Scientific journal
European Journal of Natural History
ISSN 2073-4972


Panischev A.L.
The article is devoted to the concept of science in its unity with the civilization. It is supposed that the very civilization, its state system have provided basics for the development of science as the independent social institution and the form of the world cognition. At the same time based on the civilization the science is setting such an impetuous rhythm of life for a person in the system of culture and civilization that now we have escalation of person adaptation problem in the conditions of all-time varying environment.
The question of time and reasons of origin of the science as independent, purposeful research action has no certain answer.  There are two main points concerning the causes of the science origin. According to the one of them the science has appeared as a cause of external sociocultural conditions, practical needs of the society. The other point of view observes the origin of the science as a cause of its own immanent laws. In other words, the origin of science is considered to be autonomic.   

In this article is based on the first point of view. We may admit, that science has developed independently, but its dangerous to accept for a fact that world of the science and scientific knowledge is independent on social and cultural needs of humans. In this case we use the word "must not" because once appeared the knowledge remain even after the death of civilization, which had given a birth to this knowledge. Knowledge, which has been work out by a civilization, for example Maya, after death of this civilization continues to be evidence of the ancient American people of Maya. Besides, the scientific knowledge is able to suppress and restrain a human´s think, irrespective of its direction. More than that accepted science is able to show the direction of the mental work of the scientist. A. Kamu wrote, that man is a victim his ideas. He recognizes its beliefs, organizes life accordingly to its beliefs, and depends on its ideas [1, с. 243].  Speaking about autonomic origin of science one should notice the fact that in condition of its independence on the culture of social organism it can repress it. N. Berdyaev notes that, our belief in the world so strong, that information about the physical world gets insistent, obligatory character, in other words, the form of knowledge [2, с. 65]. That is why, though being able to develop irrespective of the society with its own immanent laws, science shouldn´t override people. On the contrary, people should have control under science knowledge.

However in this case arise the question about correlation between culture and civilization in the contest of they relation with a science. Is the origin and appearance of the science connected with culture or with civilization? To answer this question we need to examine the concepts of culture and civilization. To reveal the most significant the differences between the culture and civilization, we address to the study of N. Berdyaev. The philosopher supposes that the culture terns to the past, takes care of traditions, keeps memory about its history. The civilization has a tendency to the future, strives to innovations; the feature of civilization is the ideas of progress and linearity time [2, с. 700-701]. In accordance with N. Berdyaev views, its difficult to say that appearance of the science has the relation only with culture. There are more reasons for statement, that origin of the science has the relation with civilization. The reasons of correlation between the science and civilization will be object of this article.

Its correctly to say, that origin of the science is to be observed in the context of civilization development. Fist, innovations are typical for the science, this means the presence of ideas of progress and linearity time in the society. Second, objective is an important feature of scientific knowledge. The concept objectiveness has relative character in the cultural and religious life of people. For instance, in faith spirit experience has individual, subjective character [3, с. 131].  The significance role play the subjective standpoints and values of the certainly clan in understanding of traditions, cultural norms. The civilization turns to the neutrality.  We will try to prove this idea. 

So, the present of state is the main trait of civilization. Certainly the state system lets say, that a society achieves the level of civilization. Any country is based on the positive law - the complex of juridical laws, which have objective character. The country guarantees fulfillment of the laws and provides they efficacy. Culture in contrast to civilization turns to subjective attitude. Besides, the fists resolves are bases on the traditional norms, which have the unity understanding in the environment of the only culture. However these resolves have other perceptive in the environment of other cultures. There are examples of the laws, which have been provided by strength of traditions of the regnant clan. For example, the complex of laws from the schumer town Ur (XXII age B.C.). More famous resolves Babylon king Hammurapy (1792-1750 B.C.). Though the first resolves appeared in the country of ancient Orient its impossible to say, that laws of the country of ancient Orient had been based on the principals of civilization. These laws had turned to the subjective interests of the regnant clan, which attempted to lead other clans. But the interests of the regnant clan had the different sense in views of other clans.  That is the reason why the countries of ancient Orient had been subdivided in the time of heyday, unity took very little periods. On the one hand, there were many factors, which had to expedite the consolidation of people of the countries of ancient Orient, for example, the common language, religion. But, on the other hand, all countries of ancient Orient out mach effort to suppress separatism, as the law were fixed on the regnant clan interests.

For sure, the power of oriental culture could stimulate development of knowledge about physic world. Many oriental towns had become the centers of development of different fields of science. However the knowledge appeared in the atmosphere of the oriental culture are not considered to be scientific. Fist, awareness about the world had been interpreted according to the stereotypes, standpoints, norms of regnant clan. Second, religion had been substantive bases for this knowledge. At last, very few people could get the knowledge, as a rule, they were priests and state officials. To get the knowledge considered to be a privilege, the feature of a certain group of people. So, in India the brahmans could have information, which could not have other people, because any knowledge must have to correlations with dharma of social status of definite group of men.

