers, the academic sector of science, in principle, is not considered as an institution of development. The well-known MGL bill became the legal formalization of the sacrificing of the academy with a three-hundred-year history to the universities.

Formally, the MHL project provided for the creation of an Agency of Scientific Institutes, which would take over about 700 institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences (RAMS) and the Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences (RAAS), as well as all the property that is in their operational management. These academies themselves merge and turn into a kind of club of scientists. The initial draft of the MGL did not envisage that this club could be engaged in scientific research, leadership of the institutes of the agency being created, or educational activities (the “club” was entrusted with expert functions and responses to government requests). In other words, according to the authors of the project, academicians should be separated from the current academic institutions.

Thus, we are talking about the destruction of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the destruction of the organization of all fundamental research in the country. The academic structure is rejected, and fundamental science is supposed to be transferred to national research universities by injecting additional funds into them and inviting foreign scientists and managers who will be able to effectively manage them.

The arguments of the reformers about the need for the MGL project to increase “publication activity” (according to the SCImago Institution, the Russian Academy of Sciences ranks third in the world in such activity after the National Center for Scientific Research of France and the Chinese Academy of Sciences), for “more efficient use of property” (which is already remains state) do not stand up to scrutiny.

The IGL project does not contribute to the preservation and strengthening of the country's sovereignty. He does not work for Russia. The bill must be withdrawn. The voice of the scientific community, of all those who understand the importance of science in Russia and associate their future with it, must be heard.

This is probably obvious to many readers. Therefore, now it is important to discuss not the scheme and reasons for the dismantling of Russian science, but the ways and forms of the most effective use of the results of fundamental research conducted in the country, and the scientific and technological potential currently available in Russia.

Let's turn to quantitative data and international comparisons. In August 1996, the Law on Science and State Scientific and Technical Policy was approved, according to which expenditures on civil science were to be at least 4% of the budget expenditures. This law has never been implemented.

The share of domestic spending on civil research and development in relation to the gross domestic product in Russia is 0.8% (Fig. 12). According to this indicator, our country is in the third ten among the states of the world. In terms of internal costs per researcher (75.4 thousand dollars), Russia also lags far behind the leaders. For example, in the USA this figure is 267.3 thousand dollars (Fig. 13) .

Rice. 12. Domestic spending on civilian research and development in relation to GDP. (Source: Science, technology and innovation in Russia. Brief statistical collection. 2012. M.: IPRAN RAN, 2012. - 88 p.)

Rice. 13. Internal costs for research and development per researcher. (Source: ibid.)

According to a joint study by the Higher School of Economics and the Center for International Higher Education, of the 28 countries studied on all continents, only in Russia the salary of a professor and scientist of the highest rank turned out to be significantly less than GDP per capita (Fig. 14).

Rice. 14. Annual salary of university professors and scientists of the highest category (for Russia - leading researcher, d.s.) relative to GDP per capita at purchasing power parity in different countries, excluding grants. (Source: Mikhail Zelensky. Where are we? (how are things going with science in Russia). TrV No. 108, pp. 2-3, "The Genesis of Science".)

The costs for the entire RAS are now comparable to funding one American Intermediate University. In other words, within the framework of the ongoing scientific strategy in Russia, science is treated as something secondary and is funded on a residual basis.

Naturally, this has a detrimental effect on the high-tech sector of the Russian economy. Now the global market for science-intensive products is $2.3 trillion. According to forecasts, in 15 years the demand for high-tech machinery and equipment will amount to 3.5-4 trillion dollars. As a result of the collapse of a significant part of the manufacturing industry, Russia's share in the production of science-intensive products has been constantly decreasing over the past 20 years and now stands at 0.3% of the world indicator. In 1990, there were 68% of enterprises implementing scientific and technical developments, in 1994 in the Russian Federation their number decreased to 20%, and in 1998 to 3.7%, while in the USA, Japan, Germany and France this level is from 70 to 82%.

Nobel laureate Academician Zh.I. Alferov sees the main reason for the ongoing crisis of Russian science in the lack of demand for its results. However, this problem is transient - science, put on a starvation ration and not having fully trained young personnel, will eventually lose the ability to obtain scientific results that should be implemented.

In the case of scientific activity, the "sacred cow" of the Ministry of Education and Science is the citation of Russian articles, which is evaluated on the basis of foreign databases. A similar citation analysis was carried out in detail and led to the conclusion that the current share of citations to Russian articles corresponds quite accurately to Russia's GDP in the gross global product.

On the other hand, on citation change domestic works can be viewed as a result and reflection of the policy pursued by the Ministry of Education and Science.

Relative indicators - the number of scientific articles per capita (Articles Per Catita - APC) and the annual change in this number per capita per population ΔAPC show the country's place in the global scientific space. Such an analysis was carried out by researchers ... (Fig. 15) using the SJR website using the Scopus database.

Rice. 15. Starry sky of science. On the horizontal axis - the relative number of articles per capita APC (Articles Per Capita) in 2010. On the vertical axis - the annual increase in the relative number of DAPC articles, on average for 2006-2010. The area of ​​the circle is proportional to the absolute number of publications in a given country in 2010. The scale of the axes in the lower graph is 7 times larger. The color indicates: blue - Western countries with developed market economies, yellow - Latin America, purple - Eastern Europe, green - Arab oil-producing countries, red - countries of the former USSR, brown - Southeast Asia, dark gray - Africa, light blue - all the rest . Designations by two-letter national domain names. (Source: ibid.)

Let's comment on this picture. For the USA APCх10 4 =16 (i.e. in 2010 in this country there were 16 articles per 10 thousand people), ΔAPСх10 4 =1 (i.e. each subsequent year the number of articles per 10 thousand people increased by one). The total number of published articles in the US has increased by 1.5 times over 5 years, or by 155,000. This is a lot.

