Science as a special form of knowledge of reality - abstract. Features of scientific knowledge and scientific truth. Forms of development of scientific knowledge The concept of science as a form of knowledge
Topic 4. Lesson 2. Question 1
Science as the most important form of development of knowledge. Empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge. The concept of methods and methodology of scientific knowledge.
A person’s cognitive relationship to the world is carried out in
various forms - in the form of everyday knowledge, artistic knowledge
spiritual, religious, and finally, in the form of scientific knowledge. First
three areas of knowledge are considered, in contrast to science, as external
scientific forms.
Scientific knowledge grew out of everyday knowledge, but in the present
Currently, these two forms of knowledge are quite far apart
friend. What are their main differences?
1. Science has its own, special set of objects of knowledge, unlike
knowledge of the everyday. Science is ultimately oriented toward
knowledge of the essence of objects and processes, which is not at all typical
ordinary knowledge.
2. Scientific knowledge requires the development of special languages of science.
3. Unlike everyday knowledge, scientific knowledge develops its own
methods and forms, your own research tools.
4. Scientific knowledge is characterized by planfulness, system-
consistency, logical organization, validity of results
research.
5. Finally, in science and everyday knowledge the methods
substantiation of the truth of knowledge.
But what is science? Before answering
this question, it should be noted that her birth is the result
history, the result of the deepening division of labor, automation of various
branches of spiritual activity and spiritual production.
We can say that science is the result of knowledge of the world. system
reliable knowledge tested in practice and at the same time special
area of activity, spiritual production, production of new
knowledge with its own methods, forms, tools of cognition, with a
loy system of organizations and institutions.
All these components of science as a complex social phenomenon
especially clearly highlighted our time, when science became directly
economic productive force. Today it is no longer possible, as in the recent past
past, to say that science is what is contained in thick
books resting on library shelves, although scientific knowledge remains
is one of the most important components of science as a system. But this system
the topic these days is, firstly, the unity of knowledge and
activities for their extraction, secondly, acts as a special co-
a social institution that occupies an important place in modern conditions
in public life.
The role and place of science as a social institution are clearly visible
in its social functions. The main ones are cultural and worldview
ical function, function of direct productive force,
social function.
The first of them characterizes the role of science as the most important element
that spiritual life and culture, which plays a special role in the formation
worldview, a broad scientific view of the world around us.
The second function revealed its effect with particular force in
our days, in the context of deepening scientific and technological revolution, when the synthesis of science, technology
nicknames and production became a reality.
Finally, the role of science as a social force is clearly evident
is that in modern conditions scientific knowledge and scientific methods
are increasingly used in solving large-scale
problems of social development, its programming, etc. In the present
During the current period, science has a special place in solving global
problems of our time - environmental, resource problems, food
freedom, problems of war and peace, etc.
In science, its division into two large ones is clearly visible.
groups of sciences - natural and technical sciences, focused on
research and transformation of natural and social processes,
exploring the change and development of social objects. social
cognition differs in a number of features related to the specifics
objects of knowledge, and with the unique position of the researcher himself.
First of all, in natural science the subject of knowledge deals with
"pure" objects, a social scientist - with special - social objects -
there, with a society where subjects, people endowed with consciousness, act
niem. As a result, in particular, unlike natural sciences here
the scope of the experiment is very limited due to moral considerations.
The second point: nature as an object of study is
in front of the subject studying it, on the contrary, a social scientist studies social
al processes, being inside society, occupying certain
lenient place, influenced by its social environment. Interests
personality, its value orientations cannot but influence
Tviy on the position and evaluation of the study.
It is also important that in the historical process a much greater
role than in natural processes is played by the individual, and laws
act as tendencies, due to which individual representatives of neo-
Kantians generally believed that social sciences can only describe
speak facts, but, unlike the natural sciences, cannot speak
about laws.
All this certainly complicates the study of social processes.
owls, requires the researcher to take into account these features,
no objectivity in the cognitive process, although, naturally,
this does not exclude the assessment of events and phenomena from certain social
positions, skillful discovery of individual and unique
common, repeating, natural.
Before moving on to the analysis of the structure of scientific knowledge,
Let us note its main purpose and general goals. They
come down to solving three problems - describing objects and processes, their
explanation and, finally, prediction, forecast of the behavior of objects in
As for the architecture of the building of science, the structure of the scientific
knowledge, then it distinguishes two levels - empirical and theoretical
chy. These levels should not be confused with the aspects of cognition in
in general - by sensory reflection and rational knowledge. The thing is
that in the first case we mean different types of cognition
activity of scientists, and in the second we are talking about the types of mental
ical activity of the individual in the process of cognition in general, and
Both of these types are used both empirically and theoretically.
ical levels of scientific knowledge.
The levels of scientific knowledge themselves differ in a number of parameters:
on the subject of research. Empirical study of orientation
is based on phenomena, theoretical - on essence;
by means and instruments of cognition;
according to research methods. At the empirical level, this observation
research, experiment, theoretically - a systematic approach, idealization
tion, etc.;
by the nature of the acquired knowledge. In one case it is empirical
facts, classifications, empirical laws, in the second - laws,
disclosure of significant connections, theories.
In the XVII-XVIII and partly in the XIX centuries. science was still in its infancy
pirical stage, limiting its tasks to generalization and classification
cation of empirical facts, formulation of empirical laws.
Subsequently, the theoretical level is built on top of the empirical level.
ical, associated with a comprehensive study of reality in
its essential connections and patterns. Moreover, both types of research
formations are organically interconnected and presuppose each other in the process
the complete structure of scientific knowledge.
