Among the many different cognitive processes, the main types of cognition can be distinguished. There is no unity of opinion in their classification, but most often they talk about ordinary (everyday), mythological, religious, artistic, philosophical and scientific knowledge. Let us briefly consider here only two types of knowledge - ordinary, which serves as the foundation of human life and any cognitive process, and scientific, which today has a decisive impact on all spheres of human activity.
Ordinary knowledge- this is the primary, most simple form of cognitive activity of the subject. It is spontaneously carried out by each person throughout his life, serves as an adaptation to the real conditions of everyday life and is aimed at acquiring the knowledge and skills that he needs every day and hour. Such knowledge is usually quite superficial, far from always substantiated and systematized, the reliable in them is closely intertwined with delusions and prejudices. At the same time, in the form of so-called common sense, they embody real worldly experience, a kind of wisdom that allows a person to behave rationally in a variety of everyday situations. Ordinary knowledge, moreover, is constantly open to the results of other types of knowledge - for example, scientific: common sense is able to assimilate the relatively simple truths of science and become more and more theorized. Unfortunately, such an impact of science on everyday consciousness is not as great as we would like, for example, one study showed that half of the US adult population surveyed does not know that the Earth revolves around the Sun in 1 year. In general, ordinary knowledge is always limited by certain limits - only external properties and connections of objects of everyday experience are available to it. To obtain deeper and more essential information about reality, it is necessary to turn to scientific knowledge.
scientific knowledge fundamentally different from the ordinary. Firstly, it is not available to any person, but only to those who have undergone specialized training (for example, received a higher education), which gave him the knowledge and skills for research activities. Secondly, scientific knowledge is specifically focused on the study of phenomena (and the laws of their existence) that are unknown to today's common practice. Thirdly, science uses by special means, methods and tools that are not used in traditional production and everyday experience. Fourthly, the knowledge obtained in scientific research has a fundamental novelty, it is substantiated, systematically organized and expressed using a special, scientific language.
For the emergence and development of scientific knowledge, certain sociocultural conditions are needed. Modern studies have shown that scientific knowledge could not have arisen in the so-called traditional society (such were the civilizations of the Ancient East - China, India, etc.), which is characterized by a slow pace of social change, authoritarian power, the priority of traditions in thinking and activity, and etc. Knowledge here is valued not in itself, but only in its practical application. It is clear that in these conditions a person is more inclined to follow established patterns and norms than to look for non-traditional approaches and ways of cognition.
Scientific knowledge was destined to take shape in a technogenic society, which implies high rates of change in all spheres of life, which is impossible without a constant influx of new knowledge. The prerequisites for such a society are formed in the culture Ancient Greece. Let us recall that the democratic structure of society, the freedom of the citizen contributed to the development of the vigorous activity of individuals, their ability to logically substantiate and defend their position, to offer new approaches to solving the problems under discussion. All this led to the search for innovations in all types of activity, including cognition (it is no coincidence that it is in Greece that the first model of theoretical science, the geometry of Euclid, is born). The cult of the human mind, the idea of its omnipotence then finds its development in the culture of the European Renaissance, which contributes to the formation of professional scientific knowledge and the emergence of modern science.
Scientific knowledge is usually carried out at two levels - empirical and theoretical. empirical(from Greek. empeiria- experience) knowledge gives us information about the external aspects and relationships of the objects under study, fixes and describes them. It is carried out mainly with the help of methods of observation and experiment. Observation- this is a purposeful and systematic perception of the studied phenomena (for example, the study of the behavior of great apes in the natural conditions of their life). When observing, the scientist tries not to interfere with the natural course of things, so as not to distort it.
Experiment- specially prepared experience. In the course of it, the object under study is placed in artificial conditions that can be changed and taken into account. Obviously, this method is characterized by the high activity of a scientist who is trying to get as much knowledge as possible about the behavior of an object in various situations, and even more than that - to artificially obtain new things and phenomena that do not exist in nature (this is especially true for chemical research).
Of course, in addition to these methods of cognition, empirical research also uses methods of logical thinking - analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, etc. Using the combination of all these methods - both practical and logical - the scientist receives new empirical knowledge. It is expressed mainly in three main forms:
scientific fact - fixation of one or another property or event (Phenol melts at a temperature of 40.9 ° C; In 1986, the passage of Halley's comet was observed);
scientific description- fixation of an integral system of properties and parameters of a particular phenomenon or group of phenomena. This kind of knowledge is given in encyclopedias, scientific reference books, textbooks, etc.;
empirical dependence – knowledge that reflects certain relationships inherent in a group of phenomena or events (The planets move around the Sun in elliptical orbits - one of Kepler's laws; Halley's Comet revolves around the Sun with a period of 75 -76 years).
theoretical(from Greek. theory– consideration, research) knowledge reveals the internal connections and relationships of things and phenomena, rationally explains them, reveals the laws of their being. Therefore, it is knowledge of a higher order than empirical knowledge - it is no coincidence that, for example, Heidegger defines science itself as a "theory of the real."
In theoretical knowledge, special mental operations are used that allow one way or another to come to new knowledge, which explains the previously received or develops the existing theoretical knowledge. These mental methods are always associated with the use of scientific concepts and so-called ideal objects(remember, for example, the concepts of "material point", "ideal gas", "absolutely black body", etc.). Scientists conduct thought experiments with them, use the hypothetical-deductive method (reasoning that allows you to put forward a hypothesis and derive consequences from it that can be verified), the method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete (the operation of combining new scientific concepts with existing ones in order to build more general theory a specific object - for example, an atom), etc. In a word, theoretical knowledge is always a long and complex work of thought, carried out with the help of various methods.
The theoretical knowledge gained from these intellectual operations exists in various forms. The most important of them are:
problem- a question, the answer to which is not yet available in scientific knowledge, a kind of knowledge about ignorance (for example, physicists in principle know today what a thermonuclear reaction is, but cannot say how to make it controllable);
hypothesis- a scientific assumption that probabilistically explains a particular problem (for example, various hypotheses about the origin of life on Earth);
theory- reliable knowledge about the essence and laws of being of a certain class of objects (say, the theory of the chemical structure of A. M. Butlerov). There are rather complex relationships between these forms of knowledge, but in general their dynamics can be described as follows:
The occurrence of a problem;
Putting forward a hypothesis as an attempt to solve this problem;
Hypothesis testing (for example, using an experiment);
Construction of a new theory (if the hypothesis is somehow confirmed); the emergence of a new problem (since no theory gives us absolutely complete and reliable knowledge) - and then this cognitive cycle is repeated.
Stages of the process of cognition. Forms of sensory and rational knowledge.
The concept of method and methodology. Classification of methods of scientific knowledge.
General (dialectical) method of cognition, principles of the dialectical method and their application in scientific cognition.
General scientific methods of empirical knowledge.
General scientific methods of theoretical knowledge.
General scientific methods applied at the empirical and theoretical levels of knowledge.
Modern science is developing at a very fast pace, at present the volume of scientific knowledge is doubling every 10-15 years. About 90% of all scientists who have ever lived on Earth are our contemporaries. For some 300 years, namely such an age of modern science, mankind has made such a huge breakthrough that our ancestors did not even dream of (about 90% of all scientific and technological achievements were made in our time). The whole world around us shows what progress humanity has made. It was science that was the main reason for such a rapidly flowing scientific and technological revolution, the transition to a post-industrial society, the widespread introduction of information technologies, the emergence of a “new economy”, for which the laws of classical economic theory do not apply, the beginning of the transfer of human knowledge into an electronic form, so convenient for storage, systematization, search and processing, and many others.
All this convincingly proves that the main form of human knowledge - science in our days is becoming more and more significant and essential part of reality.
However, science would not be so productive if it did not have such a developed system of methods, principles and imperatives of knowledge inherent in it. It is the correctly chosen method, along with the talent of a scientist, that helps him to understand the deep connection of phenomena, reveal their essence, discover laws and patterns. The number of methods that science develops to understand reality is constantly increasing. Their exact number is perhaps difficult to determine. After all, there are about 15,000 sciences in the world, and each of them has its own specific methods and subject of research.
At the same time, all these methods are in dialectical connection with general scientific methods, which they usually contain in various combinations and with the general, dialectical method. This circumstance is one of the reasons that determine the importance of having philosophical knowledge in any scientist. After all, it is philosophy as the science “about the most general laws of the existence and development of the world” that studies the trends and ways of developing scientific knowledge, its structure and research methods, considering them through the prism of its categories, laws and principles. In addition to everything, philosophy endows the scientist with that universal method, without which it is impossible to do in any field of scientific knowledge.
Cognition is a specific type of human activity aimed at comprehending the surrounding world and oneself in this world. “Cognition is, primarily due to socio-historical practice, the process of acquiring and developing knowledge, its constant deepening, expansion, and improvement.”
A person comprehends the world around him, masters it in various ways, among which two main ones can be distinguished. First (genetically original) - logistical - production of means of subsistence, labor, practice. Second - spiritual (ideal), within which the cognitive relationship of subject and object is only one of many others. In turn, the process of cognition and the knowledge obtained in it in the course of the historical development of practice and cognition itself is increasingly differentiated and embodied in its various forms.
Every form of social consciousness: science, philosophy, mythology, politics, religion, etc. correspond to specific forms of knowledge. Usually, the following ones are distinguished: everyday, playful, mythological, artistic-figurative, philosophical, religious, personal, scientific. The latter, although related, are not identical to each other, each of them has its own specifics.
We will not dwell on the consideration of each of the forms of knowledge. The subject of our research is scientific knowledge. In this regard, it is advisable to consider the features of only the latter.
The main features of scientific knowledge are:
1. Main task scientific knowledge- discovery of the objective laws of reality - natural, social (public), laws of cognition itself, thinking, etc. Hence the orientation of the study mainly on the general, essential properties of the subject, its necessary characteristics and their expression in a system of abstractions. “The essence of scientific knowledge lies in a reliable generalization of facts, in the fact that it finds the necessary, regular behind the random, the general behind the individual, and on this basis it predicts various phenomena and events.” Scientific knowledge strives to reveal the necessary, objective connections that are fixed as objective laws. If this is not the case, then there is no science, because the very concept of scientificity presupposes the discovery of laws, a deepening into the essence of the phenomena being studied.
2. The immediate goal and highest value of scientific knowledge is objective truth, comprehended primarily by rational means and methods, but, of course, not without the participation of living contemplation. From here characteristic scientific knowledge - objectivity, elimination, if possible, of subjectivistic moments in many cases for the implementation of the "purity" of consideration of one's subject. Even Einstein wrote: “What we call science has as its exclusive task to firmly establish what is.” Its task is to give a true reflection of the processes, an objective picture of what is. At the same time, it must be borne in mind that the activity of the subject is the most important condition and prerequisite for scientific knowledge. The latter is impossible without a constructive-critical attitude to reality, excluding inertia, dogmatism, and apologetics.
3. Science, to a greater extent than other forms of knowledge, is focused on being embodied in practice, being a “guide to action” in changing the surrounding reality and managing real processes. The vital meaning of scientific research can be expressed by the formula: “To know in order to foresee, to foresee in order to practically act” - not only in the present, but also in the future. The whole progress of scientific knowledge is connected with the increase in the power and range of scientific foresight. It is foresight that makes it possible to control processes and manage them. Scientific knowledge opens up the possibility of not only foreseeing the future, but also its conscious formation. “The orientation of science to the study of objects that can be included in activity (either actual or potentially, as possible objects of its future development), and their study as obeying the objective laws of functioning and development is one of the most important features of scientific knowledge. This feature distinguishes it from other forms of human cognitive activity.
