<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">socofpower</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Социология власти</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Sociology of Power</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">2074-0492</issn><issn pub-type="epub">2413-144X</issn><publisher><publisher-name>The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id custom-type="edn" pub-id-type="custom">RCHHDC</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">socofpower-284</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>СТАТЬИ. ТЕОРИЯ И ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>ARTICLES. THEORY &amp; INVESTIGATIONS</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Технократическая метафора в российском политическом дискурсе: проблема концептуализации</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>The Technocratic Metaphor in Russian Political Discourse</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0009-0007-7613-6675</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Мозжухин</surname><given-names>М. П.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Mozzhukhin</surname><given-names>M. P.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Мозжухин Максим Павлович — магистр политических наук, аналитик исследовательской компании Russian Field.</p><p>Москва</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Maksim P. Mozzhukhin — MA in Political Science, analyst at the research company Russian Field.</p><p>Moscow</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">lodgo@yandex.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru"><institution>Исследовательская компания Russian Field</institution><country>Россия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en"><institution>Reresearch company Russian Field</institution><country>Russian Federation</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2025</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>27</day><month>07</month><year>2025</year></pub-date><volume>37</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>187</fpage><lpage>206</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Мозжухин М.П., 2025</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2025</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Мозжухин М.П.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Mozzhukhin M.P.</copyright-holder><license xml:lang="ru" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.</license-p></license><license xml:lang="en" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://socofpower.ranepa.ru/jour/article/view/284">https://socofpower.ranepa.ru/jour/article/view/284</self-uri><abstract><p>Статья посвящена исследованию метафорических концептов в российском политическом дискурсе, переносящих в сферу политики явления из сферы техники. За счет средств теории когнитивной метафоры описываются причины популярности технократических метафор в политических объяснительных моделях в современной России. В качестве одного из основных факторов называется технооптимизм позднесоветской культуры, повлиявший на формирование современного российского политического лексикона. В то же время констатируется анонимность метафорических концептов этого рода: установить, кто и когда предложил их использование в российской политической науке, оказывается чрезвычайно сложно. В отсутствие конкретного автора и какого-либо контроля со стороны научных институтов один и тот же термин начинает наполняться часто противоположными смыслами и моральными оценками. На примере «политических технологий» демонстрируется, с одной стороны, укорененность такого рода метафор в языке политической аналитики, с другой — низкий уровень научной рефлексии вокруг подобных понятий. Чтобы преодолеть данное противоречие, предлагается реконструировать ход научной дискуссии вокруг как этой, так и других технократических метафор, закрепившихся в языке российских политических наук. В духе картографии разногласий необходимо определить, велся ли в действительности содержательный спор вокруг их значения. В зависимости от результата этих изысканий можно будет судить, делают ли технократические метафоры политическую реальность более понятной или же, наоборот, являются пустым означающим, обдуманное использование которого требует широкой дискуссии специалистов и последовательной реконцептуализации. Подобная работа могла бы сделать язык российской политологии более ясным и, как следствие, способным к более четкому отражению сложных политических явлений современной РФ.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The article focuses on studying metaphorical concepts in Russian political discourse that transfer phenomena from the domain of technology to politics. Using the tools of cognitive metaphor theory, the paper describes the reasons for the popularity of technocratic metaphors in political explanatory models in contemporary Russia. Techno-optimism of late Soviet culture, which influenced the formation of the modern Russian political lexicon, is identified as one of the main factors. At the same time, the anonymity of such metaphorical concepts is noted: it is extremely difficult to determine who and when proposed such terms in Russian political science. In the absence of a specific author and any control from scientific institutions, the same term can often take on opposing meanings and moral evaluations. Using “political technologies” as an example, the article demonstrates, on the one hand, the entrenchment of such metaphors in the language of political analysis and, on the other, the low level of scientific