One of the important features of scientific knowledge in comparison with everyday knowledge is its organization and the use of a number of research methods. In this case, a method is understood as a set of techniques, methods, rules of cognitive, theoretical and practical, transformative activity of people. These techniques and rules are ultimately not established arbitrarily, but are developed based on the patterns of the objects being studied themselves. Therefore, methods of cognition are as diverse as reality itself. The study of methods of cognition and practical activity is the task of a special discipline - methodology. With all the differences and diversity of methods, they can be divided into several main groups: 1. General, philosophical methods, the scope of which is the widest. The dialectical-materialist method also belongs to their number. 2. General scientific methods that find application in all or almost all sciences. And the originality and difference from universal methods is that they are used not at all, but only at certain stages of the process of cognition. For example, induction plays a leading role at the empirical level, and deduction at the theoretical level of knowledge, analysis predominates at the initial stage of research, and synthesis at the final stage, etc. At the same time, in the general scientific methods themselves, as a rule, the requirements of universal methods find their manifestation and refraction. 3. Particular or special methods characteristic of individual sciences or areas of practical activity. These are methods of chemistry or physics, biology or mathematics, methods of metalworking or construction. 4. Finally, a special group of methods is formed by techniques, which are techniques and methods developed to solve some special, particular problem. Choosing the right methodology is an important condition for the success of the study. Let us dwell briefly on the characteristics of some general scientific research methods. Let us turn first of all to methods that are used at the empirical level of scientific knowledge - to observation and experiment. 1 Observation - 0 is the deliberate and purposeful perception of phenomena and processes without direct intervention in their course, subordinated to the tasks of scientific research. The basic requirements for scientific observation are the following: 1) unambiguous purpose and design; 2) consistency in observation methods; 3) objectivity; 4) the possibility of control either through repeated observation or through experiment. Observation is used, as a rule, where intervention in the process under study is undesirable or impossible. Observation in modern science is associated with the widespread use of instruments, which, firstly, enhance the senses, and secondly, remove the touch of subjectivity from the assessment of observed phenomena. An important place in the process of observation (as well as experiment) is occupied by the measurement operation. Measurement is the determination of the relationship of one (measured) quantity to another, taken as a standard. Since the results of observation, as a rule, take the form of various signs, graphs, curves on an oscilloscope, cardiograms, etc., an important component of the study is the interpretation of the data obtained. Observation in the social sciences is particularly difficult, where its results largely depend on the personality of the observer and his attitude to the phenomena being studied. In sociology and psychology, a distinction is made between simple and participant (participant) observation. Psychologists also use the method of introspection (self-observation). 1Experiment 0, in contrast to observation, is a method of cognition in which phenomena are studied under controlled and controlled conditions. An experiment, as a rule, is carried out on the basis of a theory or hypothesis that determines the formulation of the problem and the interpretation of the results. The advantages of experiment in comparison with observation are that, firstly, it is possible to study the phenomenon, so to speak, in its “pure form”, secondly, the conditions for the process can vary, and thirdly, the experiment itself can be repeated many times. There are several types of experiments. 1. The simplest type of experiment is qualitative, establishing the presence or absence of phenomena proposed by the theory. 2. The second, more complex type is a measuring or quantitative experiment that establishes the numerical parameters of any property (or properties) of an object or process. 3. A special type of experiment in the fundamental sciences is a thought experiment. 4. Finally: a specific type of experiment is a social experiment carried out in order to introduce new forms of social organization and optimize management. The scope of social experiment is limited by moral and legal norms. Observation and experiment are the source of scientific facts, which in science are understood as special kinds of propositions that capture empirical knowledge. Facts are the foundation of the building of science; they form the empirical basis of science, the basis for putting forward hypotheses and creating theories. Let us outline some methods for processing and systematizing knowledge at the empirical level. This is primarily analysis and synthesis. Analysis is the process of mental, and often real, division of an object or phenomenon into parts (signs, properties, relationships). The reverse procedure to analysis is synthesis. Synthesis is the combination of the aspects of an object identified during the analysis into a single whole. A significant role in generalizing the results of observations and experiments belongs to induction (from the Latin inductio - guidance), a special type of generalization of experimental data. During induction, the researcher’s thought moves from the particular (particular factors) to the general. There are popular and scientific, complete and incomplete induction. The opposite of induction is deduction, the movement of thought from the general to the specific. Unlike induction, with which deduction is closely related, it is mainly used at the theoretical level of knowledge. The process of induction is associated with such an operation as comparison - establishing the similarities and differences of objects and phenomena. Induction, comparison, analysis and synthesis prepare the ground for the development of classifications - combining various concepts and corresponding phenomena into certain groups, types in order to establish connections between objects and classes of objects. Examples of classifications - the periodic table, classifications of animals, plants, etc. Classifications are presented in the form of diagrams and tables used for orientation in the variety of concepts or corresponding objects. Now let us turn to the methods of cognition used at the theoretical level of scientific knowledge. This, in particular, is abstraction - a method that comes down to abstraction in the process of cognition from some properties of an object for the purpose of in-depth study of one specific aspect of it. The result of abstraction is the development of abstract concepts that characterize objects from different sides. In the process of cognition, a technique such as analogy is also used - an inference about the similarity of objects in a certain respect based on their similarity in a number of other respects. Associated with this technique is a modeling method that has become particularly widespread in modern conditions. This method is based on the principle of similarity. Its essence lies in the fact that it is not the object itself that is directly studied, but its analogue, its substitute, its model, and then the results obtained from studying the model are transferred to the object itself according to special rules. Modeling is used in cases where the object itself is either difficult to access, or its direct study is not economically profitable, etc. There are a number of types of modeling: 1. Subject modeling, in which the model reproduces the geometric, physical, dynamic or functional characteristics of an object. For example, a model of a bridge, a dam, a model of an airplane wing, etc. 2. Analog modeling, in which the model and the original are described by a single mathematical relationship. An example is electrical models used to study mechanical, hydrodynamic and acoustic phenomena. 3. Sign modeling, in which diagrams, drawings, and formulas act as models. The role of iconic models has especially increased with the expansion of the use of computers in the construction of iconic models. 4. Mental modeling is closely related to the iconic, in which models acquire a mentally visual character. An example in this case is the model of the atom, proposed at one time by Bohr. 5. Finally, a special type of modeling is the inclusion in the experiment not of the object itself, but of its model, due to which the latter acquires the character of a model experiment. This type of modeling
Legal science has gone through a long path of formation and development. The first sprouts of legal scientific thought appear in the era of Antiquity, they are filled with vitality in the era of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance and, finally, gain maturity in the era of New and Contemporary times. When starting to study the history of legal science, it is necessary to note three extremely significant points for its understanding.
First, legal science is part of science as a whole, therefore, understanding the essence of legal science is inseparable from understanding the essence of science as such.
Secondly, the history of legal science cannot be considered in isolation from the history of science as such. The scientific thought of different historical eras is characterized by a certain unity in understanding the fundamental principles of existence. That is why the understanding of the logic of the development of legal science is revealed through its correlation with the logic of the development of science as such.
Finally, thirdly, the history of legal science is closely connected with the history of culture as a whole. The history of jurisprudence can be considered as a text, the interpretation of which outside its context - the sociocultural environment - is not achievable.
These points determine the structure of the first part of the textbook offered to the reader, which contains a theoretical analysis of science as a specific way of cognition and a historical analysis of the genesis and development of scientific knowledge.
Chapter 1. The concept of science
Science is a multifaceted phenomenon, so one-dimensional models of its study are unrepresentative. The many-sided appearance of science, which opens only to stereoscopic vision, consists of such aspects as: epistemological (cognitive), ontological (existential), social. Accordingly, science can be considered as a form of knowledge, a sphere of culture, a social institution.
§1. Science as a form of knowledge
In the epistemological aspect, science appears as one of the ways of understanding the world. The basis of cognition is thinking - the active process of processing information about the world. Modern researchers identify two main strategies for processing cognitive (cognitive) information: right-hemisphere, figurative-emotional, generalizing knowledge about the world using a system of emotionally charged images; and left-hemisphere, logical-verbal, rational, generalizing information about the world using a system of concepts and symbols (1). Art and myth as forms of cognition rely primarily on the right-hemisphere figurative-emotional strategy, while art is based mostly on experimental knowledge, and myth is super-experiential. Philosophy and science as forms of knowledge are based on a left-hemisphere rational strategy for processing information, while science is based primarily on experimental knowledge, and philosophy generalizes the experienced and forms super-experimental - abstract, speculative, speculative knowledge. Religion, especially when it comes to world religions, is synthetic knowledge. It undoubtedly is dominated by figurative-emotional information processing strategies, but a rational strategy also plays a certain role. At the same time, religion is by definition super-experimental knowledge.
Of course, the proposed scheme is quite arbitrary - in reality, any knowledge is synthetic, we can only talk about priorities.
The development of science, including legal science, is associated with the actualization and highlighting of the logical-verbal, analytical-synthetic, rational cognitive strategy, while the figurative-emotional one forms the background of this process.
The main components of a rational cognitive strategy are reason, reason, reflection, and intellectual intuition.
Reason - “ultimate” thinking (G.V.F. Hegel) - the initial level of rational thinking, at which the operation of abstractions occurs within a given scheme, an unchanging pattern, strict principles. The logic of reason is a formal logic that sets certain rules for statements, evidence, and determines not so much the content as the form of established knowledge. In essence, reason is the ability to reason consistently, correctly analyze, classify and systematize facts. The main function of the mind is the ordering and organization of cognitive material. The main forms of rational thinking are: concept - definition, reflecting in a generalized form the general and special features of the phenomena of reality and the essential connections between them; judgment - a statement reflecting individual things, phenomena, processes, their properties, connections and relationships, and inductive and deductive conclusions - mental actions through which new knowledge is derived.