The fist national and cultural neutral resolves is considered to be Roman law. It suggests objective, unity demands for people regardless of cultural, national, relational belongings. Every citizen of Rome had the right to be acquainted with the norms of the Roman law and to interpret it objectively. This feature of Rome civilization was the significant cause of the science origin, because neutrality is one of the treats of scientific knowledge. In this case relevancy say, that law, as discipline, is the fist real science. Law as an independent field of practical and theoretical science started its development in the ancient culture and became an important subject in the medieval universities.   

So, the state having proved the law  as major a principle of state life, provided rise of the science and  its incorporation to the social entity.

To prove the point, that the law is the fist real science we will pay attention to the process of development of Greek philosophy. Greek philosophy followed the principle of provability; this is a significant treat of scientific knowledge. The principle of provability is interrelated with another treat of science; this is neutrality. A large role belongs to the sophistry while developing the principle of provability. This philosophical school followed the rule that any idea must be proved and accepted by the most of people. Besides, the principle of provability was rooting in the political life of the society. So, there was a law in the legislation of Solon, according to it every citizen of policy had to take side of any party in the political life of police. The man lost the citizenship, if he didn´t take part in the political life of policy and didn´t take somebody´s part. Therefore, every political party had to prove that its ideas were more profitable, than ideas of other parties. In such a way, the principle of provability was taking root and was supported by the government. Moreover, this principle leads to the state establishment. There the state protected principles of neutrality and provability, because it was the basis for development of justice as an essential trait of the state. At last, the principle of provability got practical meaning and at the same time got understanding as necessary conditions for the law and the state function. 

There is another feature of law as science. This is the succession in the comprehended of generations. This idea has been expressed by Leonardo da Vinchi, who thinks that the most useful science is that which has product, which can be clearly described to other people; and vice versa, the science is less of use, when its result can not be explained for people [4, p. 361]. The law is reflected on the paper and is interpreted regardless of cultural, religious points and the period of historical time. The modern human understands norms of Rome law, for example, as an ancient roman understood it. The Rome law´s principals let it spread. 

In the medieval time the law was the basis of the state existence. For sure, most of the field´s science was not always real science, because they were not supported by the theory, directed on theology and the practical aims of society. However the law had both good theoretical basis and practical necessity. This necessity was observed on the different levels of social structure. Accordingly there were four major kinds of the court:  the court of a senior (feudal lord), the court of a towns, the court of a church, the court of a rein (state´s court). Each of these courts solved the juridical problems of the different character. So, the court of a senior solved the problems in the small region, for example, in the village, which belonged to the feudal lord. The court of towns solved the problems within the certain town rage.  The other two kinds of court solved the functionaries of the higher level. So, the court of rein faced the dispute between the lords. In the process of solution of a dispute between the lords a rain provided security for the most of people.

The court of rein and the court of church long time had competed with each other for a long time. From time to time their rivalry leads to the army clashes. The most hard conflict begun in 1078, continued more than 30 yeas and finished by victory of the church. As a result the court of rein remained as the main organizing part of the state life. In the following time the system state law and court of the country became more complicated. Development of the law, as a rule, was determined by practical needs, but it was based on the theory. The theoretical principals of medieval law lay in the Roman law, which was taught in the medieval universities on the faculty of law. It shows that the law of medieval states preserved the connected with the culture of ancient Rome and included the norms of antique world. That is why we can say, that positive law, based on the state resolve, is continuation of natural law, based on the priory knowledge. At last, the state court was of interest of the most people. Domination of the rein court promised to people calm life and protected people from wars between seniors and tyranny of feudal lord.  Seniors could also address to the rein court to solve some problems. In this case the rein court played the role of independent judge, who followed to the objectives, valid arguments and commons norms.  

We suppose that the court of a church represented the culture and the court of a rein represented civilization. But its very important to take into account, that Christianity concluded idea of linearity of time and, therefore, progress. The European Christianity civilization assumed this idea and kept the connection with culture. So, the law in the European countries admitted as fundament norms of Christianity traditions. Thus a great number of functions of a state justice have been taken from the church. So, the church had solved the problem of inheritance for a long time, but afterwards the juridical law begun resolving these questions. The family law is based on the wedding. Religion idea of swear underlies to the contract law. The church authority under sins is the basis for the criminal law. This connection between the court of a church, the court of state determined the connection between culture and civilization.

So, the country and the legislation, as major principle of state life, has provided development of science and its rootage in the social entity.

At the same time the science, as the essential part of civilization, based on civilization, couldn´t obtain the position of independent exploratory sphere, which follows its proper immanent principals. More than that, the science has become the means of  strengthening norms of civilization and in many cases getting rid of the very cultural principles, values, which are  realized in the process of  spiritual experience development. On the one hand, this way leads to simplification of social relationship, reduction of price of manufacture. However on the another hand, in this conditions a human obey the common standards, norms, which are not always constructive.

The science having become the servant of civilization started to provide it with innovations, which the civilization can´t exist without. Indeed, the civilization having turned to the science, as a condition for survive, became dependent on the science. 

The civilization itself is one of the forms of social organization, but it doesn´t explore the world and doesn´t discover its laws. However the civilization uses the discoveries due to the science, which find privileging conditions for development. So, the civilization makes favorable condition for the science, which provide the civilization by scientific innovations and leads to civilization existence. While the civilization tends to scientific researches it can develop successfully.

