Old and new norm systems of science

Old and new norm systems of science are the concepts to distinguish two forms of organization and practice of science, including the traditional scientific system and the modern scientific system, in which, the modern scientific system is considered began after the time of the modern revolution in science and technology in the 1940s of the 20th Century.

We know that before the modern revolution science and technology, the results of scientific research activities are mainly provided for society the scientific knowledge to explain the natural world, the laws of society or opening up the development of the theory of basic sciences .... In addition, though some research results then have been applied in social life, science had not suffered as much impact from the society.

After the Second World War, particularly the revolution of modern science and technology, science has become linked with social life. The success in applying of scientific achievements to serve political and military objectives (the Manhattan project in US) led to the advent of big science projects which have received funding greatly from the government and military. Besides, science is also becoming more inextricably connected with the technical and material production activities that making a revolution in technology, bringing new products to serve social life, from which open up market opportunities, attracting the attention of businesses. The business has gradually become the sponsor of scientific research activities.

For that reason, science has more features and become different from the previous scientific tradition. About the difference between the traditional scientific systems and the modern scientific system, Doctor Olof.Hallonsten, in his lecture on the subject "Governance of Science" cited 02 of acronyms of Merton and Ziman to describe the main characteristics of the traditional science and modern science.

CUDOS and PLACE

In 1942, Merton gave the characteristics of systems science in that time through the acronym: CUDOS. In 1994, Ziman outlined his views of the system characteristics of modern science through the acronym: PLACE. Accordingly, the acronyms are derived from the word CUDOS are C: Communalism, U: Universalism, D: Disinterestedness, O: Originality, S: Skepticism, and acronyms are derived from the word PLACE are P: Proprietary , L: Local, A: Authoritarian, C: Commissioned, E: Expert. (cited from the lecture on the subject "Governance of Science" by Dr. Ofof).

The acronyms on above is emphasis on distinctive features, in contrast between the traditional scientific system for the modern scientific system. For example, between Communalism - Proprietary: for traditional science, the research results should belong to society, while for modern science, this result was associated with the ownership of individuals or organizations. Universalism - Local: in traditional science, research activities seems not to focus on serving a specific audience, while in the modern science, the research is usually located in a defined range and solve specific problems etc .... We can see that this difference comes from the thing that the modern science has linked more closely with society and dominated more by the needs of society. Scientists have to choose between the scientific research is an activity of freedom, an individual needs, with the scientific research is an activity serving the needs of society.

The potential conflicts

The main differences and contradictory of traditional and modern scientific systems led to the conflict between the two. Research activities in the traditional scientific system enhanced freedom, creativity, and scientists are free to study the issues which they feel interested and excited. Meanwhile, research activities in the system of modern science have many influences and impacts from outside, to meet the expectations of society or of those who provide resources for research activities research.

In Vietnam, I think it hard to take some examples of a conflict between the traditional science and modern science because the development of science in Vietnam is still at a low level. State budget remains the main source of financing of research institutions and the financial provisions from the state does not promote scientific research activities. Besides, the participation of society for scientific research activities are limited. We do not have many businesses focus on investment in scientific research activities. The combination of business and scientific organizations are not close and yet highly effective.

Conclusions

We know that the existence of both systems of science is a certain meaning. To conclude this essay, we can say that the role of science policy-makers is very important. They should have a correct perception, to make the appropriate policies for both systems, in order to balance between ensuring the independence and freedom of scientific research activities with the application of science in the social life, serving the needs of social development.

Truong Chi