An essential feature of modern science is that it has become such a force that predetermines practice. From the daughter of production, science turns into his mother. Many modern manufacturing processes were born in scientific laboratories. Thus, modern science not only serves the needs of production, but also increasingly acts as a prerequisite for the technical revolution. Great discoveries over the past decades in the leading fields of knowledge have led to a scientific and technological revolution that has embraced all elements of the production process: comprehensive automation and mechanization, the development of new types of energy, raw materials and materials, penetration into the microcosm and space. As a result, the prerequisites for the gigantic development of the productive forces of society were formed.
4. Scientific knowledge in epistemological terms is a complex contradictory process of reproduction of knowledge that forms an integral developing system of concepts, theories, hypotheses, laws and other ideal forms fixed in a language - natural or - more characteristically - artificial (mathematical symbolism, chemical formulas, etc.). .P.). Scientific knowledge does not simply fix its elements, but continuously reproduces them on its own basis, forms them in accordance with its own norms and principles. In the development of scientific knowledge, revolutionary periods alternate, the so-called scientific revolutions, which lead to a change in theories and principles, and evolutionary, calm periods, during which knowledge is deepened and detailed. The process of continuous self-renewal by science of its conceptual arsenal is an important indicator of scientific character.
5. In the process of scientific knowledge, such specific material means are used as instruments, tools, and other so-called “scientific equipment”, which is often very complex and expensive (synchrophasotrons, radio telescopes, rocket and space technology, etc.). In addition, science, to a greater extent than other forms of cognition, is characterized by the use of such ideal (spiritual) means and methods for the study of its objects and itself as modern logic, mathematical methods, dialectics, systemic, hypothetical-deductive and other general scientific methods. and methods (see more on this below).
6. Scientific knowledge is characterized by strict evidence, the validity of the results obtained, the reliability of the conclusions. At the same time, there are many hypotheses, conjectures, assumptions, probabilistic judgments, etc. That is why the logical and methodological training of researchers, their philosophical culture, the constant improvement of their thinking, the ability to correctly apply its laws and principles are of paramount importance here.
In modern methodology, various levels of scientific criteria are distinguished, referring to them, in addition to those named, such as the internal systemic nature of knowledge, its formal consistency, experimental verifiability, reproducibility, openness to criticism, freedom from bias, rigor, etc. In other forms of cognition, the considered criteria may be present (to varying degrees), but there they are not decisive.
The process of cognition includes the receipt of information through the senses (sensory cognition), the processing of this information by thinking (rational cognition), and the material development of cognizable fragments of reality (social practice). Exists close connection knowledge with practice, in the course of which the materialization (objectification) of the creative aspirations of people takes place, the transformation of their subjective plans, ideas, goals into objectively existing objects, processes.
Sensual and rational cognition are closely related and are the two main aspects of the cognitive process. At the same time, these aspects of cognition do not exist in isolation either from practice or from each other. The activity of the sense organs is always controlled by the mind; the mind functions on the basis of the initial information that the sense organs supply to it. Since sensory cognition precedes rational cognition, it is possible in a certain sense to speak of them as steps, stages of the process of cognition. Each of these two levels of cognition has its own specifics and exists in its own forms.
Sensory cognition is realized in the form of direct receipt of information with the help of the sense organs, which directly connect us with the outside world. Note that such knowledge can also be carried out using special technical means(devices) that expand the capabilities of the human senses. The main forms of sensory knowledge are: sensation, perception and representation.
Sensations arise in the human brain as a result of the influence of environmental factors on his sense organs. Each sense organ is a complex neural mechanism consisting of perceiving receptors, transmitting nerve conductors and the corresponding part of the brain that controls peripheral receptors. For example, the organ of vision is not only the eye, but also the nerves leading from it to the brain, and the corresponding department in the central nervous system.
Sensations are mental processes that occur in the brain when the nerve centers that control receptors are excited. “Sensations are a reflection of individual properties, qualities of objects of the objective world, directly affecting the sense organs, an elementary further psychologically indecomposable cognitive phenomenon.” Feelings are specialized. Visual sensations give us information about the shape of objects, about their color, about the brightness of light rays. Auditory sensations inform a person about a variety of sound vibrations in the environment. The sense of touch allows us to sense temperature. environment, the impact of various material factors on the body, their pressure on it, etc. Finally, smell and taste provide information about chemical impurities in the environment and the composition of the food taken.
“The first premise of the theory of knowledge,” wrote V.I. Lenin, “is undoubtedly that the only source of our knowledge is sensations.” Sensation can be considered as the simplest and initial element of sensory cognition and human consciousness in general.
Biological and psycho-physiological disciplines, studying sensation as a kind of reaction of the human body, establish various dependencies: for example, the dependence of a reaction, that is, sensation, on the intensity of irritation of a particular sense organ. In particular, it has been established that from the point of view of “information ability”, a person has vision and touch in the first place, and then hearing, taste, and smell.
The capabilities of the human senses are limited. They are able to display the world around them in certain (and rather limited) ranges of physical and chemical influences. Thus, the organ of vision can display a relatively small portion of the electromagnetic spectrum with wavelengths from 400 to 740 millimicrons. Beyond the boundaries of this interval are ultraviolet and x-rays in one direction, and infrared radiation and radio waves in the other. Neither one nor the other does not perceive our eyes. Human hearing allows you to feel sound waves from a few tens of hertz to about 20 kilohertz. Vibrations of a higher frequency (ultrasonic) or a lower frequency (infrasonic) our ear is not able to feel. The same can be said about other sense organs.
From the facts testifying to the limitedness of the human senses, a doubt was born in his ability to know the world around him. Doubts about a person’s ability to cognize the world through their sense organs turn around in an unexpected way, because these doubts themselves turn out to be evidence in favor of the powerful possibilities of human cognition, including the capabilities of the sense organs, enhanced if necessary by appropriate technical means (microscope, binoculars, telescope, night vision device). visions, etc.).
But most importantly, a person can cognize objects and phenomena that are inaccessible to his senses, thanks to the ability for practical interaction with the outside world. A person is able to comprehend and understand the objective connection that exists between phenomena accessible to the sense organ and phenomena inaccessible to them (between electromagnetic waves and audible sound in a radio receiver, between the movements of electrons and those visible traces that they leave in a cloud chamber, etc. d.). The understanding of this objective connection is the basis of the transition (carried out in our consciousness) from the perceptible to the imperceptible.
In scientific knowledge, when discovering changes that occur for no apparent reason in sensually perceived phenomena, the researcher guesses the existence of phenomena that are not perceived. However, in order to prove their existence, reveal the laws of their action and use these laws, it is necessary that his (the researcher's) activity should be one of the links in the cause of the chain linking the observable and the unobservable. Managing this link at your own discretion and calling on the basis of knowledge of the laws unobservable phenomena observed effects, the researcher thereby proves the truth of knowledge of these laws. For example, the transformation of sounds into electromagnetic waves in a radio transmitter, and then their reverse transformation into sound vibrations in a radio receiver, proves not only the existence of an area of electromagnetic oscillations that our senses cannot perceive, but also the truth of the provisions of the theory of electromagnetism created by Faraday, Maxwell, Hertz.
Therefore, the sense organs that a person has are quite enough for cognition of the world. “A person has just as many feelings,” wrote L. Feuerbach, “as much as is necessary to perceive the world in its entirety, in its totality.” The lack of an additional sense organ in a person capable of responding to some environmental factors is fully compensated by his intellectual and practical-active capabilities. So, a person does not have a special sense organ that makes it possible to feel radiation. However, a person turned out to be able to compensate for the absence of such an organ with a special device (dosimeter) that warns of radiation danger in a visual or audible form. This suggests that the level of knowledge of the surrounding world is determined not just by the set, “range” of the sense organs and their biological perfection, but also by the degree of development of social practice.
At the same time, however, one should not forget that sensations have always been and always will be the only source of human knowledge about the surrounding world. The sense organs are the only “gates” through which information about the world around us can enter our consciousness. The lack of feeling outside world can even lead to mental illness.
The first form of sensory cognition (sensations) is characterized by an analysis of the environment: the sense organs, as it were, choose from an innumerable set of environmental factors, quite definite ones. But sensory knowledge includes not only analysis, but also synthesis, which is carried out in the subsequent form of sensory knowledge - in perception.
Perception is a holistic sensory image of an object, formed by the brain from sensations directly received from this object. Perception is based on combinations of different types of sensations. But this is not just a mechanical sum of them. Sensations that are received from various sense organs merge into a single whole in perception, forming a sensual image of an object. So, if we hold an apple in our hand, then visually we receive information about its shape and color, through touch we learn about its weight and temperature, smell conveys its smell; and if we taste it, we will know whether it is sour or sweet. In perception, the purposefulness of cognition is already manifested. We can focus on some side of the subject and it will be "bulged out" in perception.
Man's perceptions developed in the course of his social and labor activity. The latter leads to the creation of more and more new things, thereby increasing the number of perceived objects and improving the perceptions themselves. Therefore, the perceptions of man are more developed and perfect than the perceptions of animals. As F. Engels noted, an eagle sees much farther than a man, but the human eye notices much more in things than the eye of an eagle.
On the basis of sensations and perceptions in the human brain, representation. If sensations and perceptions exist only with direct contact of a person with an object (without this there is neither sensation nor perception), then the representation arises without a direct impact of the object on the senses. Some time after the object has affected us, we can recall its image in our memory (for example, remember an apple that we held in our hand some time ago and then ate). At the same time, the image of the object, recreated by our representation, differs from the image that existed in perception. Firstly, it is poorer, paler, in comparison with the multicolored image that we had with the direct perception of the object. And secondly, this image will necessarily be more general, because in the representation, with even greater force than in perception, the purposefulness of knowledge is manifested. In the image evoked from memory, the main thing that interests us will be in the foreground.
At the same time, imagination and fantasy are essential in scientific knowledge. This is where performances can become truly creative. Based on the elements that exist in reality, the researcher imagines something new, something that does not currently exist, but which will be either as a result of the development of some natural processes, or as a result of the progress of practice. All sorts of technical innovations, for example, initially exist only in the minds of their creators (scientists, designers). And only after their implementation in the form of some technical devices, structures, they become objects of sensory perception of people.
Representation is a great step forward in comparison with perception, for it contains such a new feature as generalization. The latter takes place already in ideas about concrete, single objects. But to an even greater extent this is manifested in general ideas (i.e., for example, in the idea not only of this particular birch growing in front of our house, but also of birch in general). In general ideas, the moments of generalization become much more significant than in any idea about a specific, single object.
Representation still belongs to the first (sensory) stage of cognition, for it has a sensory-visual character. At the same time, it is also a kind of “bridge” leading from sensory cognition to rational cognition.
In conclusion, we note that the role of sensory reflection of reality in ensuring all human cognition is very significant:
The sense organs are the only channel that directly connects a person with the external objective world;
Without sense organs, a person is generally incapable of either knowledge or thinking;
The loss of part of the sense organs complicates, complicates cognition, but does not block its possibilities (this is due to the mutual compensation of some sense organs by others, the mobilization of reserves in the active sense organs, the ability of the individual to concentrate his attention, his will, etc.);
The rational is based on the analysis of the material that the sense organs give us;
The regulation of objective activity is carried out primarily with the help of information received by the sense organs;
The sense organs provide the minimum of primary information that is necessary in order to cognize objects in many ways, in order to develop scientific knowledge.
Rational knowledge (from lat. ratio - reason) is the thinking of a person, which is a means of penetrating into the inner essence of things, a means of knowing the patterns that determine their existence. The fact is that the essence of things, their natural connections are inaccessible to sensory knowledge. They are comprehended only with the help of human mental activity.