The figure shows that today the two scientific supergiants - the United States and China - account for one third of all world scientific publications. The USA, China, Great Britain, Germany and Japan five of them write half of everything that comes out.

The relative increase in publications per capita in Russia is only 0.013 articles per 10,000 people and has been steadily maintained at this level in the country for at least 15 years.

Figure 16 shows the share of Russia in the world scientific production in comparison with the guiding and forecast documents regulating the sphere of science in the country. It can be seen that plans and reality lie in different spaces.

Rice. 16. Dreams and reality. (Source: ibid.)

With the continuation of this policy by 2018, judging by the forecast made, the contribution of the Russian Federation to world science will be 0.79%, and if we consider as such the number of citations, which for domestic articles is half the global one, then it will be 0.4%.

Let's return to financing (Fig. 17).

Rice. 17. Financing of Russian science and the Russian Academy of Sciences.

(Source: Russian Academy of Sciences. Chronicle of protest. June-July 2013. Compiled by A.N. Parshin. Second edition, supplemented and corrected. - M .: Journal "Russian Reporter", 2013. - 368 p.)

As you can see, a significant share of the increase in spending on science has bypassed the academy. Unfortunately, the increase in funding did not even lead to an increase in citation, not to mention more serious things. The reason for the failure of the favorite offspring of the Ministry of Education and Science - "Rosnano" and "Skolkovo" was analyzed by the well-known Russian specialist in the field of computer technology, academician Vladimir Betelin. Here are some of his arguments:

“For many years, the authors of the reforms have been convincing us that integrating Russia into the global global economy will provide it with unlimited access to the most modern products and technologies. Science, education, and industry in Russia were reformed on this basis. As a result, in the key areas for our defense - the dominance of screwdriver assembly technologies and dependence on the United States. Here, in fact, are the three pillars that underlie the destructive policy that has made Russia uncompetitive: the gap between the citizen and the state, the focus on momentary profit, and the rejection of its own technologies...

As part of the government strategy, a whole set of development institutions was created: technoparks, foundations, Rosnano, Skolkovo, but nevertheless we have to admit that the innovation policy did not achieve the stated goals.

And it is clear why: because the creation of competitive products is associated with high risks of long-term investment of large amounts of money, for which our development institutions are not designed.

In this situation, destroying the RAN is more than reckless.

The academy occupies a special place in our country. The main part of the research is carried out at the institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences by junior, senior and ordinary researchers. An army is powerless if there are no privates and officers in it, no matter how good the generals and marshals are.

In this regard, we present the staffing table approved by the Order of the Russian Academy of Sciences No. 192 dated 09.10.2012 (after a 6% allowance): junior researcher - 13,827 rubles/month; researcher - 15 870; senior researcher - 18,274; leading researcher - 21 040; chief researcher - 24,166; head of department - 24,160; director - 31,810. Any work is honorable, however, we note that up to a senior researcher in the Russian Academy of Sciences, they earn less than a postman in Moscow (20 thousand rubles / month), up to the main one - less than a sales assistant with an average education (25 thousand rubles / month). And, finally, the director of an academic institute earns half as much on the staffing table as a foreman at a Moscow construction site.

And the fact that under such conditions the RAS works and obtains important scientific results means that persistent, selfless people who do not think of themselves outside of science work in this organization. Reforms will come and go, but Russian science must remain.

Is Russian fundamental science still alive? Or maybe Minister D. Livanov is right - and the Academy of Sciences is really not viable? Such questions sometimes arise when reading critical articles about Russian science in newspapers and magazines. They could also appear with our readers.

To make everything clear, let's pay attention to just a few results that have been obtained in Russian research institutes in recent years:

· Many of the most important results of modern fundamental science are related to the study of deep space. To look far into the universe, scientists observe the same object from two points separated by a large distance. The greater the distance, the farther you can see. Such systems are called ultra-long baseline interferometers. This idea has been implemented in the international project "Radioastron", the leader of which is Russia. The Spektr-R space satellite with a radio telescope on board was launched into orbit. Another observation point was located on Earth. The distance between them was 300 thousand kilometers. This greatly expanded our ability to explore the remote corners of the universe;

· as a result of a unique experiment conducted by scientists of the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in cooperation with Russian research centers and US national laboratories, the birth of the heaviest isotopes of transuranium elements with numbers 105-117 was registered. The 117th element was synthesized for the first time in the world. Typical for transuranium elements is a decrease in half-life with an increase in their number. However, scientists have put forward a hypothesis that in the world of superheavy elements there should be “islands of stability” and that starting from a certain number, the half-life will increase. Experimental work carried out at JINR convincingly confirmed this assumption. On the basis of these achievements, large-scale national programs for the synthesis and comprehensive study of the atomic, nuclear and chemical properties of the heaviest elements were adopted in the USA, Japan, the European Union, and China. Academician Yu.Ts. Oganesyan, the leader of these works, was awarded the State Prize of the Russian Federation in the field of science and technology in 2010.

· The Joint Institute for High Temperatures of the Russian Academy of Sciences has developed a unique steam-gas technology for the combined generation of heat and electricity based on domestic gas turbines with technical, economic and environmental characteristics significantly exceeding the world level. At the same time, the cost of generated electricity is two times lower than at traditional CHPPs, and 25% lower than at cogeneration combined-cycle plants;

· The Institute of Molecular Biology of the Russian Academy of Sciences has developed, patented and introduced into medical practice the technology of biological microchips (biochips), which allows for express diagnostics of tuberculosis, hepatitis C, oncological diseases, and allergies. Biochip-based test systems are used in more than 40 clinics and diagnostic centers in Russia and the CIS countries, are being certified for subsequent distribution in Europe;

· The Southern Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences prepared and published the Atlas of Socio-Political Problems, Threats and Risks in the South of Russia in 5 volumes (2006-2011), which presents and analyzes the acute problems of the political, economic and social life of the population of the southern regions of the country. This work is extremely important from the point of view of ensuring Russia's national security.

