The article is an exploration into the problem of the ethos of modern science viewed from the representationalist and interventionist perspectives. The representationalist account of science is associated with the position of theoreticism, while the interventionist account pertains to the concept of new experimentalism. The former of these approaches is dominated by the ethos of science which Robert K. Merton defined as comprising four sets of institutional imperatives referred to as ‘Mertonian norms’: universalism, communitarism, disinterestedness, and organized skepticism. In the latter approach, the concept of ethos is far more intricate. It can be described as a hybrid mix of elements derived from Mertonian norms and some constituents from the area of science that John Ziman calls “industrial science”. This article compares the two types of ethos, highlighting the need to identify and investigate nuances in the ethos embraced by individual disciplines within the area of the interventionist approach to science. It is argued that the need can be attributed to the escalating process of substituting the ideal of value-free science for the ideal of value-laden science. The phenomenon is especially evident in the field of laboratory sciences, as exemplified by the research conducted on synthetic mRNA technology. The author also draws attention to the problem of the social responsibility of disciplines from the interventionist approach to science.

这篇文章是从表征主义和干预主义的角度探讨现代科学的精神问题。科学的表征主义解释与理论主义的立场有关，而干预主义的解释则与新实验主义的概念有关。这些方法中的前者以科学精神为主，罗伯特·默顿 （Robert K. Merton） 将其定义为包括四组被称为“默顿规范”的制度要求：普遍主义、社群主义、无私主义和有组织的怀疑主义。在后一种方法中，ethos 的概念要复杂得多。它可以被描述为源自默顿规范的元素和来自科学领域的一些成分的混合混合物，约翰·齐曼称之为“工业科学”。本文比较了这两种类型的精神，强调了识别和调查干预主义科学领域内各个学科所接受的精神的细微差别的必要性。有人认为，这种需要可以归因于用无价值科学的理想取代充满价值的科学理想的不断升级的过程。这种现象在实验室科学领域尤为明显，对合成 mRNA 技术的研究就是例证。作者还从干预主义科学方法中提请注意学科的社会责任问题。