Reason – “infinite” thinking (G.V.F. Hegel) is the highest level of rational thinking, which is characterized by creative manipulation of existing abstractions and their critical rethinking. The mind is aimed at comprehending the essence and patterns of various phenomena and processes of the world. The main function of the mind is the adequate display of information in a system of concepts, categories, concepts presented in their interrelation and development. The logic of reason is dialectics - the logic of the transition from one system of knowledge to another higher one through the synthesis and removal of contradictions that appear both in the object of cognition and in the process of cognition itself, in the interaction of the object and subject of cognition.
Rational cognition is a process of interaction between reason and reason. The transition of reason into reason occurs as a result of overcoming the historically established conceptual system on the basis of putting forward new ideas and forming new categories. The transition of reason into reason is associated with the formalization and schematization of knowledge obtained as a result of the creative activity of the mind.
Scientific rationalism is inseparable from such a method of mental activity as reflection. Reflection is “a thought about a thought, catching up with a thought” (J. Schrader) or “the ability of thinking to make thinking its subject” (K. Jaspers), the ability to think not only about objects, but also about thoughts and entities. The development of scientific rationality is associated with the development of theoretical reflection - critical thinking, focused on the formation of generalizing constructions freed from specifics, based on evidence.
A significant role in the process of cognition is played by intellectual intuition, which in psychological terms can be interpreted as an insight - a “peak experience”, as a result of which a breakthrough to new knowledge is made. In modern epistemology (the study of knowledge), intellectual intuition is considered as a compressed reasoning, a subconscious mental leap. Thus, the understanding of intuition is freed from the taint of spiritualism and irrationalism.
Thus, scientific knowledge is experimental and reflective knowledge, demonstrative and critical, based on rational thinking strategies that can be cast in the form of intellectual intuition.
To separate scientific and non-scientific knowledge, a certain universal principle is needed, a universal basis - a criterion (measure) that would allow one to qualify certain ideas as scientific or non-scientific in nature. In general, scientific knowledge is a way of introducing a subject to the truth; it has objectivity, general validity, universality, and evidence. However, it is obvious that these requirements are not absolute, but relative. In the history of science, there have been various criteria for scientific character. Among them: the criterion of empiricism - the experimental verifiability of the proposed scientific position; the criterion of rationalism - logical consistency and correctness of scientific theories; the criterion of conventionalism - the generally accepted nature of certain scientific theories; the criterion of falsifiability - the falsifiability of scientific theories by factual data; the criterion of verifiability - linguistic verifiability of the objectivity of scientific positions, the criterion of pragmatism - the operationality of scientific ideas, etc. Of course, we can say that scientific knowledge is objective, generally valid and universal knowledge, but with a more detailed elaboration of these criteria, many questions arise. Let's say, what should be considered a criterion of objectivity if modern science puts forward the principle of correlating the acquired knowledge about an object not only with the peculiarities of the means and operations of an activity, but also with the value-goal structures of the cognizing subject and reveals the connections of intrascientific goals with extra-scientific social values and goals? Or what should be considered a criterion of general validity if a specific feature of social and humanitarian knowledge is its polyparadigmality, i.e. synchronous existence of different paradigms - theories, principles, provisions? These questions do not have clear answers. Obviously, this kind of uncertainty is justified, since it makes science open, without creating obstacles and rigid barriers to its development, the emergence of new scientific theories and disciplines that do not fit into the existing structure of scientific knowledge and expand its space.
In general, it is advisable to talk about a set of criteria, distinguishing between paradigmatic criteria - criteria that are legitimate at a particular stage of the development of science, operating within the framework of a particular scientific paradigm; and universal criteria - meta-criteria that determine the most general parameters of scientific knowledge, regardless of any of its paradigmatic affiliations. Paradigmatic criteria are criteria formed within the framework of a particular scientific paradigm, for example, positivism, pragmatism, structuralism, phenomenology. The following requirements can be identified as metacriteria: rationality, logical consistency, intersubjectivity, reproducibility, experimental verifiability (15). Scientific, in this context, is knowledge that meets the requirements of a larger number of meta-criteria, and vice versa, knowledge for which most of the meta-criteria do not work can hardly claim the status of scientific.
Scientific rationalism should be distinguished from everyday knowledge; ordinary knowledge can also operate with logical-verbal methods of processing information, but it is not demonstrative; ordinary rationality is rational, it is the logic of common sense, based on the belief in the obviousness of any phenomena or processes. Ordinary knowledge cannot be viewed as erroneous or harmful; it represents another form of knowledge, without which the existence of culture would be problematic. Moreover, modern researchers consider ordinary knowledge as a source of information for scientific knowledge. I. Prigogine and I. Stengers, for example, argue that: “In the open world that we are now learning to describe, theoretical knowledge and practical wisdom need each other” (2).
Scientific rationalism should also be distinguished from philosophical rationalism. The problem of identifying the specifics of philosophical and scientific knowledge is extremely important, since by solving it it is possible to specify such disciplines as jurisprudence and philosophy of law. The differences between science, in particular legal science, and philosophy, in particular the philosophy of law, should be seen in the degree to which political and legal thought is abstracted from specific experimental knowledge. Jurisprudence is an experimental science. It analyzes, synthesizes, generalizes, systematizes and conceptualizes specific factual information regarding the existence of the political and legal sphere of society. Thus, jurisprudence acts as a reflection of the first order - reflection on the existing forms of political and legal culture. Philosophy of law is second-order reflection, a generalization of a generalization, a conceptualization of conceptualizations, a theory of theories or a metatheory. There are direct and inverse connections between legal science and legal philosophy. Jurisprudence, being concrete scientific knowledge, acts for the philosophy of law as a certain initial empirical basis, and the philosophy of law, in turn, acts for jurisprudence as an ideological and methodological basis. The boundary between properly scientific legal knowledge and philosophical knowledge is quite arbitrary and transparent; for example, such a section of legal science as the theory of state and law has many similarities and even coincides with the philosophy of law.
Science, including legal science, should be distinguished from practice - legal practice. Practice (Greek prakticos - active, active) is a substantive, goal-setting human activity aimed at mastering and transforming natural and social objects. Legal practice is an activity related to the regulation of social and political relations by referring to established legal norms and laws. Legal practice arises at a certain stage in the development of society - the stage of formation of a large complex society. It relies primarily on rational thinking, the content of which boils down to legal understanding and law enforcement. Legal science is based on rational thinking aimed at legal reform and legal formation. Thus, the most important social function of legal science is to improve the legal sphere of society. Legal science is the most important element of self-organization of society; through the efforts of scientists - lawyers, the legal system of society is being reconstructed, models of the legal organization of society are being created, new systems of law, new political and legal technologies are being formed. Of course, for the implementation and introduction of political and legal technologies, the participation of legal policy is necessary, i.e. state political forces.
By setting himself the problem of obtaining true knowledge and separating truth from error, man created a specific sphere of spiritual activity, to which he entrusted the task of developing and theoretically systematizing objective knowledge about reality. He called this sphere of spiritual activity science. The word "science" literally means "knowledge". Moreover, scientific knowledge is knowledge that has been tested in practice and confirmed by it. Science is characterized by a protective rule, following which it mercilessly separates various guesses from proven statements and, thereby, distinguishes true, reliable knowledge from superstitions, shaky assumptions, and conjectures. Scientific knowledge, like solid ground under one’s feet, allows a person to correctly navigate the world around him, live and act.
Science is knowledge tested and confirmed by practice. brought into the system and allowing to explain the existing and predict the future. Explanation and prediction are the most important functions of scientific knowledge. Both explanation and prediction are carried out by science on the basis of knowledge of objective connections and relationships inherent in the processes and phenomena of the objective world, which makes it possible to identify trends in their development and determine their probabilistic changes.