Russian science and the way to the future

Unfortunately, the same thing happens to people:

No matter how useful a thing is, without knowing the price,

The ignoramus about her tends to get worse;

And if the ignorant is more knowledgeable,

So he keeps pushing her.

I.A. Krylov

Following the logic and example of the outstanding scientists and organizers of Russian science: Mikhail Vasilievich Lomonosov, Sergei Ivanovich Vavilov, Mstislav Vsevolodovich Keldysh, the development of scientific knowledge should proceed primarily from those key tasks that society and the state are solving.

What is the main task of modern Russia?

So far, the world is developing in accordance with the scenario called by the American political scientist S. Huntington the "clash of civilizations", in which the 21st century is determined by the intense competition of civilizations or their blocs for dwindling natural resources. In the new technological realities, this approach is very clearly presented in the works of the American futurist Alvin Toffler: “In a divided world into three, the First Wave sector supplies agricultural and mineral resources, the Second Wave sector provides cheap labor and mass production, and the rapidly expanding Third Wave sector ascends to dominance, based on the new ways in which knowledge is created and used...

Third Wave countries sell information and innovation, management, culture and pop culture, advanced technology, software, education, job training, healthcare, finance, and other services to the world. One of the services may be military protection based on the possession of superior Third Wave military forces.

By the mid-1980s, the USSR was at or near the level of Third Wave civilizations in many key indicators. The fruitless destructive reforms of the 1985-2000s made Russia a First Wave country, a typical raw material donor. About half of the budget revenues come from the oil and gas sector, food and drug security is not ensured, and in terms of the level of medical care, according to experts from the World Health Organization, Russia until recently was in 124th place.

Ensuring real, not paper sovereignty, moving away from the colonial scenario, moving from imitation of innovative activity to entering the trajectory of sustainable, self-sustaining development of Russia requires that our Fatherland become a Third Wave civilization. This is a categorical imperative for any responsible political force, and for domestic science as a whole.

The course towards high technologies is dictated by the geographical and geopolitical position of our country,. From this comes a criterion for evaluating actions, projects and initiatives in the field of science and education. What works to achieve the formulated goal should be accepted and executed. Projects directed in the opposite direction should be rejected and rejected.

The main reason for the current difficulties is the long absence of a strategic entity that would be interested in its activities and results, in its development, and, if necessary, could protect it from the next raids of zealous reformers.

In our opinion, such subjects are already appearing in Russia and setting tasks, and over time there may be even more of them. It is important that they seek solutions to the problems posed. Let's take a few examples. At a meeting with the leadership of the Russian Academy of Sciences 03.12.2001 President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin has set two tasks for the Russian scientific community. First - independent examination of government decisions and forecast of accidents, disasters and catastrophes in the natural, man-made and social spheres. The solution proposed by the academy is the creation National System of Scientific Monitoring of Hazardous Phenomena and Processes- was agreed with a number of interested departments, but was not accepted for execution with reference to the lack of regulations for the adoption of interdepartmental federal targeted programs, i.e. for formal reasons. And it wasn't done. The catastrophes of recent years have clearly shown that this range of tasks has become even more urgent than in the early 2000s. The estimates made show that only the implementation of the proposals of the Russian Academy of Sciences in the field of disaster risk management would help to save many hundreds of billions of rubles.

An independent examination of government decisions requires the creation of a specialized structure in the RAS, databases and knowledge and connection to many information flows, but the main thing is inclusion of forecasts, assessments, examinations carried out at the Russian Academy of Sciences in the contour of public administration. For the successful implementation of such tasks, the status of the academy must be upgraded.

The second task set by the President on 03.12.2001 is working out scenarios for transferring the country from the current pipe economy to an innovative development path. In essence, this is the problem of turning the Russian world into a Third Wave civilization.

Over the past 25 years, Russia has been deindustrialized, a number of industries have ceased to exist, others have reduced their output by many times, our country has lost its position in a number of world markets (Fig. 18) .

Comparison of what is produced not in monetary but in physical terms clearly shows that in many positions we have not yet reached the level of 1990.

Many leading economists of Russia, scientists of the Russian Academy of Sciences raise the question of new industrialization of the country as a path to a knowledge economy. Primary industrialization consisted in the electrification of the productive forces. Neo-industrialization is associated with the "digitization" of productive forces, with the microprocessor revolution, with the transition to labor saving, robotic production, to the "green industry". Another principle of the neo-industrial paradigm is the automated transformation of household and industrial waste into resources.

The President of the Russian Federation outlined the creation of 25 million high-tech jobs in the coming decades as a priority task. It is necessary to design and develop a huge industry, train personnel, find a niche in the world market for the export sector of this industry. An enormous task!

The subject, objectively interested in the activities of the academy and raising its status, is society, government agencies that ensure the functioning of the system of education and enlightenment in Russia. Let's admit the obvious: the path of Westernization, along which the education system of the Russian Federation is going (and along which Russian science is now being directed), has led it to a deep dead end.

The experiment to combine the management of science and education within one ministry failed. It would be advisable if the centaur of the Ministry of Education and Science, unable to cope with either one or the other, was divided into the Ministry of Science and Technology, which could really coordinate the scientific research conducted in the country, and the Ministry of Education. The scientific leadership of the latter would naturally be entrusted to the RAS.

Currently, school programs are overloaded with secondary material. Attempts to fight corruption with the help of the Unified State Examination have increased it many times over. At the same time, both schoolchildren and students, as a rule, do not know many elementary things, have a low general culture, which negatively affects their mastery of professional skills. And cures for this severe long-term illness can be sought at the academy.

The educational potential of the academy is clearly underused. Currently, the RAS is facing the problem of a lack of trained youth. In this regard, it seems appropriate to create a number of academic universities in the Russian Academy of Sciences to organize the training of researchers, which will make it possible to overcome the personnel catastrophe in the academy itself, in the high-tech sector of the Russian economy and in a number of fundamentally important areas of the military-industrial complex (DIC).