It is “thinking that organizes the data of sensory perception, but by no means comes down to this, but gives rise to something new - something that is not given in sensibility. This transition is a leap, a break in gradualness. It has its objective basis in the “split” of the object into internal and external, essence and its manifestation, into separate and general. The external aspects of things, phenomena are reflected primarily with the help of living contemplation, and the essence, the common thing in them, is comprehended with the help of thinking. In this process of transition, what is called understanding. To understand means to reveal the essential in the subject. We can also understand what we are not able to perceive ... Thinking correlates the testimony of the sense organs with all the knowledge of the individual already available, moreover, with all the cumulative experience, knowledge of mankind to the extent that they have become the property of this subject.”
The forms of rational cognition (human thinking) are: concept, judgment and conclusion. These are the broadest and most general forms of thinking that underlie the entire incalculable wealth of knowledge that mankind has accumulated.
The original form of rational knowledge is concept. “Concepts are the products of the socio-historical process of cognition embodied in words, which single out and fix common essential properties; relations of objects and phenomena, and thanks to this, they simultaneously summarize the most important properties about the methods of action with given groups of objects and phenomena. The concept in its logical content reproduces the dialectical regularity of cognition, the dialectical connection between the individual, the particular and the universal. Essential and non-essential attributes of objects, necessary and random, qualitative and quantitative, etc. can be fixed in concepts. The emergence of concepts is the most important regularity in the formation and development of human thinking. The objective possibility of the emergence and existence of concepts in our thinking lies in the objective nature of the world around us, i.e., the presence in it of many individual objects that have a qualitative certainty. The formation of a concept is a complex dialectical process, including: comparison(mental comparison of one object with another, identification of signs of similarity and difference between them), generalization(mental association of homogeneous objects on the basis of certain common features), abstraction(highlighting in the subject of some features, the most significant, and distraction from others, minor, insignificant). All these logical devices are closely interconnected in a single process of concept formation.
Concepts express not only objects, but also their properties and relations between them. Such concepts as hard and soft, large and small, cold and hot, etc., express certain properties of bodies. Such concepts as motion and rest, speed and force, etc. express the interaction of objects and man with other bodies and processes of nature.
The emergence of new concepts is especially intensive in the field of science in connection with the rapid deepening and development of scientific knowledge. Discoveries in objects of new aspects, properties, relationships, relations immediately entail the emergence of new scientific concepts. Each science has its own concepts, which form a more or less harmonious system, called its conceptual apparatus. The conceptual apparatus of physics, for example, includes such concepts as “energy”, “mass”, “charge”, etc. The conceptual apparatus of chemistry includes the concepts of “element”, “reaction”, “valence”, etc.
According to the degree of generality, concepts can be different - less general, more general, extremely general. The concepts themselves are subject to generalization. In scientific knowledge, particular scientific, general scientific and universal concepts (philosophical categories such as quality, quantity, matter, being, etc.) function.
In modern science, an increasingly important role is played by general scientific concepts which arise at the points of contact (so to speak, “at the junction”) of various sciences. Often this occurs when solving some complex or global problems. The interaction of sciences in solving such scientific problems is significantly accelerated precisely due to the use of general scientific concepts. An important role in the formation of such concepts is played by the interaction of natural, technical and social sciences, characteristic of our time, which form the main areas of scientific knowledge.
More complex than the concept of the form of thinking is judgment. It includes the concept, but is not reduced to it, but is a qualitatively special form of thinking that performs its own, special functions in thinking. This is explained by the fact that “universal, particular and individual are not directly divided in the concept and are given as something whole. Their division and correlation is given in the judgment.
The objective basis of the judgment is the connections and relationships between objects. The necessity of judgments (as well as concepts) is rooted in the practical activity of people. Interacting with nature in the process of labor, a person seeks not only to distinguish certain objects from others, but also to comprehend their relationships in order to successfully influence them.
Connections and relations between objects of thought are of the most diverse nature. They can be between two separate objects, between an object and a group of objects, between groups of objects, etc. The variety of such real connections and relations is reflected in the variety of judgments.
“A judgment is that form of thinking through which the presence or absence of any connections and relations between objects is revealed (that is, it indicates the presence or absence of something in something)”. Being a relatively complete thought, reflecting things, phenomena of the objective world with their properties and relationships, the judgment has a certain structure. In this structure, the concept of the subject of thought is called the subject and is denoted by the Latin letter S ( subjectum- underlying). The concept of the properties and relations of the subject of thought is called a predicate and is denoted by the Latin letter P (Predicatum- said). The subject and the predicate are collectively called terms of judgment. At the same time, the role of terms in judgment is far from the same. The subject contains already known knowledge, and the predicate carries new knowledge about it. For example, science has established that iron has electrical conductivity. The presence of this connection between iron and its separate property makes possible the judgment: “iron (S) is electrically conductive (P)”.
The subject-predicate form of judgment is associated with its main cognitive function - to reflect reality in its rich variety of properties and relationships. This reflection can be carried out in the form of individual, private and general judgments.
A singular is a judgment in which something is affirmed or denied about a separate subject. Such judgments in Russian are expressed by the words “this”, proper names, etc.
Private judgments are such judgments in which something is affirmed or denied about some part of a group (class) of objects. In Russian, such judgments begin with words such as “some”, “part”, “not all”, etc.
Judgments are called general, in which something is affirmed or denied about the whole group (about the whole class) of objects. Moreover, what is affirmed or denied in a general judgment concerns each subject of the class under consideration. In Russian, this is expressed by the words “all”, “any”, “everyone”, “any” (in affirmative judgments) or “none”, “nobody”, “none”, etc. (in negative judgments).
General judgments express the general properties of objects, general connections and relations between them, including objective laws. It is in the form of general judgments that essentially all scientific propositions are formed. The special significance of general judgments in scientific knowledge is determined by the fact that they serve as a mental form in which only the objective laws of the surrounding world, discovered by science, can be expressed. However, this does not mean that only general judgments have cognitive value in science. The laws of science arise as a result of the generalization of a multitude of individual and particular phenomena, which are expressed in the form of individual and particular judgments. Even single judgments about individual objects or phenomena (some facts that have arisen in an experiment, historical events, etc.) can have an important cognitive value.
Being a form of existence and expression of a concept, a separate judgment, however, cannot fully express its content. Only a system of judgments and inference can serve as such a form. In the conclusion, the ability of thinking to mediate rational reflection of reality is most clearly manifested. The transition to new knowledge is carried out here not by referring to the subject of cognition given sensory experience, but on the basis of already existing knowledge.
Inference contains in its composition judgments, and therefore concepts), but is not reduced to them, but also presupposes their definite connection. To understand the origin and essence of inference, it is necessary to compare two kinds of knowledge that a person has and uses in the course of his life. This is direct and indirect knowledge.
Direct knowledge is that which is obtained by a person with the help of the senses: sight, hearing, smell, etc. Such sensory information is a significant part of all human knowledge.
However, not everything in the world can be judged directly. In science, it is important mediated knowledge. This is knowledge that is not obtained directly, not immediately, but by derivation from other knowledge. The logical form of their acquisition is the conclusion. Inference is understood as a form of thinking by means of which new knowledge is deduced from known knowledge.
Like judgments, inference has its own structure. In the structure of any inference, there are: premises (initial judgments), a conclusion (or conclusion) and a certain connection between them. Parcels - this is the original (and at the same time already known) knowledge that serves as the basis for the conclusion. Conclusion - this is a derivative, new knowledge derived from premises and acting as their consequence. Finally, connection between premises and inference there is a necessary relation between them which makes it possible to pass from one to the other. In other words, it is a logical consequence relation. Any conclusion is a logical consequence of some knowledge from others. Depending on the nature of this following, the following two fundamental types of inferences are distinguished: inductive and deductive.
Inference is widely used in everyday and scientific knowledge. In science, they are used as a way of knowing the past, which can no longer be directly observed. It is on the basis of inferences that knowledge about the occurrence of solar system and the formation of the Earth, the origin of life on our planet, the origin and stages of development of society, etc. But inferences in science are used not only to understand the past. They are also important for understanding the future, which cannot yet be observed. And this requires knowledge about the past, about the development trends that are currently operating and paving the way for the future.
Together with concepts and judgments, inferences overcome the limitations of sensory knowledge. They turn out to be indispensable where the sense organs are powerless in comprehending the causes and conditions for the emergence of any object or phenomenon, in understanding its essence, forms of existence, patterns of its development, etc.
concept method (from the Greek word "methodos" - the path to something) means a set of techniques and operations of practical and theoretical development of reality.
The method equips a person with a system of principles, requirements, rules, guided by which he can achieve the intended goal. Possession of the method means for a person the knowledge of how, in what sequence to perform certain actions to solve certain problems, and the ability to apply this knowledge in practice.
“Thus the method (in one form or another) is reduced to a set of certain rules, techniques, methods, norms of knowledge and action. It is a system of prescriptions, principles, requirements that guide the subject in solving a specific problem, achieving a certain result in a given field of activity. It disciplines the search for truth, allows (if correct) to save time and effort, to move towards the goal in the shortest way. The main function of the method is the regulation of cognitive and other forms of activity.”
The doctrine of the method began to develop in the science of modern times. Its representatives considered correct method guide in the movement towards reliable, true knowledge. So, a prominent philosopher of the XVII century. F. Bacon compared the method of cognition with a lantern that illuminates the way for a traveler walking in the dark. And another well-known scientist and philosopher of the same period, R. Descartes, outlined his understanding of the method as follows: “By method,” he wrote, “I mean precise and simple rules, strict observance of which ... without unnecessary waste of mental strength, but gradually and constantly increasing knowledge, contributes to the fact that the mind reaches the true knowledge of everything that is available to it.
There is a whole field of knowledge that is specifically concerned with the study of methods and which is usually called methodology. Methodology literally means “the doctrine of methods” (because this term comes from two Greek words: “methodos” - method and “logos” - teaching). By studying the patterns of human cognitive activity, the methodology develops on this basis the methods for its implementation. The most important task of methodology is to study the origin, essence, effectiveness and other characteristics of cognitive methods.
It is customary to subdivide the methods of scientific knowledge according to the degree of their generality, i.e., according to the breadth of applicability in the process scientific research.
There are two general methods in the history of knowledge: dialectical and metaphysical. These are general philosophical methods. The metaphysical method from the middle of the 19th century began to be more and more forced out of natural science by the dialectical method.
The second group of methods of cognition are general scientific methods that are used in the most diverse fields of science, that is, they have a very wide, interdisciplinary range of applications.
The classification of general scientific methods is closely related to the concept of levels of scientific knowledge.
There are two levels of scientific knowledge: empirical and theoretical..“This difference is based on the dissimilarity, firstly, of the methods (methods) of cognitive activity itself, and secondly, the nature of the scientific results achieved.” Some general scientific methods are applied only at the empirical level (observation, experiment, measurement), others - only at the theoretical level (idealization, formalization), and some (for example, modeling) - both at the empirical and theoretical levels.
The empirical level of scientific knowledge is characterized by a direct study of real-life, sensually perceived objects. The special role of empiricism in science lies in the fact that only at this level of research do we deal with the direct interaction of a person with the studied natural or social objects. Here living contemplation (sensory cognition) prevails, the rational moment and its forms (judgments, concepts, etc.) are present here, but have a subordinate meaning. Therefore, the object under study is reflected mainly from the side of its external connections and manifestations, accessible to living contemplation and expressing internal relations. At this level, the process of accumulating information about the objects and phenomena under study is carried out by conducting observations, performing various measurements, and delivering experiments. Here, the primary systematization of the actual data obtained in the form of tables, diagrams, graphs, etc. is also carried out. In addition, already at the second level of scientific knowledge - as a result of the generalization of scientific facts - it is possible to formulate some empirical patterns.