Reliability (within the limits of the possible) of scientific prediction is the result of creating a theory of the object under consideration, knowledge of the specific conditions of the predicted process or phenomenon and the ability to correctly and logically calculate long-term consequences, results and development prospects. Scientific prediction and foresight are one of the most striking manifestations of the creative activity of scientific and theoretical thinking. They emphasize the importance of science as a form of human knowledge, which allows, based on theoretical thinking, to significantly advance the empirical level of knowledge.
Science as a form of knowledge is a multifaceted phenomenon. On the one hand, it appears as a body of theoretical knowledge about reality, and on the other, it acts as a process of cognition. Science, acting in the form of knowledge, is a type of spiritual activity that produces objectively true, systematized knowledge. Science is not only a creative activity to obtain new knowledge, but also the result of such activity.
Scientific knowledge is distinguished by the fact that it is brought into a system on the basis of certain principles and logically framed in the form of a theory. Representing theoretical systems, scientific knowledge expresses the objective laws of the functioning of natural, social, and spiritual formations.
Reflecting the world, science forms a single interconnected, developing system of knowledge about the world and its laws. Depending on the proximity or distance from practice, sciences are divided into fundamental and applied. Fundamental sciences are aimed at studying (knowing) the laws of nature, society and thinking. These laws, as well as the structures in which they operate, are studied by fundamental science in their “pure form,” as such, without regard to their possible use. Basic sciences are sometimes called “pure” sciences. The task of applied sciences is to apply the results of fundamental sciences to solve both cognitive and socio-practical problems. This division of sciences is very arbitrary, since applied sciences can develop with a predominance of both practical and theoretical issues. As a rule, fundamental sciences are ahead of applied sciences in their development. Science is divided into many branches of knowledge (special sciences), which differ in subject and method of cognition.
The classification of sciences is based on an objective factor, on certain aspects of reality, or on the forms of motion of matter that represent the subject of a particular science.
There are sciences about nature, society and knowledge. Separate groups represent technical and mathematical sciences.
Specific features of scientific knowledge are:
1. Specialized languages of science, formed by integral systems of concepts, theories, hypotheses, laws and other ideal forms, embodied in natural or artificial languages.
2. Use of your specific tools, applicable in individual or related sciences. (Telescopes, microscopes, accelerators, etc.)
3. Application of specific methods of activity (see below about this).
4. Focus on the objective truth of knowledge, because if there is no truth, then there is no science. Truth is the highest value for which scientists work.
5. Organic connection with practice or focus on practice. The vital meaning of scientific daring is that the knowledge gained is necessary for people and serves them as a “guide to action.”
In addition to the listed signs of scientific knowledge, there are also such criteria as experimental verifiability, reproducibility, rigor and others.
Modern science is disciplinary organized. It includes various areas of knowledge that interact with each other and, at the same time, have relative independence. Science as a whole represents a complex developing system that generates more and more new relatively independent subsystems and new unifying (integrative) connections that determine the functioning of the scientific system as a single whole.
In the structure of scientific knowledge, there are two levels of knowledge - empirical and theoretical and, accordingly, two levels of knowledge (see below). The structure of scientific knowledge is not limited to these two levels, but also includes the foundations of scientific knowledge. This is most relevant when areas of specialized knowledge, especially those that are anti-scientific in nature, claim the status of science. The foundations of science include the ideals and norms of research, the scientific picture of the world, and philosophical foundations.
The ideals and norms of scientific knowledge express the value and goal orientations of science, since they contain the answer to the question of the necessity or unnecessaryness of certain cognitive actions. The ideal of true science is truth. The value of pseudoscience research activities is in proving non-existent foundations in the field of knowledge. This implies the difference in the approaches of science and pseudoscience to the norms of scientific knowledge. The norms of scientific research are inseparable from the ideal they are aimed at achieving and together form a method of activity to achieve the goal. Science is not afraid of various forms of evidence based on an objective approach. Pseudoscience follows the path of falsification. The most important requirement of science is that the method corresponds to the object being studied.
The second block of the foundations of science is the scientific picture of the world, as an integral system of connection between the achievements of fundamental and applied sciences, showing the place and role of any branch of scientific knowledge in a single functioning scientific whole.
The third block of the foundations of science is the philosophical ideas and principles on which the ideals and norms of science are based, as well as the substantive aspects of the scientific picture of the world. Philosophy ensures the inclusion of scientific knowledge in culture. A specific area of scientific knowledge is social (humanitarian) knowledge about society and the processes occurring in it, about man and the “human world”.
Humanitarian knowledge analyzes the activities of people, in which the material and the ideal, the objective and the subjective, the spontaneous and the conscious are organically intertwined. Because of this, humanitarian knowledge contains knowledge about the objective factors of the existence of man and society, as well as about the subjective element that makes the life of man and society different from the work of a unit subject to the laws of mechanics. Although the objective in social life passes through human consciousness and acquires a shade of subjectivity, it makes it possible to discover the laws of its functioning.
The laws of functioning (essence) of society are studied by the science of society, and shades of the objective with elements of subjectivity from various angles are analyzed by art, morality, religion, and legal consciousness.
One of the foundations of scientific knowledge are philosophical ideas and principles. It is these ideas and principles that serve as the methodology of science.
Methodology is a system of principles and methods for organizing theoretical and practical activities to achieve cognitive goals, as well as the doctrine of this system and the theory of the method. Based on the methodology, specific methods of a particular science are developed or used. Method, in the broad sense of the word, is a method of activity not only in cognition, but also in any other area of social life. In a narrow, epistemological sense, a method is a method of practical and theoretical human activity aimed at understanding an object.
The variety of types of human activity determines a diverse range of methods that can be qualified on a variety of grounds.
All methods of scientific knowledge, according to the degree of generality and scope of action, can be divided into three main groups: universal, general scientific and special.
Universal methods characterize the philosophical approach and are applicable in all spheres of human cognitive activity, taking into account their specificity. The content of universal methods are general philosophical approaches to understanding the world around us, man himself, his cognitive and transformative activities. Universal methods depend on the philosophical positions of the knowing subject.
General scientific methods are methods of cognition used in all sciences. Their objective basis is the general methodological laws of cognition, including epistemological principles. General scientific methods include observation and experiment methods, modeling method, hypothetico-deductive method, systemic and structural-functional approaches, etc.
Special (private scientific) methods are applicable only within the framework of individual (private) sciences. The objective basis of such methods are the laws and theories of special sciences. Special methods include methods of qualitative analysis in chemistry, the method of labeled atoms in biology, the method of spectral analysis in physics and chemistry, the method of statistical modeling in the study of systems, etc.
The science- this is the form and result of people’s activity to reveal the objective laws of existence of nature, society and man.
The peculiarities of scientific objects require the use of a special language with a strictly verified meaning of individual words, as well as special tools and methods of research activity. One of the most important methods of science, which largely determines its appearance, is idealization. Scientific knowledge constantly resorts to the creation of ideal objects, models that represent real objects (too changeable and involved in many connections) only in certain aspects. Hence the inherent tendency of science to reductionism, i.e., simplifying reality in the process of its rational comprehension.
Science is also characterized by a special it with, otherwise a set of norms of behavior and communication accepted in the scientific community.
In modern society - and not only among scientists - the position remains quite influential scientism, according to which science acts as the main and perhaps the only instrument of human orientation in the world, the most important source of human well-being.
40. Structure and dynamics of scientific knowledge
Scientific knowledge is carried out on two interconnected, but still having their own specificity levels– empirical and theoretical.
Empirical knowledge(Greek empeiria - experience) is aimed directly at its object, it practically interacts with it, reflects its external aspects and connections accessible to sensory contemplation. The main methods used are observation and experiment.
