Mini ReviewABSTRACT
Scientism, understood as a belief in science, has become the basis of our reality since the beginning of the third millennium. It is felt that faith in science and scientific progress is the basis of every rebirth and progress of society by overcoming all obstacles. Is there a responsibility of science if it is the only true knowledge, if only it achieves good by its own power? To practically answer this question, philosophers, sociologists, ecologists and other researchers critically reflect on the nature and factography of the imbalance of the healthy living environment. Scientific and technological potentials have not fulfilled past and present utopias about the creation of human freedom, prosperity and happiness. It seems that the natural sciences, and the biomedical sciences derived from them, those on which new technologies rely, are challenging the biosphere in a powerful struggle to establish an anonymous realm of scientific knowledge and progress. This paper shows the aggressiveness of science according to its principle, as a true knowledge of the objective, because its development contributes to progress without limits of growth. The scientific fields and disciplines that need to be consulted in biomedical research are analyzed, as well as the conditions in which the research team builds multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary connections for scientific knowledge by which technology is subordinated to phenomena and processes in healthy living environment.
Keywords: Public Health; Healthy Living Environment; Multidisciplinarity; Biomedical Research; Doctrinal Division; Scientific Disciplines
Introduction
Science and technology have reached limitations in the field of environmental protection and public health, and therefore sustainable development. Each activity takes place at the expense of limiting the environment of healthy living and at the expense of exchange. Human activity finds its external limit in nature, which must be controlled because hopes for life in a better environment are declining, physical yields and economic profitability are declining, quality of life is lower, while consumption is rising. In the study of man’s relationship with the natural system, there is a need to establish scientific attitudes on mutually inconsistent relations between the sciences. In this regard, there is an unresolved issue of organizational sciences (not defined in the Frascati Manual) from the standpoint of the influence of information technology, because it significantly changes the interrelationships between natural, social, biomedical and human sciences. Organizational sciences and a new field of organizational technology are emerging as a synthetic scientific field. This paper will consider aspects of the methodology of systems analysis that precedes scientific research in the field of biomedicine, covering several scientific fields. These areas in the circular approach include disciplines that are focused on man and his survival on Earth. The new science of epistemology limits its field of research to the harmonization of human aspirations with needs, respecting the basic postulates of the environment of healthy living and public health. The need for a multidisciplinary approach to research in order for science to meet the demands of improving public health will be analyzed.
Doctrinal Division of the Field of Science
The scientific areas and disciplines consulted in the analysis of the environment of healthy living and biomedical research are based on the 35th chapter of Agenda 21, given by the UN, which refers to science.
The primary goal of each country is to identify, at the request of international organizations, the state of its scientific knowledge and research needs, in order to achieve significant improvements in:
• Global expansion of the scientific basis and strengthening of scientific and research capacities and capabilities, especially in developing countries, in areas that are relevant for the development of attitudes towards the environment of healthy living and public health
• The formation of such measures for environmental protection and development, based on the best scientific knowledge and assessments, and taking into account the need to expand international cooperation and the relative uncertainty of various processes and options in this area
• Interaction between science and decision-making using a preventive approach (Where applicable?), In order to change the existing model of production, consumption and public health in order to gain time and reduce uncertainty
• Creating and applying knowledge, especially domestic, in different environments and cultures in order to achieve sustainable levels of development, taking into account relations at all levels
• Improving cooperation between scientists by promoting interdisciplinary research programs and activities
• Public participation in setting priorities and in making decisions related to sustainable development.
The structure of the criteria for evaluating the development of science and technology is defined by the Frascati manual. The strategic criteria are in charge of choosing the applicationdevelopmental role of science in the training and competitive participation of scientists in the European research area. Primary technological areas are those in which relevant results can be achieved with the existing staff and the existing level of integration of scientific and professional work. A doctrine is a normatively adopted position of a science or group within a scientific field, verified by a competent team of scientists, who with their references have an inviolable reputation and trust of the scientific public. Doctrines are theoretical and methodological constructions, which characterize attitudes as achievements of science and technology, which are suitable for transformation into appropriate ISO standards at the modern stage of science in that field. Standards refer to performance, balance, speed of energy savings, material savings from the point of view of resource conservation.