The theoretical level of scientific knowledge is characterized by the predominance of the rational moment - concepts, theories, laws and other forms and "mental operations". The absence of direct practical interaction with objects determines the peculiarity that an object at a given level of scientific knowledge can be studied only indirectly, in a thought experiment, but not in a real one. However, living contemplation is not eliminated here, but becomes a subordinate (but very important) aspect of the cognitive process.
At this level, the most profound essential aspects, connections, patterns inherent in the studied objects, phenomena are revealed by processing the data of empirical knowledge. This processing is carried out with the help of systems of “higher order” abstractions - such as concepts, inferences, laws, categories, principles, etc. However, “at the theoretical level, we will not find a fixation or an abbreviated summary of empirical data; theoretical thinking cannot be reduced to the summation of empirically given material. It turns out that theory does not grow out of empiricism, but, as it were, next to it, or rather, above it and in connection with it.”
The theoretical level is a higher level in scientific knowledge. “The theoretical level of knowledge is aimed at the formation of theoretical laws that meet the requirements of universality and necessity, i.e. work everywhere and all the time.” The results of theoretical knowledge are hypotheses, theories, laws.
Singling out these two different levels in scientific research, however, one should not separate them from each other and oppose them. After all, the empirical and theoretical levels of knowledge are interconnected. The empirical level acts as the basis, the foundation of the theoretical one. Hypotheses and theories are formed in the process of theoretical understanding of scientific facts, statistical data obtained at the empirical level. In addition, theoretical thinking inevitably relies on sensory-visual images (including diagrams, graphs, etc.) with which the empirical level of research deals.
In turn, the empirical level of scientific knowledge cannot exist without the achievements of the theoretical level. Empirical research is usually based on a certain theoretical structure that determines the direction of this research, determines and justifies the methods used in this.
According to K. Popper, it is absurd to believe that we can start scientific research with “pure observations” without having “something like a theory”. Therefore, some conceptual point of view is absolutely necessary. Naive attempts to do without it can, in his opinion, only lead to self-deception and to the uncritical use of some unconscious point of view.
The empirical and theoretical levels of cognition are interconnected, the boundary between them is conditional and mobile. Empirical research, revealing new data with the help of observations and experiments, stimulates theoretical knowledge (which generalizes and explains them), sets new, more complex tasks for it. On the other hand, theoretical knowledge, developing and concretizing its own new content on the basis of empirical knowledge, opens up new, wider horizons for empirical knowledge, orients and directs it in search of new facts, contributes to the improvement of its methods and means, etc.
The third group of methods of scientific knowledge includes methods used only in the framework of the research of a particular science or a particular phenomenon. Such methods are called part scientific. Each particular science (biology, chemistry, geology, etc.) has its own specific research methods.
At the same time, private scientific methods, as a rule, contain certain general scientific methods of cognition in various combinations. In particular scientific methods, there may be observations, measurements, inductive or deductive reasoning, etc. The nature of their combination and use depends on the conditions of the study, the nature of the objects being studied. Thus, private scientific methods are not divorced from general scientific ones. They are closely related to them and include the specific application of general scientific cognitive techniques for studying a specific area of the objective world. At the same time, particular scientific methods are also connected with the universal, dialectical method, which, as it were, is refracted through them.
Another group of methods of scientific knowledge is the so-called disciplinary methods, which are systems of techniques used in a particular discipline, which is part of some branch of science or that has arisen at the intersection of sciences. Each fundamental science is a complex of disciplines that have their own specific subject and their own unique research methods.
The last, fifth group includes interdisciplinary research methods which are a set of a number of synthetic, integrative methods (arising as a result of a combination of elements of different levels of methodology), aimed mainly at the interfaces of scientific disciplines.
Thus, in scientific knowledge there is a complex, dynamic, integral, subordinated system of diverse methods of different levels, spheres of action, direction, etc., which are always implemented taking into account specific conditions.
To what has been said, it remains to add that any method in itself does not predetermine success in the knowledge of certain aspects of material reality. It is also important to be able to correctly apply the scientific method in the process of cognition. If we use the figurative comparison of academician P. L. Kapitsa, then the scientific method “is, as it were, a Stradivarius violin, the most perfect of violins, but in order to play it, you need to be a musician and know music. Without it, it will be just as out of tune as a normal violin.”
Dialectics (Greek dialektika - I am talking, arguing) is the doctrine of the most general laws of the development of nature, society and knowledge, in which various phenomena are considered in the variety of their connections, the interaction of opposing forces, tendencies, in the process of change, development. According to its internal structure, dialectics as a method consists of a number of principles, the purpose of which is to lead cognition to the deployment of the contradictions of development. The essence of dialectics lies precisely in the presence of contradictions in development, in the movement towards these contradictions. Let us briefly consider the basic dialectical principles.
The principle of comprehensive consideration of the objects under study. An integrated approach to cognition.
One of the important requirements of the dialectical method is to study the object of knowledge from all sides, to strive to identify and study as many as possible (out of an infinite set) of its properties, connections, relations. Modern research in many fields of science increasingly requires taking into account the growing number of actual data, parameters, relationships, etc. This task is becoming increasingly difficult to solve without involving the information power of the latest computer technology.
The world around us is a single whole, a certain system, where each object as a unity of the diverse is inextricably linked with other objects and all of them constantly interact with each other. One of the basic principles of materialistic dialectics follows from the position on the universal connection and interdependence of all phenomena - the comprehensiveness of consideration. A correct understanding of any thing is possible only if the whole set of its internal and external sides, connections, relations to etc. is explored. In order to really know the subject deep and comprehensively, it is necessary to cover, study all its aspects, all connections and “mediation” in their system, with the isolation of the main, decisive side.
The principle of comprehensiveness in modern scientific research is realized in the form of an integrated approach to the objects of knowledge. The latter makes it possible to take into account the multiplicity of properties, aspects, relations, etc. of the objects and phenomena being studied. This approach underlies complex, interdisciplinary research, which makes it possible to “bring together” multilateral studies, to combine the results obtained by different methods. It was this approach that led to the idea of creating research teams consisting of specialists in various fields and realizing the requirement of complexity in solving certain problems.
“Modern integrated scientific and technical disciplines and research are the reality of modern science. However, they do not fit into traditional organizational forms and methodological standards. It is in the sphere of these studies and disciplines that the practical “internal” interaction of the social, natural and technical sciences is now taking place ... Such studies (which, for example, include research in the field of artificial intelligence) require special organizational support and the search for new organizational forms of science. However, Unfortunately, their development is hampered precisely because of their unconventionality, the lack of a clear idea in the mass (and sometimes professional) consciousness about their place in the system of modern science and technology.
Nowadays, complexity (as one of the important aspects of dialectical methodology) is an integral element of modern global thinking. Based on it, the search for solutions to the global problems of our time requires a scientifically substantiated (and politically balanced) integrated approach.
The principle of considering in relation. System knowledge.
The problem of taking into account the connections of the thing under study with other things occupies an important place in the dialectical method of cognition, distinguishing it from the metaphysical one. The metaphysical thinking of many natural scientists, who ignored in their research the real relationships that exist between the objects of the material world, at one time gave rise to many difficulties in scientific knowledge. To overcome these difficulties, began in the XIX century. the transition from metaphysics to dialectics, "... considering things not in their isolation, but in their mutual connection."
The progress of scientific knowledge already in the 19th century, and even more so in the 20th century, showed that any scientist - in whatever field of knowledge he works - will inevitably fail in research if he considers the object under study out of connection with other objects, phenomena, or if will ignore the nature of the relationships of its elements. In the latter case, it will be impossible to understand and study the material object in its entirety, as a system.
The system is always some integrity representing yourself a set of elements, the functional properties and possible states of which are determined not only by the composition, structure, etc. of its constituent elements, but also by the nature of their mutual relations.
To study an object as a system, a special, systematic approach to its cognition is also required. The latter must take into account the qualitative uniqueness of the system in relation to its elements (i.e., that it - as an integrity - has properties that its constituent elements do not have).
At the same time, it should be borne in mind that “... although the properties of the system as a whole cannot be reduced to the properties of the elements, they can be explained in their origin, in their internal mechanism, in the ways of their functioning based on the properties of the elements of the system and the nature their relationship and interdependence. This is the methodological essence of the systems approach. Otherwise, if there were no connection between the properties of the elements and the nature of their relationship, on the one hand, and the properties of the whole, on the other hand, there would be no scientific sense in considering the system precisely as a system, that is, as a set of elements with certain properties. Then the system would have to be considered simply as a thing that has properties, regardless of the properties of the elements and the structure of the system.
“The principle of consistency requires the differentiation of the external and internal sides of material systems, the essence and its manifestations, the discovery of the many different aspects of the subject, their unity, the disclosure of form and content, elements and structure, random and necessary, etc. This principle directs thinking to the transition from phenomena to their essence, to the knowledge of the integrity of the system, as well as the necessary connections of the subject under consideration with the processes surrounding it. The principle of consistency requires the subject to place at the center of cognition the idea of integrity, which is designed to guide cognition from the beginning to the end of the study, no matter how it breaks up into separate, possibly, at first glance, and not related to each other, cycles or moments; on the whole path of cognition, the idea of integrity will change, be enriched, but it should always be a systemic, holistic idea of the object.
The principle of consistency is aimed at a comprehensive knowledge of the subject, as it exists at one time or another; it is aimed at reproducing its essence, integrative basis, as well as the diversity of its aspects, manifestations of the essence in its interaction with other material systems. Here it is assumed that the given object is delimited from its past, from its previous states; this is done for a more directed knowledge of its current state. Distraction from history in this case is a legitimate method of knowledge.
The spread of the systematic approach in science was associated with the complication of the objects of study and with the transition from metaphysical-mechanistic methodology to dialectical. Symptoms of the exhaustion of the cognitive potential of the metaphysical-mechanistic methodology, which focused on reducing the complex to individual connections and elements, appeared as early as the 19th century, and at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. the crisis of such a methodology was already quite clearly revealed, when a sound human mind increasingly began to come into contact with objects interacting with other material systems, with consequences that can no longer (without making an obvious mistake) be separated from the causes that gave rise to them.
The principle of determinism.
Determinism - (from lat. determino- determine) is philosophy about the objective regular relationship and interdependence of the phenomena of the material and spiritual world. The basis of this doctrine is the position on the existence of causality, i.e. such a connection of phenomena in which one phenomenon (cause) under certain conditions necessarily gives rise to another phenomenon (consequence). Even in the works of Galileo, Bacon, Hobbes, Descartes, Spinoza, the position was substantiated that when studying nature, one must look for effective causes and that “true knowledge is knowledge through causes” (F. Bacon).
Already at the level of phenomena, determinism makes it possible to distinguish necessary connections from accidental, essential from non-essential, to establish certain recurrences, correlative dependencies, etc., i.e., to carry out the advancement of thinking to essence, to causal connections within essence. Functional objective dependencies, for example, are connections between two or more consequences of the same cause, and the knowledge of regularities at the phenomenological level must be supplemented by the knowledge of genetic, producing causal relationships. The cognitive process, proceeding from effects to causes, from accidental to necessary and essential, aims at revealing the law. The law determines the phenomena, and therefore the knowledge of the law explains the phenomena and changes, the movements of the object itself.
Modern determinism presupposes the presence of a variety of objectively existing forms the relationship of phenomena. But all these forms are ultimately formed on the basis of universally acting causality, outside of which there is not a single phenomenon of reality.
The principle of learning in development. Historical and logical approach to cognition.