Theoretical knowledge reflects phenomena and processes from their internal, essential connections, comprehended through rational processing of empirical knowledge. In this case, such methods of cognition as: idealization, abstraction (abstraction from a number of properties and relationships of objects), (deduction (transition from general knowledge to particular), axiomatic method (building a theory based on a number of axioms or postulates), etc. are widely used .
The theory itself is, of course, the highest form of not only theoretical, but also scientific knowledge in general (it is not for nothing that M. Heidegger defined science as the theory of the real). Theory is an internally consistent system of fundamental ideas and laws that gives a holistic view of the essential connections in the set of objects under consideration. Two important requirements for any scientific theory, allowing us to distinguish it from pseudo-scientific speculation, - verifiability And falsifiability. According to the principle of verification, a concept or proposition has meaning only if it is empirically verifiable. The principle of falsification insists that any scientific theory allows for risky predictions, the failure of which in practice would refute it.
important role in the development of theory the correct formulation of the problem plays a role. Problem- a form of theoretical knowledge, the content of which is what has not yet been known by man, but what needs to be known.
Reflecting on problems, scientists put forward hypotheses. Hypothesis is a scientific assumption that solves the problem probabilistically.
ABSTRACT ON PHILOSOPHY
on the topic of:
SCIENCE AS A SPECIAL FORM OF KNOWLEDGE OF REALITY
Completed by: Lieutenant Timakov D.S.
Tver 2006
Introduction
This work is devoted to one of the many problems of philosophy, namely: science as a form of knowledge of reality. Here we will describe various approaches to understanding this problem in different years, as well as the properties and functions of science as they were seen by people at different stages of the development of society.
The first part is devoted to the consideration of science as a system that has its own properties and functions. Next, questions of the specificity and generality of cognition will be considered both by individual groups of people and by society as a whole.
The third part will describe scientific truth as a social phenomenon. The fourth part presents the basic universal principles and general scientific methods of cognition and their description.
In the final, fifth part, the dynamics of the development of worldviews of an opposite nature will be briefly examined: the view of science as an integral part of the culture of a developing society and the view of this problem from opponents of solving cultural issues using scientific methods.
1. Systematicity of the phenomenon of science
Science is a specific form of activity (both in theoretical and practical spheres) associated with the formation of relatively objective, systematic and proven knowledge about spiritual and material reality.
Science is one of the defining subsystems of culture. By the beginning of the XXI century. there are more than 800 of its definitions, because every major scientist (thinker) gives his own interpretation of the phenomenon of science.
If we clarify this rather general definition, then we should distinguish several areas of scientific activity that specify it. Namely:
– identification of not external, but essential characteristics of reality;
– formation of a logically consistent system of knowledge about the objective picture of the world;
– forecasting the state of real objects and processes based on identified natural and social laws;
– creation and development of special means of cognitive activity (mathematical methods, research equipment, etc.);
– the spread of a special type of professional activity (scientists, engineers, etc.) in the sphere of social division of labor;
– the functioning of a special system of organizations and institutions involved in the acquisition, storage, dissemination and implementation of acquired knowledge (libraries, information centers, etc.).
The terms “science” and “scientist” arose in the first half of the 19th century. in European university practice. They designated activities in the field of mathematics, physics, chemistry and other natural sciences. The term “social science” was later used for activities in the field of social sciences.
In the process of the genesis and development of scientific knowledge, attention to its classification increased. Let us note some milestones in this process.
The first classifications of science arose in the era of antiquity. Aristotle (384-422 BC) divided philosophy (as a single science) into “theoretical philosophy”, “practical philosophy” and “creative philosophy”. Moreover, he divides “theoretical philosophy” into physical, mathematical and theological philosophy; on poetics and rhetoric. Logic is interpreted as a propaedeutic (introduction) to the entire system of sciences.
In modern times, F. Bacon (1561-1626) developed a classification of sciences based on contemporary material. Human knowledge was divided into three areas (spheres), namely: history (memory), poetry (fantasy) and philosophy (reason). At the same time, the identified areas of knowledge were subjected to further detail.
Representatives of the French Enlightenment (Diderot, 1713-1784; and others), within the framework of the “Encyclopedia, or Explanatory Dictionary of Sciences, Arts and Crafts,” highlighted mechanics, physics, chemistry, physiology, etc.
A. de Saint-Simon (1760-1825) proposed classifications of sciences by analogy with the class structure of society (slave and feudal society - theology, capitalism - positivism, etc.).
O. Comte (1798-1857) developed the doctrine of “three stages” of the development of science, namely: theological, metaphysical and positive. Moreover, each of the known sciences sequentially goes through, in his opinion, the marked stages. Not only the natural sciences (astronomy, physics, biology, etc.), but also the humanities—sociology—go through the corresponding stages.
The fundamental classification of science (philosophy) was proposed by Hegel (1770-1831). Namely: “real philosophy” is divided by him into “philosophy of nature” and “philosophy of spirit”. “Philosophy of Nature” includes mechanics, physics, organic physics. “Philosophy of spirit” is divided into “subjective spirit” (anthropology, phenomenology, psychology), “objective spirit” (law, morality, ethics) and “absolute spirit” (art, religion, philosophy).
By the 20th century, the following system of sciences had developed:
– natural science (natural sciences) – a system of scientific knowledge about nature;
– technical knowledge (technical sciences) – a system of scientific knowledge about technical systems; sciences focused on the implementation of natural science knowledge;
– human studies (social and human sciences) – a system of scientific knowledge about man and society and the socio-cultural environment of his habitat.
In this case we are talking about the “horizontal” dimension of the phenomenon of science. Within the framework of the “vertical” dimension, sciences are distinguished fundamental and applied.
Fundamental sciences are a system of knowledge about the deepest properties of objective reality, associated with the formation of a scientific picture of the world, which, as a rule, does not have a practical orientation. Applied sciences, on the contrary, are considered as a system of knowledge that has a pronounced subject-practical orientation.
Fundamental sciences are associated with identifying the basic patterns and principles of the development of nature. Traditional research at this level is carried out not due to external (social) needs, but due to internal (immanent) incentives. Therefore, at their core, fundamental sciences do not have a clearly expressed practical orientation. In this sense, axiological (value) neutrality is associated with them. At the same time, discoveries in the fundamental sciences have a fundamental impact on the formation of the natural science picture of the world, changing the paradigm (main characteristics) of scientific thinking. It is in the fundamental sciences that basic models of cognition are developed, concepts, principles and laws that form the foundations of applied sciences are identified.
Applied sciences, based on the results of fundamental research, focus on solving specific technical and technological problems related to the interests of society. Sciences at this level are ambivalent, i.e. Depending on the area of application, they can be used both for the benefit of a person and have a negative impact on him and his environment. In other words, applied sciences also include value content.
On the one hand, the range of ideas, theories and concepts coming from the field of fundamental sciences to the field of applied research leads to the transformation of applied sciences. This circumstance, in turn, requires the “fundamentalization” of applied sciences. On the other hand, applied sciences actively influence fundamental sciences, increasing the degree of their “practicalization”.
Firstly, the means and methods of instrumental knowledge of nature are being improved. And, secondly, when developing applied problems, new ideas and methods often arise. Thus, the development of the technology of acceleration of elementary particles made it possible to substantiate and test theoretical ideas about the fundamental laws of the microworld. Moreover, relevant research has led to the discovery of new elementary particles and the identification of patterns of their formation, which has significantly advanced the understanding of the deep processes of the microworld that determine the evolution of the Universe.
The development of science is an objective process, which is characterized by an orientation towards internal immanent (from the Latin immanentis - characteristic, inherent) conditions. The formation of natural science, technical knowledge and human knowledge increasingly reveals its historical dependence on external conditions (social, economic, cultural, etc.).
In other words, the process of interconnection and interaction of sciences is intensifying. Historically, several forms of interrelation and interaction between various scientific disciplines have been identified. Let us designate some levels of integrativeness of science.
