Introduction. The spread of the poststructuralist paradigm has led to the penetration of the philosophy of dilettantism into all spheres of public life. Consequently, the criteria for distinguishing between truth and falsehood, right and wrong, and ethical and unethical are gradually disappearing. The entrenchment of dilettantism in science and the education of younger generations is particularly unacceptable, undermining the already unstable system of higher education in our country. Therefore, the study, the results of which are presented in this article, aimed to distinguish the concept of «dilettante» from concepts denoting other participants in the scientific process and to establish the place of dilettantism in the system of scientific activity. Methods. The study utilized a combination of traditional theoretical and empirical methods: systematization and interpretation of the obtained information, comparative analysis, abstraction, etc. Results. An analysis of the meanings of the words «specialist», «professional», «self-taught», «amateur» and «dilettante» reveals that none of them can be considered synonyms, as they all denote different phenomena. Traditionally, the term «professional» had a positive connotation, while «dilettante» had a negative one. Currently, these terms are being re-evaluated, and the term «dilettante» is increasingly used in a positive sense. To reinforce this assessment, the meanings of the terms are first blurred, leading to a confusion of the corresponding concepts. Then, to argue for the greater success of the dilettante, situations are analyzed in which the dilettante achieved greater success than the specialist (professional). Finally, it is argued that the specialist possesses only hard skills, while the dilettante relies on soft skills (flexible, supra-professional skills). The author of the article believes that calls to disrupt the existing higher education system under the guise of introducing creativity could have a detrimental effect on the development of our society.