The principle of studying objects in their development is one of the most important principles of the dialectical method of cognition. This is one of the fundamental differences. dialectical method from the metaphysical. We will not get true knowledge if we study a thing in a dead, frozen state, if we ignore such an important aspect of its existence as development. Only by studying the past of the object of interest to us, the history of its origin and formation, it is possible to understand its current state, as well as to predict its future.
The principle of studying an object in development can be realized in cognition by two approaches: historical and logical (or, more precisely, logical-historical).
At historical approach, the history of the object is reproduced exactly, in all its versatility, taking into account all the details, events, including all kinds of random deviations, “zigzags” in development. This approach is used in a detailed, thorough study of human history, when observing, for example, the development of some plants, living organisms (with corresponding descriptions of these observations in all details), etc.
At logical The approach also reproduces the history of the object, but at the same time it is subjected to certain logical transformations: it is processed by theoretical thinking with the allocation of the general, essential and, at the same time, it is freed from everything random, insignificant, superficial, which interferes with the identification of the patterns of development of the object under study.
This approach in the natural sciences of the XIX century. was successfully (though spontaneously) realized by Ch. Darwin. For him, for the first time, the logical process of cognition of the organic world proceeded from the historical process of the development of this world, which made it possible to scientifically solve the issue of the origin and evolution of plant and animal species.
The choice of one or another - historical or logical - approach in cognition is determined by the nature of the object under study, the objectives of the study, and other circumstances. At the same time, in the real process of cognition, both of these approaches are closely interrelated. The historical approach is not complete without some kind of logical understanding of the facts of the history of the development of the object under study. The logical analysis of the development of an object does not contradict its true history, it proceeds from it.
This interconnection between the historical and logical approaches in cognition was especially emphasized by F. Engels. “... The logical method,” he wrote, “... in essence is nothing more than the same historical method, only freed from historical form and from interfering accidents. From where history begins, the course of thought must also begin from the same, and its further movement will be nothing more than a reflection of the historical process in an abstract and theoretically consistent form; a corrected reflection, but corrected according to the laws that the actual historical process itself gives...”
The logical-historical approach, based on the power of theoretical thinking, allows the researcher to achieve a logically reconstructed, generalized reflection of the historical development of the object under study. And this leads to important scientific results.
In addition to the above principles, the dialectical method includes other principles - objectivity, specificity"split one" (principle of contradiction) etc. These principles are formulated on the basis of the relevant laws and categories, in their totality reflecting the unity, integrity of the objective world in its continuous development.
Scientific observation and description.
Observation is a sensual (mainly visual) reflection of objects and phenomena of the external world. “Observation is a purposeful study of objects, based mainly on such sensory abilities of a person as sensation, perception, representation; in the course of observation, we gain knowledge about the external aspects, properties and signs of the object under consideration”. This is the initial method of empirical knowledge, which allows obtaining some primary information about the objects of the surrounding reality.
Scientific observation (unlike ordinary, everyday observations) is characterized by a number of features:
Purposefulness (observation should be carried out to solve the task of research, and the attention of the observer should be fixed only on the phenomena associated with this task);
Regularity (observation should be carried out strictly according to the plan drawn up on the basis of the research task);
Activity (the researcher must actively search, highlight the moments he needs in the observed phenomenon, drawing on his knowledge and experience for this, using various technical means of observation).
Scientific observations are always accompanied description object of knowledge. An empirical description is a fixation by means of a natural or artificial language of information about objects given in an observation. With the help of a description, sensory information is translated into the language of concepts, signs, diagrams, drawings, graphs and numbers, thereby taking on a form convenient for further rational processing. The latter is necessary to fix those properties, aspects of the object under study, which constitute the subject of the study. Descriptions of the results of observations form the empirical basis of science, based on which researchers create empirical generalizations, compare the studied objects according to certain parameters, classify them according to some properties, characteristics, and find out the sequence of stages of their formation and development.
Almost every science goes through this initial, “descriptive” stage of development. At the same time, as emphasized in one of the works on this issue, “the main requirements that apply to a scientific description are aimed at making it as complete, accurate and objective as possible. The description should give a reliable and adequate picture of the object itself, accurately reflect the phenomena being studied. It is important that the concepts used for description always have a clear and unambiguous meaning. With the development of science, changes in its foundations, the means of description are transformed, and a new system of concepts is often created.
When observing, there is no activity aimed at transforming, changing objects of knowledge. This is due to a number of circumstances: the inaccessibility of these objects for practical impact (for example, observation of remote space objects), the undesirability, based on the objectives of the study, of interference in the observed process (phenological, psychological, and other observations), the lack of technical, energy, financial and other opportunities setting up experimental studies of objects of knowledge.
According to the method of conducting observations, they can be direct and indirect.
At direct observations certain properties, aspects of the object are reflected, perceived by the human senses. Observations of this kind have provided much useful information in the history of science. It is known, for example, that Tycho Brahe's observations of the position of planets and stars in the sky, carried out for more than twenty years with an accuracy unsurpassed for the naked eye, were the empirical basis for Kepler's discovery of his famous laws.
Although direct observation continues to play an important role in modern science, however, most often scientific observation is mediated i.e., it is carried out using certain technical means. The emergence and development of such means largely determined the enormous expansion of the possibilities of the method of observation that has taken place over the past four centuries.
If, for example, before the beginning of the XVII century. astronomers have watched celestial bodies naked eye, Galileo's invention of the optical telescope in 1608 raised astronomical observations to a new, much higher level. And the creation in our days of X-ray telescopes and their launch into outer space on board the orbital station (X-ray telescopes can only work outside the Earth's atmosphere) made it possible to observe such objects of the Universe (pulsars, quasars), which would be impossible to study in any other way.
The development of modern natural science is associated with an increase in the role of the so-called indirect observations. Thus, objects and phenomena studied by nuclear physics cannot be directly observed either with the help of human senses or with the help of the most advanced instruments. For example, when studying the properties of charged particles using a cloud chamber, these particles are perceived by the researcher indirectly - by such visible manifestations as the formation tracks, consisting of many liquid droplets.
At the same time, any scientific observations, although they rely primarily on the work of the senses, require at the same time participation and theoretical thinking. The researcher, relying on his knowledge, experience, must be aware of sensory perceptions and express (describe) them either in terms of ordinary language, or - more strictly and abbreviated - in certain scientific terms, in some kind of graphs, tables, drawings, etc. For example, emphasizing the role of theory in the process of indirect observations, A. Einstein in a conversation with W. Heisenberg noted: “Whether a given phenomenon can be observed or not depends on your theory. It is the theory that must establish what can be observed and what cannot.
Observations can often play an important heuristic role in scientific knowledge. In the process of observation, completely new phenomena can be discovered, allowing one or another scientific hypothesis to be substantiated.
From the foregoing, it follows that observation is a very important method of empirical knowledge, which ensures the collection of extensive information about the world around us. As the history of science shows, correct use this method is very fruitful.
Experiment.
An experiment is a more complex method of empirical knowledge compared to observation. It involves an active, purposeful and strictly controlled influence of the researcher on the object under study in order to identify and study certain aspects, properties, relationships. At the same time, the experimenter can transform the object under study, create artificial conditions for its study, and interfere with the natural course of processes.
“In the general structure of scientific research, the experiment occupies a special place. On the one hand, it is the experiment that is the link between the theoretical and empirical stages and levels of scientific research. By design, an experiment is always mediated by prior theoretical knowledge: it is conceived on the basis of relevant theoretical knowledge, and its goal is often to confirm or refute a scientific theory or hypothesis. The results of the experiment themselves require a certain theoretical interpretation. At the same time, the method of experiment, according to the nature of the cognitive means used, belongs to the empirical stage of cognition. The result of experimental research is, first of all, the achievement of factual knowledge and the establishment of empirical patterns.
Experimentally oriented scientists argue that a cleverly designed and “cunningly”, masterfully staged experiment is higher than theory: a theory can be completely refuted, but a reliably obtained experience cannot!
The experiment includes other methods of empirical research (observations, measurements). At the same time, it has a number of important, unique features.
Firstly, the experiment makes it possible to study the object in a “purified” form, i.e., to eliminate all kinds of side factors, layers that impede the research process.
Secondly, during the experiment, the object can be placed in some artificial, in particular, extreme conditions, i.e., studied at ultra-low temperatures, at extremely high pressures, or, conversely, in a vacuum, at enormous intensities electromagnetic field etc. In such artificially created conditions, it is possible to discover surprising sometimes unexpected properties of objects and thereby to better comprehend their essence.
Thirdly, while studying any process, the experimenter can interfere with it, actively influence its course. As Academician I. P. Pavlov noted, “experience, as it were, takes phenomena into its own hands and sets in motion one or the other, and thus, in artificial, simplified combinations, determines the true connection between phenomena. In other words, observation collects what nature offers it, while experience takes from nature what it wants.
Fourth, an important advantage of many experiments is their reproducibility. This means that the conditions of the experiment, and, accordingly, the observations and measurements carried out in this case can be repeated as many times as necessary to obtain reliable results.
The preparation and conduct of the experiment require compliance with a number of conditions. So, scientific experiment:
Never taken at random, it presupposes a well-defined goal of the study;
It is not done “blindly”, it is always based on some initial theoretical positions. Without an idea in your head, I.P. Pavlov said, you won’t see the fact at all;
It is not carried out unplanned, chaotically, the researcher preliminarily outlines the ways of its implementation;
Requires a certain level of development of technical means of cognition necessary for its implementation;
Should be carried out by people who have a sufficiently high qualification.
Only the totality of all these conditions determines success in experimental studies.
Depending on the nature of the problems solved in the course of experiments, the latter are usually divided into research and testing.
Research experiments make it possible to discover new, unknown properties in an object. The result of such an experiment may be conclusions that do not follow from the existing knowledge about the object of study. An example is the experiments carried out in the laboratory of E. Rutherford, which led to the discovery of the atomic nucleus, and thus to the birth of nuclear physics.
Verification experiments serve to test, confirm certain theoretical constructions. Thus, the existence of a number of elementary particles (positron, neutrino, etc.) was first predicted theoretically, and only later they were discovered experimentally.
Based on the methodology and the results obtained, the experiments can be divided into qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative experiments are exploratory in nature and do not lead to any quantitative ratios. They allow only to reveal the effect of certain factors on the phenomenon under study. Quantitative experiments aimed at establishing accurate quantitative dependencies in the phenomenon under study. In the real practice of experimental research, both of these types of experiments are implemented, as a rule, in the form of successive stages in the development of cognition.
As you know, the connection between electrical and magnetic phenomena was first discovered by the Danish physicist Oersted as a result of a purely qualitative experiment (by placing a magnetic compass needle next to a conductor through which an electric current was passed, he found that the needle deviates from its original position). After Oersted published his discovery, quantitative experiments by the French scientists Biot and Savart followed, as well as experiments by Ampère, on the basis of which the corresponding mathematical formula was derived.
All these qualitative and quantitative empirical studies laid the foundations for the doctrine of electromagnetism.
Depending on the field of scientific knowledge in which the experimental method of research is used, there are natural science, applied (in technical sciences, agricultural science, etc.) and socio-economic experiments.
Measurement and comparison.
Most scientific experiments and observations involve making various measurements. Measurement - this is a process that consists in determining the quantitative values of certain properties, aspects of the object under study, the phenomenon with the help of special technical devices.
The great importance of measurements for science was noted by many prominent scientists. For example, D. I. Mendeleev emphasized that “science begins as soon as they begin to measure.” And the famous English physicist W. Thomson (Kelvin) pointed out that "every thing is known only to the extent that it can be measured."