Adjacent integrativeness. The relationship of scientific disciplines genetically and historically interacting with each other (physical chemistry, biophysics, economic mathematics, etc.)
Intercontiguous integrativity. The interrelation of scientific disciplines, both one cycle (natural science) and interrelated (for example, bionics is based not only on biology and physics, but also on technical sciences).
Targeted integrativeness. The interaction of scientific disciplines of various cycles and profiles is carried out to implement the target setting corresponding to a particular science (for example, cybernetics combines not only mathematics or biology, but also systems theory, management methodology, sociology, etc.).
Problematic integrativeness. The interrelation of various areas of scientific knowledge occurs in the process of solving a specific problem; the degree of integrativeness is a function of its level - from local to global (for example, solving a global environmental problem requires the “involvement” of all areas of natural science, technical knowledge and human science).
These trends in science also correlate with its functions. Several functions of science are noted. Let's highlight some of them, namely: research, teaching, communication, sociocultural and ideological.
Research function. Science, studying a specific reality, discovers its new sides and qualities, reveals more and more effective methods of cognition, etc. The purpose of scientific research is to analyze the patterns of objective reality.
Educational function. Within its framework, the reproduction of scientific knowledge is carried out - the transfer of scientific ideas from one research system to another. This is carried out in the process of training scientific personnel (through the education system, scientific schools, etc.), which ensures the continuity of the development of science, as well as the formation of new scientific traditions.
Communication function. This is a process of information exchange between members of the scientific community, which includes publications, conferences, discussions, etc. As a result, the relationship of the scientific community is strengthened, the awareness and efficiency of research activities increases.
Sociocultural function. Science is one of the basic elements of culture that forms the basis of civilization. The level and nature of the development of science is a significant factor that fixes the status of society in the dynamics of the historical process. The development of science is a criterion for the positive dynamism of civilization.
Worldview function. The overall development of science forms the foundations of a scientific worldview, that is, a system of principles, beliefs and ideas that determine a holistic approach to objective reality. In an extremely generalized form, the scientific worldview is associated with the rational attitude of man (subject) to nature (object).
At various stages of social development, certain functions of science dominated. For example, in the ancient period the emphasis was placed on its ideological functions (spontaneously dialectical form of worldview); in the medieval period - the teaching function (during this period science was concentrated mainly in universities); in the conditions of modern times, the research function of science developed (the formation of a modern type of scientific knowledge).
Until the 19th century the development of science was predominantly immanent in nature, without having a significant impact on the sociocultural processes of reality. And only by the middle of the 20th century the functions of science appear in unity, forming a systemic integrity that ensures the dynamism of the cognitive process.
2. Natural science and sociocultural knowledge: specificity and generality
Historically, two points of view have developed on the specifics of natural science (technical knowledge) and human science (social and humanitarian knowledge). The first of them comes from the fact that there is a pronounced specificity between natural science and human science, determined by the type of natural science and humanities knowledge. The second point of view, on the contrary, is based on ideas according to which there are no fundamental differences between natural science and humanitarian knowledge.
I. Kant (1724-1804) stands at the origins of views based on the essential difference between the “history of nature” and the “history of society.” In his opinion, if “unconscious forces” operate in nature, then in society there are people “striving for certain goals "
The neo-Kantian (Baden) school, based on Kant’s teaching, actively developed the thesis about the opposition of natural science and sociocultural knowledge.
G. Rickert (1863-1936) divided the sciences, based on the level of abstraction used within their framework, into generalizing disciplines (natural sciences) and individualizing disciplines (historical sciences). Therefore, in his opinion, in natural science it is possible to reach the level of comprehensive concepts and laws, while historical (sociocultural) disciplines are oriented primarily towards an individualistic vision of reality. Moreover, the desire to achieve a generalizing (generalizing) understanding of historical processes results in their distortion.
Historically, a number of features of natural science and sociocultural knowledge have been identified, due to the reality of their specific characteristics. Let's note some of them.
The basis of knowledge of the laws of nature is the cause-and-effect relationship of natural things and phenomena. Moreover, natural patterns do not depend on human activity. The laws of mechanics, for example, are objective in nature, explaining the specifics of the relationships of bodies in the macrocosm.
On the contrary, the laws of functioning of sociocultural systems are a function of the activities of society, because they change as a result of sociocultural development. Therefore, sociocultural patterns are not a constant category.
Of course, the laws of nature, revealed within the framework of natural science, lose their constancy in the process of cognition. The discovery of the microworld revealed the limitation of the laws of mechanics to the sphere of the macroworld. At the same time, sociocultural patterns are largely normative in nature, having a large degree of subjectivity.
So, natural sciences are characterized by a high degree of objectivity, because their development is associated with the desire to identify internal natural connections and relationships. Historical disciplines also strive to identify objective trends in the development of social systems. Within their framework, however, the dominance of goal-oriented and normative ideas is more clearly visible.
The laws of natural science are revealed on the basis of scientific experiment. Moreover, any theoretical position in a particular science of nature requires experimental confirmation. The situation is different in the social sciences. Within their framework, experiment (as an active influence on a cognizable object in the natural scientific sense) is hardly possible.
Natural scientific regularities receive the status of law when the process of experimentation succeeds in ensuring their repeatability. A historical fact is a single phenomenon. In this sense, any sociocultural phenomenon is unique in its existing historical forms. Consequently, the cognitive process in natural science and human science is based on opposing methodological principles.
The specific features of the object of natural science and human science also affect the effectiveness of forecasting the development of natural (natural) and socio-natural (integral) systems. The truth of the natural science theory is confirmed not only by experiment, but also by the constructiveness of the forecast, i.e. the possibility of long-term extrapolation of the development of a specific natural system. If molecular hydrogen and oxygen are involved in a chemical reaction, then the prognosis is obvious, namely: the process will end with the formation of a molecule. Similar forecasting efficiency is hardly possible in the social sciences. In other words, forecasting in social and humanitarian knowledge (as opposed to natural science and technical knowledge) is characterized by a high degree of uncertainty.
Historically, natural science knowledge took shape in the form of a scientific theory before the system of sciences about man and society took shape.
At the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the divide between the natural sciences and the humanities is increasingly arbitrary. Let us point out two circumstances that at least confirm this thesis.
Firstly, the scale of the problems (“challenges”) that require adequate resolution within the framework of modern civilization requires the “connection” of the entire cycle of scientific knowledge. And if in the process of formation and development the status of natural science was extremely high (and human science could not compete with it), then by the middle of the 20th century. the sciences of the social and humanitarian cycle have to a certain extent “pushed out” disciplines of a natural science nature (the development of economics, psychology, anthropology, social philosophy, etc.). An adequate “answer” to the challenges of civilization can only be obtained through the process of interconnection and interaction of various branches of modern scientific knowledge.
And, secondly, the methods of natural science (and technical science) and human science are gradually moving closer together. If previously, for example, a scientific experiment was correlated primarily with natural science, then with the development of, say, global modeling, social sciences have the opportunity to “play out” certain situations in the development of society. As a result, the objectivity of social cognition increases, as well as the effectiveness of its predictive constructs. The phenomenon of the “information revolution” is steadily overcoming the traditional dichotomy between natural science and human science. At the same time, differences between them, due to the specifics of the object of study, remain to one degree or another. Man and nature, rushing towards each other, nevertheless retain their specificity.
3. Scientific truth as a sociocultural phenomenon
The concept of truth is one of the defining ones in the theory of knowledge. Truth is an adequate reflection of reality, its comprehension. There are diametrically opposed points of view regarding the possibility of knowing objective reality.
