In the different time was progress of science (and proto-science, in modern understanding of term “science”) by different factors restricted. A part of this restriction is based of axiomatic systems of sciences and is necessary , another part are metaphysical factors that it’s possible different to characterize the third part of factors are social, cultural, economic and political factors which influences the progress of science indirect, but there is this influence

One of historical examples of metaphysical factors is position of Thomas Aquinas, concrete his idea that thru of theology is more completely as thru of human philosophy.

It’s also necessary to remark that in tis time term philosophy was not the same that it is now. The idea of Ren? Descartes “Cogito ergo sum” was also not independent it was part of confirmation of existence of God. One of the best historical descriptions of social factors was made in the work of Francis Bacon “Novum Organum”. He made a theory about idols (idola) that limits our knowledge opportunities. The causes are nature of human, individual experience, authority of past and incorrect using of language.

The German sociologist Max Weber in the work “Science as a Vocation” that was published, after his lection in Munich in 1918, that there isn’t place on the tribune of university for prophet and demagogue, he wrote that in research and lections the scientist must be neutral in political and religion topics. He was in his position a successor of the English zoologist Thomas Huxley for that was important neutrality in religion questions. Very quick this idea got paradigmatically status.

The American philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn introduced in his work “Structure of scientific revolutions” the term “paradigm” in modern understanding of them. After it wrote the German philosopher of technology Gerd Fleischmann in the article “Stability and modification of technology. Paradigm, pattern, standard” about difference between paradigm in science and in technology. For introduction of new technological paradigm is necessary acceptance not only by experts, but also by users.

On this page will be present that in the situation of hard control of science by the state, if there is a conflict also between scientific and technological paradigm, the group, position of that is based on technological paradigm, has more chances for victory. Although there was historical experience that intervention of state in the scientific research is not effective, there were hard ideological projects in the science in 20. Century.

Bruno Latour wrote that Louis Pasteur in had ti make his research a show for more investments. In this time there was the ideological trend that the science has to service the state and society. In the industrialization case there was conflict between scientific and technological 23 paradigm in physics, in the modernization of agriculture there was conflict in biology.

In the Ussr in the time of hegemony of Trofim Lysenko was limited the progress of genetics as part of biology. Lev Zhivotovsky wrote that in this time was genetic a new discipline with to much open fundamental questions. In this time were ideas of T. Lyseko more effective for solution of agricultural problems. In this situation was for Soviet government position of Lysenko more attractive as position of genetic. In Germany in the time of Adolf Hitler there was project of “German Physics”.

This physics disclaimed a quantum mechanics and theory of relativity. The central idea was that like all nations has national cultures so has every nations national science. On the start was this project by Philipp Lenard and Johannes Stark successful and there were debate between national physicists and Werner Heisenberg. But when the government of Germany started the German nuclear weapon project, there was fiasco of idea of “German physics” because refusal of new physical paradigm after scientific revolution made the project impossible.

Although there was the immigration of many scientist from Germany after World war II, was the situation with fundamental physics in Germany better as with genetics in UUSR where there was hegemony of Lysenkoism to 1960-s. This two historical examples illustrates that in the case of conflict between scientific and technological paradigm, if there is state control of science, the side that uses the technological paradigm has more chances for victory in this conflict.

Author Iakovlev, PhD.