reflection surrounding these concepts. To overcome this contradiction, it is proposed to reconstruct the course of scientific discussion around this and other technocratic metaphors that have become established in the language of Russian political sciences. In the spirit of mapping controversies, it is necessary to determine whether a substantial debate about their meaning has actually taken place. Depending on the results of these investigations, it will be possible to judge whether technocratic metaphors make political reality more comprehensible or, conversely, are empty signifiers requiring broad discussion among specialists and consistent reconceptualization. Such work could make the language of Russian political science clearer and, as a result, more capable of accurately reflecting the complex political phenomena of contemporary Russia.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>картография разногласий</kwd><kwd>когнитивные науки</kwd><kwd>исследования науки и технологий</kwd><kwd>политические технологии</kwd><kwd>политология</kwd><kwd>технооптимизм</kwd><kwd>технократия</kwd><kwd>технократическая метафора</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>cognitive sciences</kwd><kwd>Mapping controversies</kwd><kwd>Political science</kwd><kwd>Political technologies</kwd><kwd>STS</kwd><kwd>Technocracy</kwd><kwd>Technocratic Metaphor</kwd><kwd>Techno-optimism</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Абрамов Р. Н. (2013). Популяризация науки в СССР как элемент культурной политики. Время вперед! Культурная политика в СССР. ВШЭ. EDN: WXWNHH</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Abramov R. N. (2013) Popularization of Science in the USSR as an Element of Cultural Policy. Time Forward! Cultural Policy in the USSR. HSE. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Баранов А. Н. (2004) Метафорические грани феномена коррупции. Общественные науки и современность, (2), c. 70–79. EDN: OWNMZD</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Baranov A. N. (2004) Metaphoric Aspects of Corruption Phenomenon. Social Sciences and Modernity, (2), pp. 70–79. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Баранов А. Н., Караулов Ю. Н. (1994) Словарь русских политических метафор. М.: Помовский и партнеры. EDN: RTAORH</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Baranov A. N., Karaulov Y. N. (1994) Dictionary of Russian Political Metaphors. Moscow: Pomovsky and Partners. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Вахштайн В. C.* (2006) Джон Ло: социология между семиотикой и топологией. Социологическое обозрение, 5(1), c. 24–29. EDN: JWURND</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Vakhshtayn V. S. (2006) John Law: Sociology Between Semiotics and Topology. Russian Sociological Review, 5(1), pp. 24–29. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Вентурини Т. (2018) Погружаясь в магму: как подходить к исследованию разногласий с помощью акторно-сетевой теории. Логос, 5(126), c. 53–84. EDN: MFTMPB. https://doi.org/10.22394/0869-5377-2018-5-53-81</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Venturini T. (2018) Diving in magma: how to explore controversies using actor-network theory. Logos, 5(126), pp. 53–84. https://doi.org/10.22394/0869-5377-2018-5-53-81. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Григорян Г. (2012) Всесоюзное общество «Знание» как коммуникатор для власти и научного сообщества СССР. URL: https://novznania.ru/2012/10/05/%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BE%D1%8E%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B5-%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%89%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE-%C2%AB%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5%C2%BB-%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BA-%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC/ (дата обращения: 26.02.2025)</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Grigoryan G. (2015) All-Union Society “Znanie” as a Communicator for the Authorities and the Scientific Community of the USSR. (in Russ.) URL:https://novznania.ru/2012/10/05/%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BE%D1%8E%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B5-%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%89%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE-%C2%AB%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5%C2%BB-%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BA-%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC/</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Гринберг Т. Э. (2012) Политические технологии: ПР и реклама: Учеб. пособие для студентов вузов. M.: Аспект Пресс. EDN: SCHIEZ</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Grinberg T. E. (2012) Political technologies. Moscow: Aspect Press. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Демидченко В. (2015) Понятие политических технологий: сущность, формы и виды. Власть, (12), c. 140–142. EDN: VDHFJJ</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Demidchenko V. (2015) Political technologies: nature, forms and types. Power, (12), pp. 140–142. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Демьянков В. З. (1994) Когнитивная лингвистика как разновидность интерпретирующего подхода. Вопросы языкознания, 4, c. 17–33. EDN: SCKGRB</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Demyankov V. Z. (1994) Cognitive Linguistics as a Type of Interpretative Approach. Linguistics Issues, 4, pp. 17–33. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ефремов И. А. (1953) О широкой популяризации науки. Литературная газета, 23 марта. URL: https://i-efremov.ru/Publicism/LG53-24march.htm (дата обращения: 25.02.2025)</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Efremov I. A. (1953) On the Broad Popularization of Science. Literaturnaya Gazeta, March 24. (in Russ.) URL: https://i-efremov.ru/Publicism/LG53-24march.htm</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Куракин Д. (2015) Траектория, форма жизни и единство жизненного пути: к уточнению понятия траектории в поведенческих науках. URL: https://www.hse.ru/data/2015/04/01/1096719190 (дата обращения: 27.06.2025).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kurakin D. (2015) Trajectory, the Form of Life and the Unity of the Life Path: to Clarify the Concept of Trajectory in the Behavioral Sciences. URL: https://www.hse.ru/data/2015/04/01/1096719190. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Лакофф Д., Джонсон М. (2004) Метафоры, которыми мы живем. М.: УРСС. EDN: QRAADX</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Lakoff D., Johnson M. (2004) Metaphors We Live By. Moscow: URSS. (in Russ.) Латур Б. (2006) Надежды конструктивизма. В сборнике: Вахштайн В. С.* (ред.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Латур Б. (2006) Надежды конструктивизма. В сборнике: Вахштайн В. С.* (ред.). Социология вещей (с. 365–389). Издательский дом «Территория будущего». EDN: TMXZDH</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Latour B. (2006) Hopes of Constructivism. In Vakhshtayn V. S. (Ed.). Sociology of Things (pp. 365–389). Territoriya budushchego. EDN: TMXZDH. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Непогодин А. (2020) «Запад списал Лукашенко». После выборов Белоруссию ждут большие потрясения. Кто на самом деле готовит в стране переворот? URL: https://lenta.ru/articles/2020/08/07/zhannadark/ (дата обращения: 27.02.2025)</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Nepogodin A. (2020) “The West Has Written Off Lukashenko” Belarus Faces Major Upheavals After the Elections. Who Is Really Preparing a Coup in the Country? URL: https://lenta.ru/articles/2020/08/07/zhannadark/</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ло Дж. (2015) После метода: беспорядок и социальная наука. М.: Изд-во Института Гайдара. EDN: TNACHX</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Law J. (2015) After Method: Mess and Social Science. Moscow: Gaidar Institute Publishing. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">МакКормак Э. (1990) Когнитивная теория метафоры. В сборнике: Арутюнова Н. Д., Журинская М. А. Теория метафоры (с. 358–386). М.: Прогресс. EDN: RATNEV</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">McCormack E. (1990) Cognitive Theory of Metaphor. In Arutyunova N. D., Zhourinskaya M.A (Eds). Theory of Metaphor (pp. 358–386). Moscow: Progress. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Малкин Е., Сучков Е. (2006) Политические технологии. М.: Русская панорама. EDN: QOFVRL</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Malkin E., Suhkov E. (2006) Political technologies. Moscow: Russkaya Panorama. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit18"><label>18</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ортега-и-Гассет Х. (1991) Эстетика. Философия культуры. М.: Искусство.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ortega y Gasset J. (1991) Aesthetics. Philosophy of Culture. Moscow: Iskusstvo. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit19"><label>19</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Столярова О. Е. (2008) Реляционная онтология А. Н. Уайтхеда и ее конструктивистская интерпретация. Вопросы философии, (12), c. 84–103. EDN: JUGPXB</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Stolyarova O. E. (2008) A. N. Whitehead’s Relational Ontology and its Constructivist Interpretation. Philosophy Issues, (12), pp. 84–103. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit20"><label>20</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Рикер П. (1990) Когнитивная теория метафоры. В сборнике: Арутюнова Н. Д., Журинская М. А. Теория метафоры (с. 358–386). М.: Прогресс. EDN: RATNEV</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ricœur P. (1990) Living metaphor. In Arutyunova N. D., Zhourinskaya M.A (Eds). Theory of Metaphor (pp. 435–455). Moscow: Progress. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit21"><label>21</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Харман Г. (2017) Сети и ассамбляжи: возрождение вещей у Латура и Деланда. Логос, 27(3), c. 1–34. EDN: YMICDZ. doi.org/10.22394/0869-5377-2017-3-1-32</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Harman G. (2017) Networks and Assemblages: Networks and assemblages: the rebirth of things in Latour and DeLanda. Logos,27(3), pp.1–34. doi.org/10.22394/0869-5377-2017-3-1-32. (in Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit22"><label>22</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Щедровицкий П. (2018) Программа работ для серии игр «Технологии мышления». Материалы к программе разработки «Технологий мышления». CORVUS, c. 8–14. URL: https://shchedrovitskiy.com/programma-rabot-dlya-serii-igr-technologii-myishleniya/ (дата обращения: 17.06.2025)</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Shchedrovitsky P. (2018) Work Program for the Series of Games “Thinking Technologies”. Materials for the Development Program of “Thinking Technologies”. CORVUS, pp. 8–14. (in Russ.) URL: https://shchedrovitskiy.com/programma-rabot-dlya-serii-igr-technologii-myishleniya/</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit23"><label>23</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Bloor D. (1976) Knowledge and Social Imagery. Chicago University Press.