Supporters of one point of view proceed from the fact that, despite the complexity and inconsistency, reality as a whole is knowable; on the contrary, others - those who adhere to agnosticism - reject completely (or partially) the possibility of knowing the world. Elements of agnosticism, given the complexity of the cognitive process, persist in modern sociocultural conditions.
Different forms of truth are recorded (artistic, moral, political, etc.), corresponding to specific types of knowledge (aesthetics, ethics, politics, etc.). Scientific truth has a special status.
The following criteria of scientific truth are identified, which are interconnected. Namely:
–objectivity – independence from external factors;
– systematic – the use of a set of principles, theories, hypotheses, etc.;
–rational evidence—reliance on logical experimental grounds;
– the possibility of verifiability – at the experimental and practical level.
The search for scientific truth is an evolutionary process. Reaching the level of objective scientific truth, i.e., obtaining knowledge that does not depend on subjective conditions, is associated with the “gradation” of the cognitive process.
How to separate true knowledge from untrue? In other words, how to distinguish true knowledge from error in its most diverse manifestations?
The search for an answer to this question has been going on since the genesis of scientific knowledge. Various characteristics were taken as a criterion for true knowledge, namely: self-evidence, observability, clarity, etc. In the 19th-20th centuries. Several principles have emerged, the consideration of which presupposes reaching the level of true knowledge. Let's highlight some of them.
Principle“practice is the criterion of truth.” Practice is understood as the purposeful objective-sensory activity of a subject (person) to transform an object (surrounding reality). Scientific practice involves experimental activities related to the implementation of the provisions of a theory, thereby confirming its truth or falsity. However, this principle does not mean an absolutization of the status of a practitioner in the cognitive process: only in the process of interrelation between practice and science (theory) is the truth of scientific concepts revealed.
Verification principle. In accordance with the views of positivism, the truth of any statement about the objects and processes of reality is established, ultimately, by comparing it (the truth) with sensory data. The difficulty (and often the impossibility) of “touching” directly the objects of scientific research (for example, the microworld) led neopositivists (logical positivism) to the thesis of partial and experimental indirect confirmation of the theory. This establishes a relationship between theoretical and experimental positions as a criterion for the truth of knowledge.
The principle of falsification. In accordance with this principle, only those statements that can, in principle, be falsified, that is, refuted in the process of comparison with empirical data, have the status of scientific nature. In this case, the emphasis is on a critical approach to the results of theoretical research.
The principle of rationalism. This is the ideal of philosophical classical ideas about true science. According to these ideas, reliable knowledge (universality, simplicity, predictability, etc. is associated with it) can only be obtained on the basis of logical constructions. Taking a critical approach to classical ideas about the scientific nature of knowledge, modern postpositivists reject a unified theory of rationality based on “historical relativism.” Within its framework, the concept of rational knowledge changes historically, including characteristics (for example, intuition) not accepted by classical rationalism.
Differentiating true knowledge from false knowledge is not so easy. It is not always possible to set up an experiment, to conduct an experimental test of the relevant theoretical provisions, especially in the social sciences and humanities.
M. Polanyi (1891-1976) formulated a theory according to which there are two types of knowledge. Namely: explicit knowledge expressed in categories, concepts, laws, theoretical constructs, etc.; tacit knowledge that does not have a clear theoretical apparatus, recorded primarily in practical actions (skills, mastery, etc.).
Scientific truth is a balance between explicit and implicit knowledge. And if in natural science (and technical science) there is a large degree of explicit knowledge, then, on the contrary, in human science there is a large degree of implicit knowledge. Approaching scientific truth presupposes the “translation” of an increasingly significant part of knowledge from its implicit to its explicit form. This is a dynamic process determined by the historical and sociocultural conditions of the development of science.
4. Universal principles and general scientific methods of cognition
Universal principles are mental techniques used in all spheres of cognitive activity, in the system of natural, technical and human sciences. We will indicate only a few of them.
The principle of objectivity. The desire to consider an object (phenomenon, thing or process) based on internal (immanent) ideas.
development principle. The idea according to which change, both quantitatively and qualitatively, of a thing, phenomenon or process is its internal property.
Development is inherent in both organic and inorganic objects, as well as sociocultural systems. Various types of development are distinguished. Namely: ascending and descending, progressive and regressive, from higher to lower, from simple to complex, from necessary to accidental, etc.
Systematic principle. An analysis of a thing, phenomenon or process in the unity, interaction and interrelation of all their elements is assumed; consideration of system elements as a whole.
Systematicity– the desire for the comprehensiveness of the cognitive process, which is interpreted as an epistemological ideal. One of the features of systematicity is the interrelation of the formalized and informal means and methods used in it for studying objects of various levels studied by the natural, technical and human sciences.
The universal principles of scientific knowledge (some of them are discussed above) are specified within the framework general scientific methods. Let's highlight a number of them.
Induction and deduction. They are based on the relationship between discreteness (separateness) and integrity (community) of reality.
Induction (from Latin inductio - guidance) is a method of cognition based on inferences from the particular to the general, when consciousness moves from particular knowledge to the general, to the knowledge of laws. Scientific induction establishes causal relationships based on the repetition and interconnection of the essential properties of some things and phenomena of a certain group, and from them to the identification of universal causal relationships. Inductive inferences do not provide reliable knowledge, but only “suggest” thought to identify such knowledge.
Deduction (from Latin deductio - inference) is a method of cognition, the opposite of induction, based on inferences from the general to the particular. Deductive inferences provide reliable knowledge provided that it is contained in the relevant premises. In real knowledge, deduction and induction are interrelated. The constructiveness of the deductive method is associated with the subject-practical and sociocultural activities of a person. In other words, its effectiveness is determined by the accumulation and theoretical interpretation of the relevant empirical material.
Analysis and synthesis. The mental and real process of dismembering the whole into its component parts with the subsequent acquisition of lost integrity.
Analysis (from the Greek analysis - decomposition) - a method of learning associated with the mental division of a thing, phenomenon or process into its constituent elements for the purpose of knowledge. The analytical method allows us to recognize a part as an element of the whole.
Synthesis (from the Greek synthesis - connection) is the opposite mental operation associated with the unification of the elements of an object into a whole. Analysis and synthesis are interconnected.
Essentially, synthesis is a cognitive process enriched with the results of the analytical method. Moreover, from a general method of cognition, analysis and synthesis are transformed into special research methods corresponding to specific sciences (mathematical analysis, synthetic chemistry, etc.).
Classification and generalization. Logical ordering of scientific objects and processes of reality.
Classification (from the Latin classis - category and facere - to do) is a method of dividing the things, phenomena or processes under study into separate groups in accordance with certain characteristics. The following are distinguished: natural classification, within which significant similarities and differences of objects are identified (for example, in biology); and artificial classification (say, a library alphabetical catalogue). Classification according to essential characteristics is characterized as a typology. Any classification is quite conditional and relative, improving in the process of cognition of real objects. Classification is a form of generalization.
Generalization is a method of thinking within which the general properties, signs and qualities of things, phenomena and processes of reality are identified. The resulting generalized knowledge means an in-depth reflection of reality and indicates further insight into the essence of the object under study. Thus, if within the framework of the classification the specific characteristics of an object are identified (for example, the concepts of “birch”, “poplar”, “maple”, etc.), then the generalization reaches the level of generic characteristics (in this case, the concept of “tree”) , discarding signs of a specific nature.
Analogy and similarity. Identification of similar elements in dissimilar objects and systems.
Analogy (Greek analogia - correspondence) is a method based on identifying similarities in some respects, aspects and qualities of non-identical objects. Relies on the logical method of inference by analogy. In the early stages of the development of science, analogy replaced experiment and observation. Thus, ancient pre-science (natural philosophy) proceeded from the identity of the microcosm (man) and the macrocosm (nature). Later, on the basis of analogy, the similarity of the human body and the state, the organism with the human mechanism, was substantiated.