World assemblies establish scientific doctrine, and teams further reclassify. Multidisciplinarity is defined as the use of disciplines from several scientific fields that do not have functional connections. However, a holistic approach to the problem is built on transdisciplinarity, where areas are interconnected. Rapid scientific and technological development has conditioned the connection of mutual fields of science, and thus bridges are obtained, which form relations between teams. The doctrines did not respond to the merger of groups, ie teamwork, so the foundations of sustainable development, based on time economy, from quick decision making, through innovation to health services and motivation, remained without scientific basis, [1] as shown in Figure 1. The doctrine turned into a standard gives a request to practitioners, which makes the practical value of research papers. In order for the Biotechnical Sciences to respond to the demands of researchers in the direction of ensuring public health, their development must go towards multidisciplinarity, which encompasses four areas of science:
• Natural sciences: Their postulates and principles that characterize the natural environment and steam in connection with the requirements set according to insurance research procedures healthy living environment.
• Technical sciences: Which mark the existing achievements and development trends sciences in general (automation, computerization, cybernetics and bionization).
• Social sciences: Demography and sociology of work and creativity, economics, environment Law.
• Synthetic and organizational sciences: Social ecology as a functional link connections projections of nature development and food production on the basis of adequate development engagement of technical-technological and biotechnical disciplines.
Figure 1: Development of attitudes towards public health and the environment of healthy living.
Scientific Fields, Branches and Disciplines Consulted in Biomedical Research in the Field of Public Health
The attitude towards the environment of healthy living is already a norm for a general issue concerning the possibility of life and the need for human life and nature in the cultural space of the community [2]. Today, the ecology of freedom and the ecology of suffering are rightly spoken of. Unfortunately, philosophically oriented ecology, i.e ecology in a comprehensive sense, did not attract the attention of the public, primarily political. The behavior of politicians shows that humanity has been suppressing environmental issues for more than a century, that caring for the future and generations has been completely suppressed in the interest of modern man. Then comes the development of biomedicine and its multidisciplinarity with other sciences that answer the questions of harmonization of human aspirations, possibilities and needs in the conditions of sustainable development.
The disciplines of Biomedical Sciences are a multidisciplinary study of human survival in a healthy living environment with the help of economic activities, as well as their connections with basic natural systems. It provides a theoretical basis and an objective understanding on which a reasonable improvement in current practice can be based [3]. Disciplines that contribute to biomedicine are from the fields of social, technical and biotechnical sciences physics and biology, technology, economics, law, anthropology and some disciplines of technical sciences. Biomedicine in itself is inadequate to support the achievement of a long-term global system. Cultural and ethical evolution is very difficult, but it is necessary because the vision of sustainable development, which is very normative, relies on political and cultural systems. Biomedicine relies on transdisciplinary scientific engineering and other disciplinary research relevant to improving public health.
Bio-ethics as a branch of social and biomedical sciences calls for help, in order to harmonize man’s aspirations with his needs, respecting the basic postulates of nature. Medical action with the consultation of this knowledge enters the area acceptable according to the principles of longevity, prevention, precaution and warning. The role of bio-ethics is to provide support to physicians to review decisions when acting in a living environment, emphasizing anticipation, and taking responsibility for interventions performed. Nomology is the science of rules of conduct relevant to the field of biomedical sciences and plays a role in connecting the six existing fields of science according to the Frackati manual. Not all aspects of its formation have been resolved, such as defining the subject of research and methodological operationalization. Although young science is important for biomedical research because, among other things, in its field, it nurtures the fundamental scientific discipline on which information technology is based [4]. Technology through science and technology seeks less and less influence of political control, but at the same time captures man as a natural being. Also, through the uneven development of technology, richer countries with new technologies expand their social power and limits of influence, and very often change political relations in the world or parts of the world. Modern technology, despite the need for large financial resources and their management, offers an extraordinary opportunity for decentralization, and based on this organizational principle, it achieves incredibly favorable work and financial results.
New technologies have revolutionized almost all parts of human life. They are gradually becoming available in all segments, and especially in scientific research work in search of the best possible health performance. On the way to the availability of new technologies, countries that are addicted to new technologies often face many problems. Namely, new industries and processes based on the incorporation of as much knowledge as possible per unit of service, achieve the greatest commercial success and are the core of the wealth of countries that have managed to establish themselves in the world market. Information and communication technology enables obtaining and connecting the necessary information both within the collective and between various external groups that can be located locally, in the same country and outside the nation state. as a basis for building a comprehensive health policy at the appropriate levels.