The attitude of Russian citizens to knowledge and the academy is clearly evidenced by the results of a sociological survey of the population of large cities of Russia, conducted from July 19 to 22, 2013 by the staff of the Institute for Socio-Political Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences together with ROMIR, representing the association of researchers Gallup International.

About 44% of respondents are not familiar with the activities of the Russian Academy of Sciences and do not have a position on reforming the academy, do not understand the importance of scientific knowledge for the country's innovative development, and cannot yet assess the consequences of ongoing events. (To a large extent, this is the result of the failure of school education.) About 20% of the respondents knew nothing about the reorganization of the RAS.

At the same time, 8 out of 10 respondents highly appreciate the contribution of the Russian Academy of Sciences to the development of Russian and world science, and every third believes that without it there would be no outstanding discoveries, space flights, nuclear physics, and the modern army.

7 out of 10 who track the reform of the Russian Academy of Sciences believe that if the MHL project is implemented, Russia will lose its advantages in the field of fundamental research, which will negatively affect the prospects for the country's socio-economic development, its place and role in the world community.

The survey showed that the level of citizens' trust in the academy is very high and comparable to the level of trust in the President of the Russian Federation, the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), and the Armed Forces. Thus, the difference between the answers “I trust” and “I do not trust” in favor of “I trust” for the Russian Academy of Sciences was the largest - 39.4% compared to other social institutions in the country.

Another strategic entity that is objectively extremely interested in developing and expanding the powers of the academy is the defense industry.

Deputy Prime Minister in charge of the defense industry, nuclear and space industry, high technology, D.O. Rogozin drew attention to "events that in the foreseeable future can overturn modern ideas about the methods of warfare." These are tests in the United States of a hypersonic missile flying at a speed of more than five times faster than sound, and testing the takeoff and landing of an attack unmanned vehicle on the deck of an aircraft carrier, carried out in 2013. Let us recall the words of V.V. Putin: “Responding to the threats and challenges of today only means dooming yourself to the eternal role of lagging behind. We must by all means ensure technical, technological, organizational superiority over any potential adversary.”

Thus, the Russian defense industry needs a strategic forecast, scientific and technological breakthroughs to maintain sovereignty in the military sphere.

Here are a few more assessments of the current situation given by the Deputy Prime Minister:

“At the end of 2012, the Pentagon held a computer game, the results of which showed that as a result of a strike on a “large and highly developed country” by 3.5-4 thousand units of precision weapons, its infrastructure will be almost completely destroyed within 6 hours, and the state will lose its ability to resist …

What can we do to counter this threat, if it is really directed against us? This should be an asymmetric response, using fundamentally new types of weapons. These weapons should not rely on existing telecommunications systems that can be disabled in a matter of minutes. It should be an autonomous, self-sufficient weapon that can independently solve its tasks ...

Obviously, in the near future, in order to solve this and similar non-trivial tasks, we need to make a technological breakthrough, which in terms of its scale can be comparable to an atomic project or the Soviet space program.”

The first steps for the academy to meet this challenge are quite obvious:

· organization of regular constructive interaction of a number of ideologists and leaders of the defense industry with scientists of the Russian Academy of Sciences to set key scientific tasks focused on the future development of the defense industry and the Russian Armed Forces. This should be organized at a much higher level than is currently being done in the Applied Problems Section of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The work must be more active, concrete and fast;

· expansion and development of the system of open (and closed) competitions in the interests of the defense industry, allowing to find new ideas and technologies, as well as people capable of working in this area;

· the organization of a number of institutes in the Russian Academy of Sciences, focused on supporting the defense industry. Perhaps the organization of work in the most important areas in the mode of "special committees" that have proven themselves in nuclear and space projects, in the development of radar, cryptography and aviation technology;

· development of a number of structures in the Russian Academy of Sciences, providing scientific instrumentation in areas vital for the defense industry. The rise on this basis of the metrological support of mechanical engineering and a number of defense systems. There is positive experience in the RAS and a number of other organizations in this area, but it requires active development.

Looking into the future, it is appropriate to touch on organizational issues. During the last year, the RAS has been preparing summary reports of all 6 state academies of sciences. In a number of documents, including the notorious MGL project, it is entrusted with the coordination of all fundamental research in Russia. This is a big serious analytical, organizational, predictive activity, not limited to filing and editing papers coming from scientific organizations. A structure should be created at the academy that is seriously, at a high level and with the involvement of leading scientists, is engaged in this important and responsible work. The basis for this has already been created. In the period 2008-2012. the “Program of Fundamental Scientific Research of the State Academies of Sciences” was implemented, during which new mechanisms for organizing research carried out by various structures were worked out .

At the same time, the need to unite efforts in the scientific field is becoming more and more obvious not only to the researchers themselves. Therefore, it seems reasonable to reassign Skolkovo, the Kurchatov Institute and other "clones" of the academy related to fundamental research and the direct use of their results to the Russian Academy of Sciences. At the same time, it is necessary to determine the range of fundamental problems and technological tasks that can be assigned to these scientific centers.

Looking from the same positions at the key tasks that Russian civilization will have to solve in the coming decades, we will see many subjects that would urgently need a strong, efficient, capable Academy of Sciences. It would be needed not for decorative or representative purposes, but for important and large-scale cases.

findings

1. Humanity has entered a new phase of its development. On the one hand, it is determined by qualitatively new scientific and technological changes, and on the other hand, by the phase of overconsumption, in which the Earth's ability to support our existence with the use of modern technologies and the amount of resources consumed turned out to be significantly exceeded. We are missing one more planet. In the lifetime of one generation, there is a breakdown of global demographic trends that have determined the life of mankind for hundreds of thousands of years. So far, we are rapidly moving towards a “crisis of 2050”, comparable in scale and severity to the depletion of resources before the Neolithic revolution.

