The experience of developed countries shows that the revision of the relations of science and the state, the change in the models of their interaction is committed during periods of changing the paradigm of scientific and technical development or under the influence of deep economic and political crises. In Russia, the need and inevitability of the transformation of science is associated with deep socio-economic transformations of the past decade.

One of the remarkable features of modern science is that ethical issues occupy an increasingly prominent place in it. Of course, interest in these problems did not arise today; their discussion, although in a certain sense it was optional, has its own long and meaningful history.

My fate in science - the fate of a scientist during the perestroika period - is both exceptional (at this time of broken standards, almost every scientific career is unique, built on many accidents) and typical, since it includes almost the entire arsenal of structural elements of a scientist’s activity characteristic of the past 15 years, use of all new, previously unseen opportunities and freedom of maneuver.

[1] Active construction of separate scientific towns began in the USSR in the second half of the 1940s.

One hundred and fifty years ago, for the first time in the field of close attention of the educated community, the Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences publicly declared its "disinterest in the changeable minds of the press and the public." Since then, the figures of our Academy preferred to solve their problems without resorting to publicity, through direct contacts with the highest leaders of the state. This cell practice has survived to the days of today.

All the conversations that science is not needed and does not bring any benefit is fundamentally wrong. They are either populist, or are based on a misunderstanding of the ongoing processes. The Soviet system created a first -class science, recognized throughout the world.

Transformation into an incubator of knowledge Back in 1993, experts in the organization of economic cooperation and development (OECD) directly stated: “It becomes more and more frequent when business in the OECR countries hires and finances groups of dozens and even hundreds of highly qualified Russian scientists from special institutions for up to several years. The choice is usually made after a deep assessment of various institutions and groups working in all sectors ” [1] .

“Everyone abandoned the work ... Houses for male assemblies opened, from there they carried out sacred objects that could never be shown to anyone, and now they were shown to women, after which they burned or turned off ... People were preparing for a great day. In many villages, long tables were placed, covered according to the custom of white, up to vases with flowers on the tables. Papuans sat behind them like white. And otherwise they behaved like white.

The development of science and technology serving the arms race gave rise to a special type of cities in the Soviet Union-the so-called science city-settlements at research institutes with the initially good, privileged conditions for the lives of their employees. In the suburbs, this is Obninsk (the first nuclear power plant in the world, physical institutions), Dubna (nuclear research), Pushchino (biology), Troitsk (physics), Protvino (synchrophasotron, high -energies physics).

The French Republic is one of the oldest and developing bureaucracies in Europe. France carried the main features of a unitary state with strict federal control over almost all spheres of government through all historical upheavals - revolutions, two world wars, the loss of colonies, integration into the European Union. At the same time, the scientific bureaucracy successfully overcame the difficult times for French science in the 60s and 70s.

After ten years since the beginning of the radical reforms of the Soviet economic system, it is quite appropriate to analyze what the measures and efforts that were taken by the Government of Yegor Gaidar and partly Viktor Chernomyrdin in the early 1990s have led to the radical reforms.

To explain at least some intelligibly how science works and what it represents, we can start with the simplest and obvious-to determine it through the language. In Russian, this word appeared relatively recently and not from the Slavic language, like most cultural terms. It is formed from the ancient Indo-European root *EUK (OUK-) with the meaning of “accustom, get used to, trust”, which gave the Slavic (c) UK-/academic .

In the sociology of science, it was traditionally believed that scientific scandals and dishonest behavior of scientists are the result of the functioning of science as an institution that seeks to restore its initially inherent normative structure.

The letter combination of NTR has long been a confused abbreviation for the concept of a scientific and technical revolution. But for those who are engaged in special affairs and tasks, this reduction deciphens also as scientific and technical intelligence. Such a coincidence in the abbreviations, of course, by chance, but internally, in its meaning, in accordance with (Versus), both of these concepts are closely related.