http://localhost:8080/handle/lib/219 Sat, 10 Oct 2026 05:40:04 GMT 2026-10-10T05:40:04Z http://localhost:8080/handle/lib/4840 Title: Axiological Dimension of the Modern Science Communication Authors: Бойченко, Наталія Михайлівна Abstract: The article is devoted to the analysis of the specifics of the values of contemporary science communication. The values of science are still underestimated by many science researchers, in particular, sociologists. At the same time, the clear definition of the key values of science and intersubjective understanding about them increasingly determine the success of research. After all, values underlie the motivation of human behavior in general and the behavior of a scientist in particular. Academic values should be a priority in motivating the behavior of an individual scientist and science communication in general. Although values indicate to a greater extent what is desired, rather than what is available, they cannot be reduced to an ideal that is absent in reality, because values are already represented in the real behavior of people. The values of science have not only a regulatory nature of intellectual values (the abstract search for scientific truth as a higher goal, the power of the human intellect, academic freedom as an ideal, etc.), but also a specific functional and pragmatic significance – as specific instrumental values (institutional and organizational values, communicative competences, etc.). Despite the fact that values have an interpretive nature, they are neither subjectively limited nor arbitrarily relative to different social groups: the significance of values is determined by the communication in which these values are used by their carriers. The need for collective recognition of the values of science communication appears especially clearly and acutely in the clarification of the problems of ethics and morality of science communication, in particular in the issues of inclusiveness of science communication. Mon, 05 Feb 2024 00:00:00 GMT http://localhost:8080/handle/lib/4840 2024-02-05T00:00:00Z http://localhost:8080/handle/lib/4633 Title: Постконвеційність патріотизму Григорія Сковороди Authors: Бойченко, Наталія Михайлівна; Бойченко, Михайло іванович Abstract: Життя Григорія Сковороди заслужено називають прикладом життя філософа: здавна вважають, що філософ має жити так, як учить сам. Адже філософ – це людина, яка вчить тому, що сама концептуалізувала, чому надала понятійне оформлення, що вивела як мораль. Яка би то була мораль, якби її нехтував сам її творець і поборник? Thu, 01 Jun 2023 00:00:00 GMT http://localhost:8080/handle/lib/4633 2023-06-01T00:00:00Z http://localhost:8080/handle/lib/4632 Title: ЕТИКА ЩАСТЯ І ЕТИКА ВБИВСТВА: КОЛІЗІЇ ЗІТКНЕННЯ Authors: Бойченко, Наталія Михайлівна; Бойченко, Михайло іванович Abstract: If in secular ethics the bioethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-harm and justice are applied, in military ethics these principles are often compromised by the obligation to obey orders in a military environment. During the war, not only the combatants fall into complex ethical conflicts related to the execution of the order to kill, it is also a fairly common situation for medics. On the one hand, they are obliged to comply with all legal orders; on the other hand, they must adhere to the ethical principles of their medical profession. For some, happiness is found in taking the lives of others simply because other people profess other values, faith, belong to another nation – aggressors kill, dehumanizing their victims, treating them worse than sick animals, aggressors are driven by hatred or contempt, cynicism and cruelty, sadism and the desire to dominate. All this has nothing to do with ethics. For others, war is a forced necessity, they kill in order not to be killed, it is a forced self-defense. And even in such a situation, a normal, adequate person, of course, punishes himself with moral reproaches, gets PTSD. War is just, and the ethics of killing does not conflict with the ethics of happiness, only when the killing is not proactive, when it is forced and aims to save more lives. Mon, 20 Mar 2023 00:00:00 GMT http://localhost:8080/handle/lib/4632 2023-03-20T00:00:00Z http://localhost:8080/handle/lib/4631 Title: Principlism in bioethics: features and possible limitations Authors: Бойченко, Наталія Михайлівна Abstract: Advantages and disadvantages of one of the most influential methodological approaches in bioethics – principlism – are considered. The practical origins of principlism in bioethics and its theoretical origins in the philosophy of principles are revealed. The main philosophical sources of bioethics are indicated, which include utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, rule-based theory of general morality, virtue ethics, and feminist ethics. The irreducibility of principlism to any of these theories in particular and at the same time its appeal to each of them was revealed. In medical ethics, principlism appears primarily as an important practical approach that allows instrumentalization of decision-making in ethically complex situations of treating patients, conducting biomedical and clinical research. The sources of the original four principles, which are recognized by the majority of theorists of principlism, have been clarified. Among such sources, the so-called Belmont report, which names three principles, is of secondary but big importance: the principle of respect for the individual; the principle of beneficence and the principle of justice. The main arguments, classical formulation and typical contexts of application of the four principles of bioethics presented by Tom Beaucamp and James Childress as the generally accepted basis of principlism are presented: respect for autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence and justice. European bioethicists subsequently complement and develop these four principles with other principles: dignity, integrity and vulnerability. The main directions of criticism of principlism are revealed: lack of specificity, uncertainty of practical application of ethical theory, possible contradiction between principles. The need for constant and systematic practice of applying ethical principles in making medical decisions is defined as an antidote to these shortcomings of principlism. It is noted that Beaucamp and Childress see such permanent practice through specification and balancing procedures. Fri, 21 Jul 2023 00:00:00 GMT http://localhost:8080/handle/lib/4631 2023-07-21T00:00:00Z