Science is being challenged like no other in history. Over the next 10-15 years, scientists will have to find a new set of life-supporting technologies (energy and food production, construction, transport, education, management, coordination of interests, etc.). Current technologies ensure the existence of mankind in the coming decades. We have to find and apply technologies designed to last for centuries. If earlier science laid the foundations for the next technological order, now it has to design a new civilizational environment.

2. At present, more than ever, there is a need for the country to place a bet in the distribution of resources on science and new technologies, which are created primarily within the framework of the Russian Academy of Sciences. It is necessary to concentrate the efforts of domestic science on ways to solve the main, key tasks for our civilization - the world, Russia - tasks. The greatest opportunities, prospects and risks of the 21st century are already associated with the development and effective use of the abilities and potential of people and teams. We must create a national system for identifying and developing talents, teach our young people to dream, ensure the operation of a number of first-class universities, comparable and superior to the best Soviet institutions, and most importantly, give talented scientists, engineers and organizers the opportunity to realize their ideas and plans in their homeland. These people will help solve the main problems of Russia, they will make us a Third Wave civilization. This is true competitiveness in today's world.

Speaking at the Academic Council of the Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics of Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov, the great Soviet mathematician Andrei Nikolaevich Kolmogorov, answering a question about the main thing in the work of the faculty, said: “We all need to learn to forgive people for their talent.” For us, this is also the most important thing.

3. The analysis shows that it was the USSR on the basis of the Academy of Sciences that was a scientific superpower, conducting research on all fronts, achieving outstanding success in space exploration and nuclear energy, in many other areas. At several historical milestones, the work of our scientists helped to defend the sovereignty of the country. Twenty years ago, Russia took the path of orthodox liberalism. In the 1990s, the main part of the country's applied science was destroyed, in the 2000s - most of the educational potential. By many indicators, Russian science is now in the second ten in the world.

At present, we are again in a situation where the question of the future of the country is being decided. Basic research plays the role of yeast in the science and technology pie. On their basis, it is possible to revive both applied work and military science, and raise the level of medicine and education, which has fallen dramatically in recent decades.

The most successful, active and fruitful fundamental research is being developed in the Russian Academy of Sciences. The attempts made to replace the Russian Academy of Sciences entirely or in some areas with the Kurchatov Institute, Skolkovo, Rosnano, the Higher School of Economics, despite abundant funding, turned out to be untenable. The draft law on the reorganization of the Medvedev-Golodets-Livanov RAS, based on the principle of "divide and rule", will destroy the RAS, paralyze fundamental research in the country and deprive us of the chances for the revival of Russia. It should be withdrawn or fundamentally, with the most active participation of the scientific community, revised.

4. From the state point of view, fundamental science is objectively necessary for those who make strategic decisions for the following reasons:

· for an independent examination of government decisions and forecast of disasters, crises, catastrophes in the natural, man-made and social spheres;

· to work out scenarios for the transition from the “pipe economy” to an innovative development path (new industrialization and the creation of 25 million jobs in the high-tech sector of the economy);

· to work out the principles and foundations for the creation of new types of weapons that can change the geopolitical status of the country;

for a strategic forecast that allows you to quickly and timely correct the “threat map” for the state and highlight problems that require immediate solutions;

· for the examination of major programs and projects implemented with public money. (An attempt to do without the Russian Academy of Sciences in the tasks of expertise and forecasting, without serious fundamental research and to assign these problems to the Higher School of Economics, the Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation and foreign companies failed. These works should be entrusted to the Russian Academy of Sciences, creating conditions for their implementation. Fundamental the relative independence of the RAS from the state, which ensures the objectivity of the assessments given, and not work on the principle of "whatever you like")

5. The Academy of Sciences provides the best opportunities in comparison with other structures for the implementation of large interdisciplinary projects - the main direction of scientific and technological development of the XXI century. However, this requires its unity and systemic integrity - a close connection between different departments, between the humanities, natural scientists and specialists in mathematical modeling, between academic organizations in different regions of the country. The rupture of ties between them, envisaged by the IGL bill and other similar plans, will drastically reduce the country's scientific potential and worsen Russia's prospects. Today we do not know what will become the main and critically important in 5-10-20 years. Therefore, we must know, understand and develop much that the RAS allows us to do.

6. Any strategic entity and any responsible political force is objectively interested in a reliable forecast, serious scientific expertise, identification of risks and new opportunities, and, consequently, in first-class scientific research. In the current conditions, it is extremely important to unite the forces of the scientific community. Therefore, the RAS should be entrusted with the coordination of all fundamental research carried out with federal money in the country, the tasks of scientific and technical expertise and the design of the future. Today, in order to make far-sighted effective decisions in many areas - from state defense orders to socio-economic and regional policy - one must have a clear idea of ​​​​the development of the world and Russia for the next 30 years. This is taken most seriously in the leading countries of the world, choosing their development priorities and directions of breakthrough based on in-depth scientific analysis and adjusting them, systematically taking into account the changes taking place in the world. This is how things should be done in Russia as well.

7. Science is most closely connected with education, which in modern Russia is in a deep crisis due to ill-conceived, short-sighted experiments in this area over the past 20 years.

It would be expedient to divide the Ministry of Education and Science into the Ministry of Science and Technology and the Ministry of Education and endow the Higher Attestation Commission of the Russian Federation with the rights of a federal agency. The scientific leadership of the Ministry of Education should be entrusted to the Academy of Sciences, entrusting the latter with the creation of several academic universities focused on training future researchers from school. This can set the bar for the entire education system in Russia. Institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences can become the basis for the basic departments of a number of universities, as was done during the creation of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology. A number of educational projects of the academy show that it is quite ready for such work. It remains to make a decision and eliminate the bureaucratic obstacles erected on this path.