Similarity is a variant of analogy; it is used, however, to compare similar objects, but of different scales. For example, “similar triangles” are distinguished, i.e. geometric shapes characterized by different scales.
Abstraction and idealization. Theoretical identification and consideration of an object or process that does not actually exist.
Abstraction (from the Latin abstractio - distraction) is the process of mentally highlighting individual aspects, properties, qualities or relationships of a thing, phenomenon or process with simultaneous abstraction from their other characteristics, which in a given research context are not considered as defining. The abstraction method allows you to gain a deeper understanding of what is being studied. phenomenon.
Idealization (from the Greek idea - image, representation) is a thought process that involves the identification of some abstract object that fundamentally does not exist in objective reality. These objects act as a means of scientific analysis, the basis of a theory. “Idealized” objects are characteristic of the entire system of scientific knowledge, namely: in mathematics – “absolutely black body”; in physics – “point”; in chemistry – “ideal solution”; in sociology – “type of rationality”; in cultural studies - “cultural-historical type”, etc.
Idealization is a form of expression of abstraction. It is in the process of idealization that an extreme abstraction from the real properties and qualities of a thing or phenomenon occurs with the simultaneous introduction into the content of the concepts being formed of features that do not exist in reality. Let's say, the concept of a “material point” is an ideal object, but its use is not only of a theoretical nature (in the process of creating a scientific theory), but also of a practical application (for example, for calculating the movement of specific material objects). The concept of “Western type of rationality” (M. Weber) allows, for example, to give a theoretical analysis of the foundations of Western civilization (“Protestant ethics”).
Simulation and thought experiment. Identification of the relationship between a real object (process) and its analogue.
Modeling (from the French modell - sample) is a method in which the object under study (original) is replaced by another (model) specially created for its study. Modeling is used when studying a thing, phenomenon or process is impossible or difficult for one reason or another.
There are several types of modeling, namely: physical, mathematical, logical, computer. Modeling capabilities are increasing as computerization improves - from local to global modeling, i.e., to the construction of planetary-scale models.
One type of modeling is a thought experiment. This is a method of scientific thinking, similar to the structure of a material experiment, with the help of which, relying on theoretical knowledge and empirical data, constructing ideal models of the object being studied and the conditions interacting with it, the essence of the theoretical problem is revealed. In a thought experiment, one operates with ideal objects and ideal conditions affecting them. Mental conditions are constructed on the basis of both experimental and theoretical methods of cognition.
Mathematization. One of the fundamental methods of a general scientific nature, giving empirical knowledge a theoretical status.
Mathematization (from the Greek mathema - knowledge) is the penetration of mathematical methods into all spheres of scientific knowledge, the existing system of sciences.
Mathematization manifests itself in various ways in the sciences. A special relationship develops between physics and mathematics. If in classical physics a theory of corresponding processes was initially created, for which a suitable mathematical apparatus was later constructed, then modern physics creates a mathematical apparatus corresponding to the new theory. In other words, modern theory reveals the physical meaning in abstract mathematical constructions. The use of mathematical methods made it possible to create theoretical biology; mathematization of chemistry has significantly increased the possibilities of organic synthesis; the use of mathematics in geography promoted it to the group of leading natural sciences. Mathematization is actively used in the socio-economic and humanitarian sciences (economic mathematics, mathematical sociology, etc.).
Both universal principles and general scientific methods of cognition are “complementary” in relation to each other. It is in the process of their interaction that an adequate idea of objective reality in its integrity is formed.
5. Dynamics of scientism and anti-scientism
Science is an integral part of culture. In different historical periods of the development of civilization, the dominant culture was determined by different forms of social consciousness, namely: in the ancient period, the basis of the civilizational process was myth, in the medieval period - religion, in the Renaissance and Enlightenment - philosophy.
In the modern era, science is gradually becoming a determining factor in the development of sociocultural processes of civilization. It is science, and especially the forms of its implementation, that increasingly determine the specifics of the relationship between man, society and the natural environment.
In European culture, since the ancient period, an idea has been formed, according to which knowledge is considered as a good, that is, science is interpreted as a phenomenon with intrinsic value. In the dynamics of historical development, this led to scientism - a worldview that absolutizes the role of science and scientific knowledge in the sociocultural process. Moreover, science was presented as a model for the development of culture.
Modern forms of scientism are characteristic of the 20th century, when the achievements of the scientific and technological revolution era were viewed primarily as positive phenomena that ensure the dynamism of scientific and technological (and socio-economic) progress. Within the framework of scientism, the dominant idea is that most of the problems that arise in the system of human relationships with the outside world can be solved with the help of scientific and technical methods and technologies. Scientism merges with technocratism in its desire to resolve the socio-economic contradictions of society on the basis of scientific management methods.
Scientism and technocratism developed in the second half of the 20th century. in the form of theories of post-industrialism, according to which traditional industrial society must (and can) overcome internal conflicts in the process of adjusting existing directions and guidelines for development (“ecological revolution”, “information revolution, etc.). The dynamism of modern “post-industrial society” confirms, as many scientists believe, the effectiveness of the ideology of scientism.
An alternative to scientism is "anti-scientism" - a worldview that focuses on the negative aspects and consequences of the development of science. If at the initial stages of its active dynamics scientism prevailed (anti-scientism was not clearly manifested), then gradually anti-scientism occupies an increasingly significant place in the analysis of the status of science in society.
And if initially anscientism was based on the negative consequences of the development of physics, then later the experience of biology and genetic engineering was used in this context; chemistry with the negative impact of its derivatives on the biosphere. Psychology can be used to manipulate the human personality, and sociology can be used to influence public consciousness and the behavior of certain groups of society, etc.
At the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries. The question is formulated as follows: is science good or evil? Is its development a benefit or a threat to the existence of humans, society and the biosphere?
In the history of science, it is figuratively customary to distinguish two types of scientific knowledge. Namely: science of the “Apollonovsky” and “Faustian” type. In the first case, we mean the science of the ancient period with its contemplation, passivity, locality, irrationality; secondly, modern science with its activity, dynamism, globality, and rationality. It is with these characteristics that the ideas about the “crisis” of scientific knowledge and the “dead-end” direction of its development are associated.
Indeed, science of the Western (Faustian) type has determined the high level of development of modern civilization. And yet, its historically established characteristics are subject to significant criticism. Let's say a point of view is justified. according to which, for example, rationalism, as one of the defining characteristics of Western-type science, is by no means a sufficient principle for the formation of an adequate scientific picture of the world - a true idea of active reality. It is necessary, within the framework of this point of view, to “supplement” rationalism with views of an irrationalistic nature.
At the end of the XX century. What is happening is not a “crisis” of natural science knowledge, but a paradigm shift (Greek paradeigma - sample), i.e. traditional theoretical, philosophical, sociocultural prerequisites that determine the development of science.
At the end of the XX century. a tendency is revealed to bridge the “gap” between natural science (technical) and humanitarian knowledge, the sciences of nature, technology and man. The degree of “humanization” of science is increasing, i.e. its relationship with the sociocultural processes of reality is strengthened. At the same time, the process of “scientification” of culture is intensifying, due to the penetration of scientific ideas, concepts and ideas into the body of knowledge about man and society.
Conclusion
The modern scientific picture of the world is becoming increasingly systemic and integrative in nature. Within its framework, prerequisites are created for the “transfer” of basic concepts and ideas from the sphere of natural sciences to the field of humanities. Natural scientific and sociocultural processes are considered in the dynamics of their changes. We are talking about the prerequisites and conditions for the formation of a holistic picture of the world, to which modern scientific knowledge strives.
Bibliography
1. History and philosophy of science. Ursul A.D., RAGS Publishing House, Moscow, 2006