The measurement operation is based on comparison objects by some similar properties or sides. To make such a comparison, it is necessary to have certain units of measurement, the presence of which makes it possible to express the properties under study in terms of their quantitative characteristics. In turn, this makes it possible to widely use mathematical tools in science and creates the prerequisites for the mathematical expression of empirical dependencies. Comparison is not only used in connection with measurement. In science, comparison acts as a comparative or comparative-historical method. Initially, it arose in philology, literary criticism, then it began to be successfully applied in jurisprudence, sociology, history, biology, psychology, history of religion, ethnography and other fields of knowledge. Entire branches of knowledge have arisen that use this method: comparative anatomy, comparative physiology, comparative psychology, and so on. So, in comparative psychology, the study of the psyche is carried out on the basis of comparing the psyche of an adult with the development of the psyche in a child, as well as animals. In the course of scientific comparison, not arbitrarily chosen properties and connections are compared, but essential ones.
An important aspect of the measurement process is the method of its implementation. It is a set of techniques that use certain principles and means of measurement. Under the principles of measurement, in this case, we mean some phenomena that form the basis of measurements (for example, temperature measurement using the thermoelectric effect).
There are several types of measurements. Based on the nature of the dependence of the measured value on time, measurements are divided into static and dynamic. At static measurements the quantity that we measure remains constant in time (measuring the size of bodies, constant pressure, etc.). TO dynamic include such measurements during which the measured value changes in time (measurement of vibration, pulsating pressures, etc.).
According to the method of obtaining results, direct and indirect measurements are distinguished. V direct measurements the desired value of the measured value is obtained by directly comparing it with the standard or issued by the measuring device. At indirect measurement the desired value is determined on the basis of a known mathematical relationship between this value and other quantities obtained by direct measurements (for example, finding the electrical resistivity of a conductor from its resistance, length and cross-sectional area). Indirect measurements are widely used in cases where the desired value is impossible or too difficult to measure directly, or when direct measurement gives a less accurate result.
With the progress of science, the measuring technique also advances. Along with the improvement of existing measuring instruments operating on the basis of traditional established principles (replacing the materials from which the instrument parts are made, making individual changes to its design, etc.), there is a transition to fundamentally new, designs measuring devices, due to new theoretical premises. In the latter case, devices are created in which new scientific ones are realized. achievements. For example, the development of quantum physics has significantly increased the possibility of measurements with a high degree of accuracy. The use of the Mössbauer effect makes it possible to create a device with a resolution of the order of 10 -13% of the measured value.
Well-developed measuring instrumentation, a variety of methods and high characteristics of measuring instruments contribute to progress in scientific research. In turn, the solution of scientific problems, as noted above, often opens up new ways to improve the measurements themselves.
Abstraction. Rising from the abstract to the concrete.
The process of cognition always begins with the consideration of specific, sensually perceived objects and phenomena, their external features, properties, connections. Only as a result of studying the sensory-concrete does a person come to some kind of generalized ideas, concepts, to one or another theoretical position, i.e., scientific abstractions. Obtaining these abstractions is connected with the complex abstracting activity of thinking.
In the process of abstraction, there is a departure (ascension) from sensually perceived concrete objects (with all their properties, aspects, etc.) to abstract ideas about them reproduced in thinking. At the same time, sensory-concrete perception, as it were, “evaporates to the level of an abstract definition.” abstraction, Thus, it consists in a mental abstraction from some - less significant - properties, aspects, features of the object under study with the simultaneous selection, formation of one or more essential aspects, properties, features of this object. The result obtained in the process of abstraction is called abstraction(or use the term "abstract" - as opposed to concrete).
In scientific knowledge, abstractions of identification and isolating abstractions are widely used, for example. Identification abstraction is a concept that is obtained as a result of identifying a certain set of objects (at the same time, they are abstracted from a number of individual properties, features of these objects) and combining them into a special group. An example is the grouping of the entire multitude of plants and animals living on our planet into special species, genera, orders, etc. Isolating abstraction is obtained by highlighting certain properties, relationships, inextricably linked with the objects of the material world, into independent entities (“stability”, “solubility”, “electrical conductivity”, etc.).
The transition from the sensory-concrete to the abstract is always associated with a certain simplification of reality. At the same time, ascending from the sensory-concrete to the abstract, theoretical, the researcher gets the opportunity to better understand the object under study, to reveal its essence. At the same time, the researcher first finds the main connection (relationship) of the object under study, and then, step by step, tracing how it changes under various conditions, discovers new connections, establishes their interactions, and in this way displays the essence of the object under study in its entirety.
The process of transition from sensory-empirical, visual representations of the phenomena being studied to the formation of certain abstract, theoretical structures that reflect the essence of these phenomena underlies the development of any science.
Since the concrete (i.e., real objects, processes of the material world) is a set of many properties, aspects, internal and external connections and relations, it is impossible to know it in all its diversity, remaining at the stage of sensory cognition, limited to it. Therefore, there is a need for a theoretical understanding of the concrete, that is, an ascent from the sensually concrete to the abstract.
But the formation of scientific abstractions, general theoretical propositions is not the ultimate goal of cognition, but is only a means of deeper, more versatile cognition of the concrete. Therefore, further movement (ascent) of knowledge from the achieved abstract back to the concrete is necessary. The knowledge about the concrete obtained at this stage of the study will be qualitatively different in comparison with that which was available at the stage of sensory cognition. In other words, the concrete at the beginning of the process of cognition (sensory-concrete, which is its starting point) and the concrete, comprehended at the end of the cognitive process (it is called logical-concrete, emphasizing the role of abstract thinking in its comprehension), are fundamentally different from each other.
The logically concrete is the concrete theoretically reproduced in the researcher's thinking in all the richness of its content.
It contains in itself not only the sensuously perceived, but also something hidden, inaccessible to sensual perception, something essential, regular, comprehended only with the help of theoretical thinking, with the help of certain abstractions.
The method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete is used in the construction of various scientific theories and can be used both in the social and natural sciences. For example, in the theory of gases, having singled out the basic laws of an ideal gas - Clapeyron's equations, Avogadro's law, etc., the researcher goes to specific interactions and properties of real gases, characterizing their essential aspects and properties. As we go deeper into the concrete, more and more new abstractions are introduced, which act as a deeper reflection of the essence of the object. Thus, in the process of developing the theory of gases, it was found that the laws of an ideal gas characterize the behavior of real gases only at low pressures. This was due to the fact that the abstraction of an ideal gas neglects the attractive forces of molecules. Accounting for these forces led to the formulation of the van der Waals law. Compared with Clapeyron's law, this law expressed the essence of the behavior of gases more concretely and deeply.
Idealization. Thought experiment.
The mental activity of a researcher in the process of scientific knowledge includes a special kind of abstraction, which is called idealization. Idealization is the mental introduction of certain changes in the object under study in accordance with the objectives of the research.
As a result of such changes, for example, some properties, aspects, attributes of objects can be excluded from consideration. Thus, the idealization widespread in mechanics, called a material point, implies a body devoid of any dimensions. Such an abstract object, the dimensions of which are neglected, is convenient in describing the movement of a wide variety of material objects from atoms and molecules to the planets of the solar system.
Changes in an object, achieved in the process of idealization, can also be made by endowing it with some special properties that are not feasible in reality. An example is the abstraction introduced into physics by idealization, known as completely black body(such a body is endowed with a property that does not exist in nature to absorb absolutely all the radiant energy that falls on it, reflecting nothing and passing nothing through itself).
The expediency of using idealization is determined by the following circumstances:
Firstly, “idealization is expedient when the real objects to be investigated are quite complex for the available means of theoretical, in particular mathematical, analysis, and in relation to the idealized case, by applying these means, it is possible to build and develop a theory that, under certain conditions and purposes, is effective. , to describe the properties and behavior of these real objects. The latter, in essence, certifies the fruitfulness of idealization, distinguishes it from a fruitless fantasy.
Secondly, it is advisable to use idealization in those cases when it is necessary to exclude certain properties, connections of the object under study, without which it cannot exist, but which obscure the essence of the processes occurring in it. A complex object is presented as if in a “purified” form, which facilitates its study.
Thirdly, the use of idealization is advisable when the properties, parties, and connections of the object under study that are excluded from consideration do not affect within the framework of this study to its essence. Wherein right choice the admissibility of such an idealization plays a very important role.
It should be noted that the nature of idealization can be very different if there are different theoretical approaches to the study of a phenomenon. As an example, we can point to three different concepts of “ideal gas”, which were formed under the influence of various theoretical and physical concepts: Maxwell-Boltzmann, Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac. However, all three variants of idealization obtained in this way turned out to be fruitful in the study of gas states of various nature: the Maxwell-Boltzmann ideal gas became the basis for studies of ordinary molecular rarefied gases at sufficiently high temperatures; the Bose-Einstein ideal gas was applied to study the photon gas, and the Fermi-Dirac ideal gas helped solve a number of electron gas problems.
Being a kind of abstraction, idealization allows an element of sensory visualization (the usual process of abstraction leads to the formation of mental abstractions that do not have any visualization). This feature of idealization is very important for the implementation of such a specific method of theoretical knowledge, which is thought experiment ( also called mental, subjective, imaginary, idealized).
A thought experiment involves operating with an idealized object (replacing a real object in abstraction), which consists in the mental selection of certain positions, situations that allow us to detect some important features of the object under study. This shows a certain similarity between a mental (idealized) experiment and a real one. Moreover, any real experiment, before being carried out in practice, is first “played out” by the researcher mentally in the process of thinking, planning. In this case, the thought experiment acts as a preliminary ideal plan for a real experiment.
At the same time, the thought experiment also plays an independent role in science. At the same time, while maintaining similarity with the real experiment, it at the same time differs significantly from it.
In scientific knowledge, there may be cases when, in the study of certain phenomena, situations, conducting real experiments is generally impossible. This gap in knowledge can only be filled by a thought experiment.
The scientific activity of Galileo, Newton, Maxwell, Carnot, Einstein and other scientists who laid the foundations of modern natural science testifies to the essential role of a thought experiment in the formation of theoretical ideas. The history of the development of physics is rich in facts about the use of thought experiments. An example is Galileo's thought experiments, which led to the discovery of the law of inertia. “... The law of inertia,” A. Einstein and L. Infeld wrote, “cannot be derived directly from experiment, it can be derived speculatively, by thinking associated with observation. This experiment can never be done in reality, although it leads to a deep understanding of actual experiments.”
A thought experiment can be of great heuristic value, helping to interpret new knowledge obtained in a purely mathematical way. This is confirmed by many examples from the history of science.
The idealization method, which turns out to be very fruitful in many cases, has at the same time certain limitations. In addition, any idealization is limited to a specific area of phenomena and serves to solve only certain problems. This is clearly seen at least on the example of the above idealization of “absolutely black body”.
The main positive value of idealization as a method of scientific knowledge lies in the fact that the theoretical constructions obtained on its basis make it possible then to effectively investigate real objects and phenomena. The simplifications achieved with the help of idealization facilitate the creation of a theory that reveals the laws of the studied area of the phenomena of the material world. If the theory as a whole correctly describes real phenomena, then the idealizations underlying it are also legitimate.
Formalization.
Under formalization is understood as a special approach in scientific knowledge, which consists in the use of special symbols that allow one to abstract from the study of real objects, from the content of the theoretical provisions describing them and operate instead with a certain set of symbols (signs).
This technique consists in the construction of abstract mathematical models that reveal the essence of the studied processes of reality. When formalizing, reasoning about objects is transferred to the plane of operating with signs (formulas). The relations of signs replace statements about the properties and relations of objects. In this way, a generalized sign model of a certain subject area is created, which makes it possible to discover the structure of various phenomena and processes, while abstracting from the qualitative characteristics of the latter. The derivation of some formulas from others according to the strict rules of logic and mathematics is a formal study of the main characteristics of the structure of various phenomena, sometimes very distant in nature.