8. The key to the fate of Russia, domestic science and the academy is goal setting. Our country should not be a donor of raw materials, and not a second-rate power, but the basis for one of the backbone civilizations of the modern world. To do this, you should go your own way, clearly see your long-term goals, national interests, and the project of the future. In order to have real sovereignty, we must feed, protect, teach, heal, heat ourselves, we must equip our country ourselves and determine our future. Russian science can help in all this. She just needs to be allowed to do it.

Setting tasks for the academy and Russian science will determine its organization, structure, forms of activity and leaders who are ready to take on these problems.

The first Russian nuclear charge was called RDS-1. Its developers deciphered this name "Russia makes itself." We have been able to learn how to do it ourselves largely thanks to first-class science. Comparable in scale and severity challenge is now thrown to our country. Once again, the scales of history are weighing: to be Russia or not ...

Musin M.M., Gubanov S.S., New industrialization. Progress or regression. // Supernova reality. 2013, no. 6, p. 20-27.

Grazhdankin A.I., Kara-Murza S.G. White Paper of Russia: Construction, Perestroika and Reforms 1950-2012. - M .: "Book House" Librokom ". 2013. - 560 p. (Future Russia, No. 24).

Russia: military vector. Military reform as an integral part of the security concept of the Russian Federation // Izborsk club. Russian strategies. 2013, no. 2, p. 28-61.

Report to the Government of the Russian Federation “On the results of the implementation of the Program of Fundamental Scientific Research of State Academies of Sciences for 2008-2012. and prospects for the development of fundamental scientific research in 2013-2020”. - M.: Nauka, 2013, 400 p.

Number of impressions: 26462
Rating: 4.41 1

The main structure of cognition in the most developed branches of natural science is the analysis of the subject of study, the expression of abstract elementary objects and the subsequent logical synthesis of a single whole from them in the form of a theoretical model.

Two circumstances make it difficult for society to understand modern natural science. First, the use of the most complex mathematical apparatus, which must first be studied. Secondly, the impossibility of creating a visual model of modern scientific ideas: curved space; a particle that is simultaneously a particle and a wave, etc. The way out of the situation is simple - there is no need to even try to do it. Natural science XX - XXI centuries. forces us to renounce not only immediate visualization, but also visualization as such. The rejection of the visualization of scientific ideas is an inevitable price to pay for the transition to the study of deeper levels of reality that do not correspond to the evolutionarily developed mechanisms of human perception.

A fundamental feature of the structure of scientific activity is the division of science into relatively separate disciplines. This has its positive side, since it will make it possible to study in detail individual fragments of reality, but at the same time the connections between them are overlooked, and in nature everything is interconnected and interdependent. The disunity of the sciences is especially disturbing now, when the need for complex integrative studies of the environment has become clear. Nature is one. The science that studies all the phenomena of nature should also be unified.

Another fundamental feature of science is the desire to abstract from man, to become as impersonal as possible. This once positive feature of science makes it now inadequate to reality and responsible for environmental difficulties, since man is the most powerful factor in changing reality.

In addition to the above, one can add the reproach that science and technology contribute to social oppression, in connection with this there are calls for the separation of science from the state.

The paradoxes of the development of science include the fact that science, on the one hand, reports objective information about the world and at the same time destroys it (during various experiments) or something is destroyed on the basis of scientific information (life forms, non-reproducible resources).

But most importantly, science is losing hope of making people happy and giving them the truth. Science not only studies the development of the world, but is itself a process, factor and result of evolution, while it must be in harmony with the evolution of the world. A feedback loop must be formed between science and other aspects of life, which would regulate the development of science. The increase in the diversity of science should be accompanied by integration and the growth of orderliness, and this is called the formation of science to the level of an integral integrative-diverse harmonious system.

In the modern worldview, two orientations have been formed in relation to science and the scientific and technological revolution:

The first orientation, which was called scientism (from lat. scientia - science). It is in our time, when the role of science is truly enormous, that scientism has appeared, associated with the idea of ​​science, especially natural science, as the highest, if not absolute value. This scientific ideology stated that only science can solve all the problems facing humanity, including immortality. Within the framework of scientism, science is seen as the only sphere of spiritual culture in the future that will absorb its non-rational areas.

In contrast to this direction, it also loudly declared itself in the second half of the 20th century. anti-scientism, which dooms science either to extinction or to eternal opposition to nature. Anti-scientism proceeds from the position on the fundamental limitation of the possibilities of science in solving fundamental human problems, and in its manifestations it evaluates science as a force hostile to man, denying it a positive impact on culture. She argues that although science improves the well-being of the population, it also increases the danger of the death of mankind and the Earth from nuclear weapons and pollution of the natural environment.

Natural science is a product of civilization and a condition for its development. With the help of science, man develops material production, improves social relations, educates and educates new generations of people, heals his body. The progress of natural science and technology significantly changes the way of life and well-being of a person, improves the living conditions of people. Natural science is one of the most important engines of social progress. As the most important factor in material production, natural science is a powerful revolutionary force. Most of the modern material civilization is impossible without the participation in its creation of scientific theories, scientific and design developments, technologies predicted by science, etc.

In the modern world, science causes people not only admiration, but also fears. You can often hear that science brings a person not only benefits, but also the greatest misfortunes. "Atmospheric pollution, catastrophes at nuclear power plants, an increase in the radioactive background as a result of nuclear weapons tests, an ozone hole over the planet, a sharp reduction in plant and animal species, all these and others People tend to explain environmental problems by the very fact of the existence of science, but the point is not science, but in whose hands it is, what social interests stand behind it, what public and state structures direct its development.