In the course of coalescence of the science and the civilization the fist presented to exploitation of the physical world, following requests of the civilization starts its great exploitation. No wonder, that the idea of human´s domination in the nature has become the trait of the industrial society [5, с. 176]. As a result the scientific progress, permanent growth of demands of civilization industrial society is last stage for realization historical project - transformation and organization nature as the material for supremacy [6, с. 262].

The striving of the civilization for domination under nature leads to the situation when nature becomes inimical for a human. Being used by science it turns to the destructive power which suppresses human mind. But civilization turned this situation to its own advantage, and suggested the society should perceive the science as a give for technical and ecological solutions. The developed industrial society is growing and progressing just because it supports danger [6, с. 255]. At last the system of civilization itself and the character of the science itself lead to such an idea of the state:  the development of the mental and material needs, which have obtained ancient ways of struggle for existence are considered to be the most effective method of war for liberation. Civilized society values, put into human mind, assist human development in a certain direction, but at the same time they form a psychological dependence on the science, incapability to imagine state life without science. An a result the science  has found a nice place for its development  in the conditions of civilization, and in such a way has turned out into so called "parasite" which the state cant live without. Nevertheless the science depends on the civilization as well as the material resources for the science development are provided only by the state needs and strength.

Civilization defines the rhythm of human life. So, the philosopher Augustine Avreliy (353-430) who lived in the antique world from the historical point of view, wrote, that there was no  past - its had been over, there was no future - it hadn´t started yet, there was only present. However the present was so fast, that people could not realize it. Indeed, rhythm of time in the civilization is very quick. The progress of life suppresses the person´s identity, which as a rule is unable to reflect numerous laws, material combinations which have been discovered by the science, in   its mind. The information wave of the science overwhelms the person in such a way that the letter is incapable to understand it fully. So, in the modern world the mankind receives 45 000 pages of new instructions, it takes so much time to analyze all the pages that there is no time left for reflective reasoning.

Nevertheless the science obeys civilization. The subordination of the science by civilization expresses economical dependence on the state. Besides, other forms of the society cannot have necessity in the innovations and scientific knowledge. That is why the civilization crisis is not reasonable for the science. However there is no place for a human in the correlation between the science and the civilization. That is why one needs to find the ways of cultural and humanistic rootage in civilization. These values are main basis of the human existence. Development of any system must have stable fundament independent from the physical world. In this contest we agree with F.M. Dostoevsky point of view: none of the people can be organized on the principles of the science and reason.  [7, p. 243].

So, today the main task of scientific humanistic knowledge is the search of unchangeable cultural basis for civilization development. The difficulty lies in the feature of human´s nature, which is very different from the nature of the physical world. The science, turning the main concerns of people on the physical world, has made a human dependant on the material world.  People look for their place in the outer world, but fail to find it, because there is no such a place. A man addresses to the science for solution of this difficulty and has become the essential part of this world. However there are death and safe in the world, which rules are explained by laws of the logic and science. However these cases of death cannot be understood and perceived as a normal thing by men, who have the idea of immorality and perfection. The human can imagine more, than nature has in reality. The individual and the nature obey different rules. The laws important for the nature can´t be of effective use for an individual, and vice versa, the laws significant for a man can be unproductive for the nature. Course, the death and suffering have explanation in the science, for example, medicine disciplines, but the doctors cannot solve the problems of death and suffering, because the reason of these problems lies far from the science.  There is no use to find a remedy for AIDS, when in South of Africa one can observe women violence every 90 seconds or lets take Sudan, where Moslem soldiers got money from their government for the violence under Christian women in time of The Civil war. [8, p. 20]. The attempts of the sociologists to organize the democratic living in the African countries seem strange, because for the most of population the war is considered to be the way of life and way of thinking. To resolve modern problems one should work out the conception of scientific knowledge usage in accordance with spiritual demands of an individual. At last we need the analysis of scientific ideas on the level of political government of the state. Only in such a way science will become sensible and will be a real power of life development.  


  1. Kamus A. Myth o Sihtyfe. Essay o absurde / Twilight of gods. - Moscow: Isd. polit. literatura, 1990.
  2. Berdyajev N. The Philosophya svobodu. Moscow: АСТ, 2002. - С. 736.
  3. Ilijn I.A. Aksiomu religiosnogo oputa. - Moscow: ACT, 2002.
  4. Leonardo da Vinchy. The book about painting // Aesthetics of Renaissance: Anthology in the 2 vol. V. 2, Moscow: "Art", 1981, p. 360-371.
  5. Toffler E. Tretia volna. Moscow: АСТ, 2002. - С. 776.
  6. Marcuze G. Eros i civilization. Moscow: АСТ, 2002. - С. 526.
  7. Dostoevsky F.M. Besu // Dostoevsky F.M. Coll. Works. 12 vol. Vol. 8, Moscow, 1982.
  8. Baraev T. Spid y nasilie // Echo planetu. № 38 (285), 18-14 September, 1993. - P. 20-22.