Responsibility of Scientific Achievements in Biomedical Research
For what is good for the common survival of man in the environment of healthy living, science has no standard. Thanks to the scenario that the effects of science have long paved the way for extremely unpleasant and dangerous practice, one is more sober in judging science and its responsibility. Henry Poincaré [5] argued that science is not just the ability to classify phenomena. It is not just the ability to observe and research various phenomena of human health. Science penetrates deeply into all spheres of the cosmos and constructs them with the supposed practical philosophy of nature. There is doubt about human impact on ecosystems and public health through science and technology. Technological euphoria only conceals health effects, and the absence of ethics in science and responsibility for science allows it to unite other forces: legislation, execution and jurisdiction. Man’s task is to behave intelligently, to take care to maintain order in nature, and to interact dynamically between natural and cultural systems. In this respect, modern experiences prove that the idea of uniting the power of science is unfounded, that it belongs to those great stories of traditional metaphysics. In order to critically consider these problems, it is necessary to examine the historical and social layers that obscure other possibilities of science, an epistemology which, in its structure, is not a contradiction with nature and man.
If we read the history of modernity backwards, we could find out how crucial epistemology was for today’s biomedical, ethical and cultural problems, which encouraged and intensified the boundless and unscrupulous use of natural resources, and therefore the environment of healthy living. It is too early to claim that everything necessary is known about the new bioethically oriented epistemology, science in general and civilization. At a time when the instrumentalization and functionalization of the mind is noticed, which presents itself as progress, man is ruled by a civic epistemology, an apology for the exploitation of natural resources with the degradation of the environment. By accepting without limitation this epistemology, man renounces the possibility of accepting responsibility for what he does and what happens to him. And it happens that a person becomes insensitive to environmental problems, to the interrelationship between human ways of acting, the actions of public health institutions. Man does not ask himself what is worth knowing, but he knows that he possesses knowledge that he might wish he had not found and that he had not become enlightened about [6]. Some knowledge causes all kinds of destruction, the death of man or all living things on earth. Some knowledge causes fear, because “if knowledge is power, then it meets us in the form of cognition, transparency and connection” [7]. Environmental catastrophe is, therefore, anticipated in epistemological-metaphysical catastrophe. It is not just a product of the abuse of science and technology but is connected with the principles of organization of human societies and the principles of understanding the world.
Historical consciousness points to the ambiguity of science, which reveals that dangers and great risks lie in modern epistemology. It has no yardstick to distinguish good from evil, for it is equally involved in creation and destruction. “Science has no solution to moral and humane problems. It is in the service of work, progress, and even catastrophe: environmental health, demographic, political, economic and technical-technological. That is why the dramatization of scientific knowledge takes place in several directions. The most important is certainly the one in modern epistemology, modern ecology and biomedicine. The direction in modern epistemology has not been sufficiently researched. The second direction, which is the design of environmental problems in cultural change, testifies to the inevitability of social changes that degrade the biosphere”[7-9].
Conclusion
It is to be expected that science will become the basis for overcoming the economic, cultural and moral crisis. Respect for science is needed, because the belief that it has a monopoly on truth and progress has become universal. Scientism understood as a belief in science, as the basis of our reality has become an ego since the beginning of the third millennium. There is then a responsibility to science because it is the only true knowledge. Only she achieves good with her own strength and removes all scarcity. This would mean the birth of a call for the formation of the responsibility of scientists, without science being just a new ethical imperative. Increasing service to man cognitively points to the origin of epistemology, which, at the top of the scale in modern science, is in its virtue to win in the long run. Biomedical research requires multidisciplinarity, which is built by connecting several fields of science without functional connections. A holistic approach to public health and ensuring a healthy living environment is based on transdisciplinarity. Based on the connections or bridges thus obtained, relationships are established between research teams. All organizational forms of performance are taken into account by multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary work on which the entire functional organization is realized, and dynamic systems designed and established in accordance with the requirements of health policy are designed and established.
References
- Mijanović K Jukić, M Mijanović Jukić J (2020) Education for sustainable development, IRASA Second International Scientific Conference Science, Education, Technology and Inovation, SETI Belgrade.
- Rodger J, Gemery H (1994) Science, Technology, and the Enviromemt (multidisciplinary perspectives). The University of Akron Press.
- Mijanović K (2018) Ambient of health life in the light of using the healthcare food. Zbornik radova, Konferencija AGROSIM. Sarajevo.
- Dobrov GM (1968) Nauka o naukama, Uvod u opšte poznavanje naučnih djelatnosti, zavod za izdavanje udžbenika srbije, Beograd.
- Poincare H (2008) La Valuere de la science, Paris, juni 41(3): 232-237.
- Šarčević A (1990) Ekološki problemi u kulturnoj mijeni, Sarajevo.
- Mijanovic K (2010) Okolinska etika za inženjere i menadžere, Mostar.
- (2004) Strategy for Building Worldwide Capaciteties in Science and Technology. Interacademy Council.
- Mijanović K (2004) Uticaj okolinskih zahtjeva na rad proizvodnih sistema, Doktorska disertacija, Mašinski fakultet Sarajevo.