Science is a complex social institution, and it is closely connected with the development of the whole society. The complexity and inconsistency of the current situation is that science, of course, is involved in the generation of global and, above all, environmental problems of civilization (not in itself, but as a part of society dependent on other structures); and at the same time, without science, without its further development, the solution of all these problems is in principle impossible. And this means that the role of science in the history of mankind is constantly increasing. And therefore, any belittling of the role of science, natural science is extremely dangerous at the present time, it disarms humanity in the face of the growing global problems of our time. And such a belittling, unfortunately, sometimes takes place, it is represented by certain mindsets, tendencies in the system of spiritual culture.

Bibliographic link

Radjabov O.R. FEATURES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF MODERN SCIENCE // Modern problems of science and education. - 2006. - No. 1.;
URL: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=99 (date of access: 01.02.2020). We bring to your attention the journals published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural History"

METHODOLOGY

A.M. Novikov

ON THE ROLE OF SCIENCE IN MODERN SOCIETY

At present, society is rapidly reassessing the role of science in the development of mankind. The purpose of this article is to find out the reasons for this phenomenon and to consider the main trends in the further development of science and relationships in the traditional "tandem" science - practice.

First, let's look at history. Since the Renaissance, science, pushing religion into the background, has taken a leading position in the worldview of mankind. If in the past only the hierarchs of the church could make certain worldview judgments, then later this role completely passed to the community of scientists. The scientific community dictated rules to society in almost all areas of life, science was the highest authority and criterion of truth. For several centuries, the leading, basic activity that cements various professional areas of human activity has been the science. It was science that was the most important, basic institution, since it formed both a unified picture of the world and general theories, and in relation to this picture, particular theories and the corresponding subject areas of professional activities in social practice were distinguished. The “center” of the development of society was scientific knowledge, and the production of this knowledge was the main type of production, which determines the possibilities of other types of both material and spiritual production.