A striking example of formalization is the mathematical descriptions of various objects and phenomena widely used in science, based on the corresponding meaningful theories. At the same time, the mathematical symbolism used not only helps to consolidate the existing knowledge about the objects and phenomena under study, but also acts as a kind of tool in the process of their further knowledge.
To build any formal system, it is necessary: a) to specify an alphabet, that is, a certain set of characters; b) setting the rules by which “words”, “formulas” can be obtained from the initial characters of this alphabet; c) setting the rules by which one can move from one word, formula of a given system to other words and formulas (the so-called inference rules).
As a result, a formal sign system is created in the form of a certain artificial language. An important advantage of this system is the possibility of carrying out within its framework the study of any object in a purely formal way (operating with signs) without directly referring to this object.
Another advantage of formalization is to ensure the brevity and clarity of the recording of scientific information, which opens up great opportunities for operating with it.
Of course, formalized artificial languages do not have the flexibility and richness of a natural language. But they lack the ambiguity of terms (polysemy), which is characteristic of natural languages. They are characterized by a well-constructed syntax (which establishes the rules for the connection between signs, regardless of their content) and unambiguous semantics (the semantic rules of a formalized language quite unambiguously determine the correlation of a sign system with a specific subject area). Thus, a formalized language has the monosemic property.
The ability to represent certain theoretical positions of science in the form of a formalized sign system is of great importance for cognition. But it should be borne in mind that the formalization of a particular theory is possible only if its content is taken into account. “A bare mathematical equation does not yet represent a physical theory; in order to obtain a physical theory, it is necessary to give mathematical symbols a specific empirical content.”
The growing use of formalization as a method of theoretical knowledge is connected not only with the development of mathematics. In chemistry, for example, the corresponding chemical symbolism, together with the rules for operating it, was one of the variants of a formalized artificial language. The method of formalization occupied an increasingly important place in logic as it developed. The works of Leibniz laid the foundation for the creation of the method of logical calculus. The latter led to the formation in the middle of the XIX century. mathematical logic, which in the second half of our century played an important role in the development of cybernetics, in the emergence of electronic computers, in solving problems of industrial automation, etc.
The language of modern science differs significantly from natural human language. It contains many special terms, expressions, formalization tools are widely used in it, among which the central place belongs to mathematical formalization. Based on the needs of science, various artificial languages \u200b\u200bare created to solve certain problems. The entire set of created and being created artificial formalized languages is included in the language of science, forming a powerful means of scientific knowledge.
axiomatic method.
In the axiomatic construction of theoretical knowledge, a set of initial positions is first set that does not require proof (at least within the framework of a given system of knowledge). These provisions are called axioms, or postulates. Then, according to certain rules, a system of output sentences is built from them. The totality of the initial axioms and the propositions derived from them form an axiomatically constructed theory.
Axioms are statements that do not need to be proven true. The number of axioms varies widely: from two or three to several dozen. Logical inference allows you to transfer the truth of the axioms to the consequences derived from them. At the same time, the axioms and conclusions from them are subject to the requirements of consistency, independence and completeness. Following certain, clearly fixed rules of inference makes it possible to streamline the process of reasoning when deploying an axiomatic system, to make this reasoning more rigorous and correct.
To define an axiomatic system, some language is required. In this regard, symbols (icons) are widely used, rather than cumbersome verbal expressions. Replacing spoken language with logical and mathematical symbols, as mentioned above, is called formalization. . If formalization takes place, then the axiomatic system is formal, and the provisions of the system take on the character formulas. The resulting formulas are called theorems and the arguments used are evidence theorems. Such is the structure of the axiomatic method, which is considered almost well-known.
Hypothesis method.
In methodology, the term “hypothesis” is used in two senses: as a form of existence of knowledge, characterized by problematic, unreliable, need for proof, and as a method of forming and substantiating explanatory proposals, leading to the establishment of laws, principles, theories. A hypothesis in the first sense of the word is included in the hypothesis method, but it can also be used outside of it.
The best way to understand the hypothesis method is to get acquainted with its structure. The first stage of the hypothesis method is familiarization with empirical material subject to theoretical explanation. Initially, they try to explain this material with the help of laws and theories already existing in science. If there are none, the scientist proceeds to the second stage - putting forward a guess or assumption about the causes and patterns of these phenomena. At the same time, he tries to use various methods of research: inductive guidance, analogy, modeling, etc. It is quite possible that at this stage several explanatory assumptions are put forward that are incompatible with each other.
The third stage is the stage of assessing the severity of the assumption and selecting the most probable one from the set of guesses. The hypothesis is tested primarily for logical consistency, especially if it has a complex form and unfolds into a system of assumptions. Next, the hypothesis is tested for compatibility with the fundamental intertheoretical principles of the given science.
At the fourth stage, the proposed assumption is unfolded and empirically verifiable consequences are deduced from it. At this stage, a partial reworking of the hypothesis is possible, the introduction of clarifying details into it with the help of thought experiments.
At the fifth stage, an experimental verification of the consequences derived from the hypothesis is carried out. A hypothesis either receives empirical confirmation or is refuted as a result of experimental verification. However, the empirical confirmation of the consequences of the hypothesis does not guarantee its truth, and the refutation of one of the consequences does not unequivocally testify to its falsity as a whole. All attempts to build an effective logic of confirmation and refutation of theoretical explanatory hypotheses have not yet been successful. The status of an explanatory law, principle or theory is given to the best hypothesis based on the results of verification. From such a hypothesis, as a rule, maximum explanatory and predictive power is required.
Acquaintance with the general structure of the hypothesis method allows us to define it as a complex complex method of cognition, which includes all its diversity and forms and is aimed at establishing laws, principles and theories.
Sometimes the method of hypothesis is also called the hypothetical-deductive method, bearing in mind the fact that putting forward a hypothesis is always accompanied by a deductive derivation of empirically verifiable consequences from it. But deductive reasoning is not the only logical device used in the framework of the hypothesis method. When establishing the degree of empirical confirmation of a hypothesis, elements of inductive logic are used. Induction is also used at the stage of guessing. An essential place in putting forward a hypothesis is the conclusion by analogy. As already noted, a thought experiment can also be used at the stage of development of a theoretical hypothesis.
An explanatory hypothesis, as an assumption about a law, is not the only kind of hypothesis in science. There are also "existential" hypotheses - assumptions about the existence of elementary particles unknown to science, units of heredity, chemical elements, new biological species, etc. The methods of putting forward and substantiating such hypotheses differ from explanatory hypotheses. Along with the main theoretical hypotheses, there may be auxiliary hypotheses that make it possible to bring the main hypothesis into better agreement with experiment. As a rule, such auxiliary hypotheses are later eliminated. There are also so-called working hypotheses that allow better organizing the collection of empirical material, but do not claim to explain it.
The most important version of the hypothesis method is mathematical hypothesis method, which is typical for sciences with a high degree of mathematization. The hypothesis method described above is the content hypothesis method. Within its framework, meaningful assumptions about the laws are first formulated, and then they receive the corresponding mathematical expression. In the method of mathematical hypothesis, thinking takes a different path. First, to explain quantitative dependencies, a suitable equation is selected from related fields of science, which often involves its modification, and then they try to give a meaningful interpretation to this equation.
The scope of application of the method of mathematical hypothesis is very limited. It is applicable primarily in those disciplines where a rich arsenal of mathematical tools has been accumulated in theoretical research. These disciplines primarily include modern physics. The method of mathematical hypothesis was used in the discovery of the basic laws of quantum mechanics.
Analysis and synthesis.
Under analysis understand the division of an object (mentally or actually) into its component parts for the purpose of studying them separately. As such parts, there may be some material elements of the object or its properties, features, relationships, etc.
Analysis is a necessary stage in the cognition of an object. Since ancient times, analysis has been used, for example, for the decomposition into components of certain substances. Note that the method of analysis played an important role in the collapse of the theory of phlogiston.
Undoubtedly, analysis occupies an important place in the study of objects of the material world. But it is only the first stage of the process of cognition.
To comprehend an object as a single whole, one cannot limit oneself to studying only its constituent parts. In the process of cognition, it is necessary to reveal the objectively existing connections between them, to consider them together, in unity. To carry out this second stage in the process of cognition - to move from the study of individual constituent parts of an object to the study of it as a single connected whole is possible only if the method of analysis is supplemented by another method - synthesis.
In the process of synthesis, the constituent parts (sides, properties, features, etc.) of the object under study, dissected as a result of the analysis, are joined together. On this basis, further study of the object takes place, but already as a single whole. At the same time, synthesis does not mean a simple mechanical connection of disconnected elements into a single system. It reveals the place and role of each element in the system of the whole, establishes their interrelation and interdependence, i.e., allows us to understand the true dialectical unity of the object under study.
Analysis fixes mainly that specific thing that distinguishes the parts from each other. Synthesis, on the other hand, reveals that essentially common thing that links the parts into a single whole. Analysis, which provides for the implementation of synthesis, has the allocation of the essential as its central core. Then the whole does not look the same as when the mind “first met” with it, but much deeper, more meaningful.
Analysis and synthesis are also successfully used in the sphere of human mental activity, that is, in theoretical knowledge. But here, as well as at the empirical level of cognition, analysis and synthesis are not two operations separated from each other. In essence, they are, as it were, two sides of a single analytical-synthetic method of cognition.
These two interrelated methods of research receive their concretization in each branch of science. They can turn from a general technique into a special method: for example, there are specific methods of mathematical, chemical, and social analysis. The analytical method has been developed in some philosophical schools and directions. The same can be said about synthesis.
Induction and deduction.
Induction (from lat. inductio- induction, inducement) is a formal logical conclusion that leads to a general conclusion based on particular premises. In other words, it is the movement of our thinking from the particular to the general.
Induction is widely used in scientific knowledge. Finding similar features, properties in many objects of a certain class, the researcher concludes that these features, properties are inherent in all objects. this class. Along with other methods of cognition, the inductive method played an important role in the discovery of some laws of nature (universal gravity, atmospheric pressure, thermal expansion of bodies, etc.).
Induction used in scientific knowledge (scientific induction) can be implemented in the form of the following methods:
1. The method of single similarity (in all cases of observing a phenomenon, only one common factor is found, all others are different; therefore, this single similar factor is the cause of this phenomenon).
2. The method of a single difference (if the circumstances of the occurrence of a phenomenon and the circumstances under which it does not occur are similar in almost everything and differ only in one factor that is present only in the first case, then we can conclude that this factor is the cause of this phenomena).
3. Combined method of similarity and difference (is a combination of the above two methods).
4. The method of concomitant changes (if certain changes in one phenomenon each time entail some changes in another phenomenon, then this implies the conclusion about causation these events).
5. Method of residuals (if a complex phenomenon is caused by a multifactorial cause, and some of these factors are known as the cause of some part of this phenomenon, then the conclusion follows: the cause of another part of the phenomenon is the remaining factors included in the general cause of this phenomenon).
The founder of the classical inductive method of cognition is F. Bacon. But he interpreted induction extremely broadly, considered it the most important method of discovering new truths in science, the main means of scientific knowledge of nature.
In fact, the above methods of scientific induction serve mainly to find empirical relationships between the experimentally observed properties of objects and phenomena.
Deduction (from lat. deductio- deduction) is the receipt of particular conclusions based on the knowledge of some general provisions. In other words, it is the movement of our thinking from the general to the particular, the individual.
But the especially great cognitive significance of deduction is manifested in the case when the general premise is not just an inductive generalization, but some kind of hypothetical assumption, for example, a new scientific idea. In this case, deduction is the starting point for the birth of a new theoretical system. The theoretical knowledge created in this way predetermines the further course of empirical research and directs the construction of new inductive generalizations.
