The paper examines the phenomenon of confrontation between groups of scientists adhering to different ontologies in the study of the properties of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), their use in food production in the context of agroecological transition. Although there is a certain consensus in the sciences about GMOs as a good, the value of which justifies the associated risks, genetic engineering remains a very controversial topic in society. The opposition of two approaches is revealed: command-controlling, reductionist and locally experimental, based on the interaction of scientists, farmers and members of the public. This situation is aggravated, among other things, by a decline in confidence in manufacturers and decline in public confidence in science as a whole. There is a possibility that the confrontation of ontologies may end in a productive compromise. However, it should be borne in mind that at the stage of exiting the life cycle of the previous technology, it is necessary to ensure, among other things, serious decisions about changing thinking modes.
agroecological transition; imperfect information; discrete beliefs; craft-mythological way of thinking; epigenetics; security of technologies.