But in the second half of the twentieth century, they decided cardinal contradictions in the development of society: both in science itself and in social practice. Let's consider them.
Contradictions in science:
1. Contradictions in the structure of a unified picture of the world created by science, and internal contradictions in the very structure of scientific knowledge, which were generated by science itself, the creation of ideas about changing scientific paradigms (the works of T. Kuhn, K. Popper, etc.);
2. The rapid growth of scientific knowledge, the technologization of the means of its production have led to a sharp increase in the fragmentation of the picture of the world and, accordingly, the fragmentation of professional areas into many specialties;
3. Modern society has not only become highly differentiated, but has also become truly multicultural. If earlier all cultures were described in a single "key" of the European scientific tradition, today each culture claims its own form of self-description and self-determination in history. The possibility of describing a unified world history turned out to be extremely problematic and doomed to mosaicism. The practical question arose of how to organize a "mosaic" society, how to manage it. It turned out that traditional scientific models "work" in a very narrow limited range: where it is a question of highlighting the general, universal, but not where it is constantly necessary to keep different as different;
4. But the main thing is not even that. The main thing is that over the past decades the role of science (in the broadest sense) has changed significantly in relation to social practice (also understood in the broadest sense). The triumph of science is over. From the 18th century to the middle of the last 20th century, discoveries in science followed discoveries, and practice followed science, “picking up” these discoveries and implementing them in social production, both material and spiritual. But then this stage abruptly ended - the last major scientific discovery was the creation of a laser (USSR, 1956). Gradually, starting from that moment, science began to “switch” more and more to the technological improvement of practice: the concept of “scientific and technological revolution” was replaced by the concept of “technological revolution”, and also, after this, the concept of “technological era”, etc. appeared. The main attention of scientists switched to the development of technology. Take, for example, the rapid development of computer technology and computer technology. From the point of view of "big science" a modern computer compared to the first computers of the 40s. 20th century contains nothing fundamentally new. But its dimensions have immeasurably decreased, speed has increased, memory has grown, languages ​​of direct communication between a computer and a person have appeared, etc. – i.e. technologies are developing rapidly. Thus, science, as it were, switched more to the direct service of practice.
If earlier theories and laws were in use, now science is less and less likely to reach this level of generalization, concentrating its attention on models characterized by the ambiguity of possible solutions to problems. In addition, it is obvious that a working model is more useful than an abstract theory.
Historically, there are two main approaches to scientific research. The author of the first is G. Galilei. The goal of science, from his point of view, is to establish the order underlying phenomena in order to represent the possibilities of objects generated by this order, and, accordingly, to discover new phenomena. This is the so-called "pure science", theoretical knowledge.
The author of the second approach was Francis Bacon. He is remembered much less often, although now it is his point of view that has prevailed: “I work to lay the foundations for the future prosperity and power of mankind. To achieve this goal, I propose a science skillful not in scholastic disputes, but in the invention of new crafts ... ". Science today goes precisely along this path - the path of technological improvement of practice;
5. If earlier science produced "eternal knowledge", and practice used "eternal knowledge", i.e. laws, principles, theories lived and "worked" for centuries or, at worst, decades, then recently science has largely switched, especially in the humanitarian, social and technological sectors, to "situational" knowledge.
First of all, this phenomenon is associated with principle of complementarity. The principle of complementarity arose as a result of new discoveries in physics at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, when it became clear that a researcher, while studying an object, introduces certain changes into it, including through the device used. This principle was first formulated by N. Bohr: the reproduction of the integrity of a phenomenon requires the use of mutually exclusive "additional" classes of concepts in cognition. In physics, in particular, this meant that obtaining experimental data on some physical quantities is invariably associated with a change in data on other quantities that are additional to the first. Thus, with the help of complementarity, equivalence was established between classes of concepts that describe contradictory situations in various areas of knowledge.
The principle of complementarity significantly turned the whole system of science. If classical science functioned as an integral education, focused on obtaining a system of knowledge in its final and complete form; for an unambiguous study of events; on the exclusion from the context of science of the influence of the activity of the researcher and the means used by him; to assess the knowledge included in the available fund of science as absolutely reliable; then with the advent of the complementarity principle, the situation changed. The following is important: the inclusion of the subjective activity of the researcher in the context of science has led to a change in the understanding of the subject of knowledge: now it is not reality “in its pure form”, but some of its slice, given through the prisms of accepted theoretical and empirical means and methods of its development by the cognizing subject; the interaction of the object under study with the researcher (including through instruments) cannot but lead to different manifestations of the properties of the object depending on the type of its interaction with the cognizing subject in various, often mutually exclusive conditions. And this means the legitimacy and equality of various scientific descriptions of the object, including various theories describing the same object, the same subject area. Therefore, obviously, Bulgakov's Woland says: "All theories stand one another."
So, for example, at present, many socio-economic systems are being studied by building mathematical models using various sections of mathematics: differential equations, probability theory, fuzzy logic, interval analysis, etc. Moreover, the interpretation of the results of modeling the same phenomena, processes using different mathematical means give although close, but still different conclusions.
Secondly, a significant part of scientific research today is carried out in applied fields, in particular, in economics, technology, education, etc. and is dedicated to the development of optimal situational models for the organization of production, financial structures, educational institutions, firms, etc. But optimal at this time and in these specific conditions. The results of such studies are relevant for a short time - conditions will change and no one will need such models. But nevertheless, such a science is necessary, and such studies are in the full sense of the word. scientific research.
6. Further, if earlier we used the word “knowledge”, as if automatically implying scientific knowledge, today, in addition to scientific knowledge, a person has to use knowledge of a completely different kind. For example, knowing the rules for using a computer text editor is quite complex knowledge. But hardly scientific - after all, with the advent of any new text editor, the former "knowledge" will go into oblivion. Or banks and databases, standards, statistics, traffic schedules, huge information arrays on the Internet, etc. etc., which each person has to use more and more in everyday life. That is, scientific knowledge today coexists with other, non-scientific knowledge. Often in publications, the authors propose to divide these concepts into knowledge(scientific knowledge) and information.
Contradictions in practice. The development of science, first of all, natural science and technical knowledge has ensured the development of mankind industrial revolution Thanks to which, by the middle of the 20th century, the main problem that had dominated all mankind throughout history, the problem of hunger, was basically solved. Humanity for the first time in history was able to feed itself (mostly), as well as create favorable living conditions for itself (again, mostly). And thus the transition of mankind into a completely new, so-called post-industrial era its development, when there was an abundance of food, goods, services, and when, in connection with this, the most intense competition began to develop throughout the world economy. Therefore, in a short time, huge deformations began to occur in the world - political, economic, social, cultural, etc. And, among other things, one of the signs of this new era was instability, the dynamism of political, economic, social, legal, technological and other situations. Everything in the world began to change continuously and rapidly. And, therefore, practice must be constantly rebuilt in relation to new and new conditions. And thus, innovativeness of practice becomes an attribute of time.
If earlier, a few decades ago, in conditions of a relatively long-term stability of the way of life, social practice, practical workers - engineers, agronomists, doctors, teachers, technologists, etc. - could calmly wait until science, scientists (as well as, in the old days in the USSR, and central authorities) develop new recommendations, and then they are tested in an experiment, and then designers and technologists develop and test the appropriate designs and technologies, and only then it will come to mass introduction into practice, then such an expectation today has become meaningless. Until all this happens, the situation will change radically. Therefore, practice, naturally and objectively, rushed along a different path - practitioners began to create innovative models of social, economic, technological, educational, etc. systems themselves: author's models of industries, firms, organizations, schools, author's technologies, author's methods, etc.
Even in the last century, along with theories, such intellectual organizations as projects and programs appeared, and by the end of the 20th century, activities for their creation and implementation became massive. They are provided not only and not so much with theoretical knowledge as with analytical work. Science itself, due to its theoretical power, has generated methods for the mass production of new sign forms (models, algorithms, databases, etc.), and this has now become the material for new technologies. These technologies are no longer only real, but also symbolic production, and in general, technologies, along with projects, programs, have become the leading form of organizing activities. The specificity of modern technologies lies in the fact that no theory, no profession can cover the entire technological cycle of a particular production. The complex organization of high technologies leads to the fact that former professions provide only one or two steps of large technological cycles, and for successful work and career it is important for a person not only to be a professional, but to be able to actively and competently join these cycles.
But for the competent organization of projects, for the competent construction and implementation of new technologies, innovative models, practical workers needed scientific style thinking, which includes such qualities necessary in this case as dialectical, systematic, analytical, logical, broad vision of problems and the possible consequences of their solution. And, obviously, the main thing - it took the skills of scientific work, first of all - the ability to quickly navigate in the flow of information and create, build new models - both cognitive (scientific hypotheses) and pragmatic (practical) innovative models of new systems - economic, production , technological, educational, etc. This, obviously, is the most common reason for the aspiration of practical workers of all ranks - managers, financiers, engineers, technologists, teachers, etc. to science, to scientific research - as a global trend.
Indeed, all over the world, including, perhaps most of all, in Russia, the number of dissertations defended and academic degrees obtained is growing rapidly. Moreover, if in previous periods of history a scientific degree was needed only by scientists and university professors, today the bulk of dissertations are defended by practitioners - having a degree becomes an indicator of the level of professional qualification of a specialist. And postgraduate and doctoral studies (and, accordingly, applicants) become the next stages of education. In this regard, the dynamics of the level of wages of workers depending on the level of their education is interesting. Thus, in the United States during the 1980s, the hourly wages of people with higher education increased by 13 percent, while those with incomplete higher education decreased by 8 percent, those with secondary education decreased by 13 percent, and those who did not graduate even high school lost 18 percent of their earnings. But in the 90s. the growth of wages of university graduates stopped - people with higher education became by this time, as it were, "average" workers - like school graduates in the 80s. The wages of persons with scientific degrees began to grow rapidly - bachelors by 30 percent, doctors - almost twice. The same thing is happening in Russia - a candidate, or even a doctor of science, is more willingly hired to work in a prestigious company than just a specialist with a higher education.