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bloor D. (1976) Knowledge and Social Imagery. Chicago University Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit24"><label>24</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">DeLanda M. (2006) A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. Continuum. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350096769</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">DeLanda M. (2006) A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. Continuum. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350096769</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit25"><label>25</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Harman G. (2018) Object-oriented ontology: a new theory of everything. Pelican Books.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Harman G. (2018) Object-oriented ontology: a new theory of everything. Pelican Books.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit26"><label>26</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Jaynes J. (1976) The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. Houghton Mifflin.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Jaynes J. (1976) The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. Houghton Mifflin.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit27"><label>27</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Lakoff G. (1993) The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173865.013</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Lakoff G. (1993) The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173865.013</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit28"><label>28</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Lakoff G. (1990) The Invariance Hypothesis: is abstract reason based on image-schemas? Cognitive Linguistics, 1(1), pp. 39–74. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Lakoff G. (1990) The Invariance Hypothesis: is abstract reason based on image-schemas? Cognitive Linguistics, 1(1), pp. 39–74. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit29"><label>29</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Lakoff G. (1996) Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. University of Chicago Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471006.001.0001</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Lakoff G. (1996) Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. University of Chicago Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471006.001.0001</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit30"><label>30</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Latour B. (2004) Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern. Critical Inquiry, 30(2), pp. 225–248. https://doi.org/10.1086/421123</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Latour B. (2004) Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern. Critical Inquiry, 30(2), pp. 225–248. https://doi.org/10.1086/421123</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit31"><label>31</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Maier C. S. (1970) Between Taylorism and Technocracy: European Ideologies and the Vision of Industrial Productivity in the 1920s. Journal of Contemporary History, 5(2), pp. 27–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/002200947000500202</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Maier C. S. (1970) Between Taylorism and Technocracy: European Ideologies and the Vision of Industrial Productivity in the 1920s. Journal of Contemporary History, 5(2), pp. 27–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/002200947000500202</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit32"><label>32</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">McMullin E. (1984) The Rational and the Social in the History of Science. In: Scientific Rationality: The Sociological Turn (pp. 127–163). The University of Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7688-8_6</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">McMullin E. (1984) The Rational and the Social in the History of Science. In: Scientific Rationality: The Sociological Turn (pp. 127–163). The University of Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7688-8_6</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit33"><label>33</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Smyth W. H. (1921) Technocracy: First, Second and Third Series; Social Universals. W. H. Smyth.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Smyth W. H. (1921) Technocracy: First, Second and Third Series; Social Universals. W. H. Smyth.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit34"><label>34</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Stabile D. R. (1987) Veblen and the Political Economy of Technocracy: The Herald of Technological Revolution Developed an Ideology of “Scientific” Collectivism. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 46(1), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.1987.tb01756.x</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Stabile D. R. (1987) Veblen and the Political Economy of Technocracy: The Herald of Technological Revolution Developed an Ideology of “Scientific” Collectivism. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 46(1), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.1987.tb01756.x</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
