A "POST-NORMAL" STATE OF SCIENCE: CONFRONTATION BETWEEN IMPRESSIONS AND MEASUREMENTS

The laconicism of this phrasing is achieved due to the analogy of doing science with playing chess. The analogy serves to illustrate the difference between the invariant rules of the game of chess and the transformation of the rules of chess tournaments. Similarly, there is a difference between the unchanged (over the last four centuries) norms of doing science and the constant transformation of science as a social institution. In the context of the proposed analogy, the concept of post-normal science captures changes in the rules of chess tournaments. The transformation of communication methods within the scientific community is similar to familiarization with the rules by which online chess functions. In the scientific community, a " player" is confronted with time, which determines the speed of achieving new results. Delay costs the "player" the loss of opportunities and the loss of their position in the competition. This interpretation of the concept's locus reveals a number of reasons why researchers become socially active outside their professional field. Research in the humanities faces a great challenge: it studies systems that are more complex than those of fundamental science but without the essential tools that the natural sciences possess. These tools are measurement procedures and conducting experiments. Conceptual models act as replacements for these tools. It is concluded that the current state of science as a social institution enables one to diagnose a model where the interrelationship between the phases of self-organization, the stages of the information process (all its stages, rather than just the processes of information transmission), and the steps of semiotic dynamics is established.