The acquisition of new knowledge through deduction exists in all natural sciences, but the deductive method is especially important in mathematics. Operating with mathematical abstractions and building their reasoning on very general principles, mathematicians are forced most often to use deduction. And mathematics is, perhaps, the only proper deductive science.
In the science of modern times, the prominent mathematician and philosopher R. Descartes was the propagandist of the deductive method of cognition.
But, despite the attempts that have taken place in the history of science and philosophy to separate induction from deduction, to oppose them in the real process of scientific knowledge, these two methods are not used as isolated, isolated from each other. Each of them is used at a corresponding stage of the cognitive process.
Moreover, in the process of using the inductive method, deduction is often “hidden” as well. “Generalizing the facts in accordance with some ideas, we thereby indirectly derive the generalizations we receive from these ideas, and we are far from always aware of this. It seems that our thought moves directly from facts to generalizations, that is, that there is pure induction here. In fact, in conformity with some ideas, in other words, being implicitly guided by them in the process of generalizing facts, our thought indirectly proceeds from ideas to these generalizations, and, consequently, deduction also takes place here ... We can say that in in all cases when we generalize, in accordance with any philosophical provisions, our conclusions are not only induction, but also hidden deduction.
Emphasizing the necessary connection between induction and deduction, F. Engels strongly advised scientists: “Induction and deduction are interconnected in the same necessary way as synthesis and analysis. Instead of unilaterally exalting one of them to the skies at the expense of the other, one should try to apply each in its place, and this can be achieved only if one does not lose sight of their connection with each other, their mutual complement to each other.
Analogy and modeling.
Under analogy similarity, the similarity of some properties, features or relationships of objects that are generally different is understood. The establishment of similarities (or differences) between objects is carried out as a result of their comparison. Thus, comparison underlies the method of analogy.
If a logical conclusion is made about the presence of any property, attribute, relationship of the object under study on the basis of establishing its similarity with other objects, then this conclusion is called inference by analogy.
The degree of probability of obtaining a correct conclusion by analogy will be the higher: 1) the more common properties of the compared objects are known; 2) the more essential the common properties found in them; and 3) the deeper the mutual regular connection of these similar properties is known. At the same time, it must be borne in mind that if the object, in relation to which a conclusion is made by analogy with another object, has some property that is incompatible with the property, the existence of which must be concluded, then the general similarity of these objects loses all meaning. .
The analogy method is used in various fields of science: in mathematics, physics, chemistry, cybernetics, in the humanities, etc. The well-known energy scientist V. A. Venikov well said about the cognitive value of the analogy method: “Sometimes they say:“ Analogy - not a proof”... But if you think about it, you can easily understand that scientists do not seek to prove anything only in this way. Isn’t it enough that a correctly seen similarity gives a powerful impetus to creativity?.. Analogy is capable of jumping thought into new, unknown orbits, and, of course, the position that analogy, if handled with due care, is the simplest and most a clear path from the old to the new.”
There are different types of inferences by analogy. But what they have in common is that in all cases one object is directly investigated, and a conclusion is made about another object. Therefore, inference by analogy in the most general sense can be defined as the transfer of information from one object to another. In this case, the first object, which is actually subjected to research, is called model, and another object, to which the information obtained as a result of the study of the first object (model) is transferred, is called original(sometimes - a prototype, sample, etc.). Thus, the model always acts as an analogy, i.e., the model and the object (original) displayed with its help are in a certain similarity (similarity).
“...Modeling is understood as the study of a simulated object (original), based on the one-to-one correspondence of a certain part of the properties of the original and the object (model) that replaces it in the study and includes the construction of a model, studying it and transferring the information obtained to the simulated object - the original” .
The use of modeling is dictated by the need to reveal such aspects of objects that are either impossible to comprehend through direct study, or it is unprofitable to study them in this way for purely economic reasons. A person, for example, cannot directly observe the process of the natural formation of diamonds, the origin and development of life on Earth, a whole series of phenomena of the micro- and mega-world. Therefore, one has to resort to artificial reproduction of such phenomena in a form convenient for observation and study. In some cases, it is much more profitable and economical to build and study its model instead of directly experimenting with the object.
Depending on the nature of the models used in scientific research, there are several types of modeling.
1. Mental (ideal) modeling. This type of modeling includes various mental representations in the form of certain imaginary models. It should be noted that mental (ideal) models can often be realized materially in the form of sensually perceived physical models.
2. Physical modeling. It is characterized by a physical similarity between the model and the original and aims to reproduce in the model the processes inherent in the original. According to the results of the study of certain physical properties of the model, the phenomena that occur (or may occur) in the so-called “natural conditions” are judged.
Currently, physical modeling is widely used for the development and experimental study of various structures, machines, for a better understanding of some natural phenomena, to learn efficient and safe mining practices, etc.
3. Symbolic (sign) modeling. It is associated with a conditionally sign representation of some properties, relations of the original object. Symbolic (sign) models include a variety of topological and graph representations (in the form of graphs, nomograms, diagrams, etc.) of the objects under study or, for example, models presented in the form of chemical symbols and reflecting the state or ratio of elements during chemical reactions.
A special and very important type of symbolic (sign) modeling is mathematical modeling. The symbolic language of mathematics makes it possible to express the properties, sides, relations of objects and phenomena of the most diverse nature. Relationships between various quantities describing the functioning of such an object or phenomenon can be represented by the corresponding equations (differential, integral, integro-differential, algebraic) and their systems.
4. Numerical simulation on a computer. This type of modeling is based on a previously created mathematical model of the object or phenomenon under study and is used in cases of large amounts of calculations required to study this model.
Numerical modeling is especially important where the physical picture of the phenomenon under study is not entirely clear, and the internal mechanism of interaction is not known. By computer calculations various options facts are being accumulated, which makes it possible, ultimately, to select the most real and probable situations. The active use of numerical simulation methods makes it possible to drastically reduce the time of scientific and design developments.
The modeling method is constantly evolving: some types of models are being replaced by others as science progresses. At the same time, one thing remains unchanged: the importance, relevance, and sometimes the indispensability of modeling as a method of scientific knowledge.
1. Alekseev P.V., Panin A.V. "Philosophy" M.: Prospekt, 2000
2. Leshkevich T.G. “Philosophy of Science: Traditions and Innovations” M.: PRIOR, 2001
3. Spirkin A.G. "Fundamentals of Philosophy" M.: Politizdat, 1988
4. "Philosophy" under. ed. Kokhanovsky V.P. Rostov-n/D.: Phoenix, 2000
5. Golubintsev V.O., Dantsev A.A., Lyubchenko V.S. “Philosophy for technical universities”. Rostov n / a.: Phoenix, 2001
6. Agofonov V.P., Kazakov D.F., Rachinsky D.D. "Philosophy" M.: MSHA, 2000
7. Frolov I.T. “Introduction to Philosophy” Ch-2, M.: Politizdat, 1989
8. Ruzavin G.I. “Methodology of scientific research” M.: UNITY-DANA, 1999.
9. Kanke V.A. “Basic Philosophical Directions and Concepts of Science. Results of the XX century. - M.: Logos, 2000.
The concept of scientific knowledge, its features
Science is a form of people's spiritual activity aimed at producing knowledge about nature, society and knowledge itself, with the immediate goal of comprehending the truth and discovering new objective laws based on the generalization of real facts in their interconnection, in order to anticipate trends in the development of reality and contribute to it. change.
Scientific knowledge is a mature form of human cognitive activity.
Features of scientific knowledge:
1) scientific knowledge deals with a special set of objects of reality that cannot be reduced to objects of ordinary consciousness; 2) scientific knowledge is carried out as a programmed process;
3) scientific knowledge is a systematic activity;
4) development and formation of methodology as a special branch of scientific research, designed to shape scientific research;
5) scientific knowledge uses a special set of tools and techniques;
6) scientific knowledge has a specific conceptual apparatus;
7) scientific knowledge is purposeful, meeting certain needs of society;
8) consistency and validity of scientific research.
The social function of scientific knowledge is as follows. Man is a part of living nature. Man cannot live outside of nature. Primordial nature did not suit man (housing, clothing, food), people were forced to create artificial nature. To create this nature, they had to learn to penetrate deeply into the essence of the natural process, to reveal the secrets of nature. People had to learn to explain the phenomena of nature, to foresee the future scientifically. This is what contributed to the emergence of scientific knowledge. It was necessary to investigate a person in order to make him a subject of activity.
Interaction of empiricism and theory in the historical development of science
1. Empiricism and theory characterize two forms of scientific knowledge, as well as structural components and levels of scientific knowledge;
2. The division into empirical and theoretical knowledge in scientific knowledge is based on the separation of empirical and theoretical research, which differ in goals;
3. Empirical research is directed directly at the object and relies on observational and experimental data, accumulating scientific facts;
4. Theoretical research is connected with the improvement and development of the conceptual apparatus of science and is aimed at a comprehensive knowledge of objective reality in its essential connections and patterns;
5. These two forms of scientific research are organically interconnected and presuppose each other in the integral structure of scientific knowledge:
Empirical research, highlighting new observational and experimental data, stimulates the development theoretical research by setting new challenges for them;
Theoretical research, developing and concretizing the theoretical content of science, opens up new perspectives for explaining and foreseeing facts, orienting and directing empirical research.
Forms of scientific knowledge: problem, hypothesis, theory
Any scientific activity is activated when a scientific problem appears. scientific problem is a problem that cannot be solved on the basis of current scientific knowledge.
To solve a scientific problem that has arisen, researchers put forward scientific hypotheses, that is, assumptions about the possibility of solving a scientific problem.
The set of conditions for putting forward hypotheses, the methods for their development and testing constitute the hypothetical method. Not every assumption or conjecture is a scientific hypothesis. To be scientific, a hypothesis must satisfy a number of conditions: comply with the principles of the scientific worldview; take into account already existing laws; rely on facts, explain them and have the ability to foresee new ones; allow experimental, empirical verification; have a single principle of explanation without resorting to additional assumptions. The verification of the hypothesis does not consist in single experimental acts, but in the total socio-historical practice.
When a hypothesis is confirmed by practice, it turns into a theory. However, in the process of development and cognition, many theories turn out to be relative truths.
Functions of hypothesis and theory.
1. Hypotheses provide probable knowledge, theories - reliable. The theory performs the function of explaining the existing facts, reveals the essence of phenomena. The hypothesis gives an explanation at the level of the possible, the theory - at the level of the real.
2. Prediction and scientific foresight. Theories reflect the internal, necessary aspects and connections of the object under study, the laws of its functioning and development. An adequate understanding of these connections and laws makes it possible to foresee the further course of development of the object under study.
The concept of methodology, method and methodology of scientific knowledge
Methodology is the doctrine of the methods of cognition and transformation of reality.
Method - a set of approaches, techniques, methods and means of scientific knowledge. Approach is the worldview of a knowing person. Techniques are ideal methods of cognition. Means - material and technical base.
Methodology - specific techniques, means of obtaining and processing factual material.
The methodology uses:
1. General philosophical methods: dialectics and metaphysics.
The following can be distinguished specific differences metaphysics from dialectics:
On the issue of connections between the old and the new - if dialectics recognizes the existence of connections between the old and the new, then metaphysics completely rejects them, believing that the new completely replaces the old;
On the question of the cause of motion - according to metaphysics, motion cannot come from matter itself, the cause of motion is an external first push;
On the question of the relationship between quantity and quality, the metaphysicians do not see the relationship between quantity and quality; in their opinion, quantity changes due to quantity (increase, decrease, etc.), quality changes due to quality (that is, it improves, worsens in itself);
On the question of the direction of movement, development - if dialectics considers that development occurs mainly in an upward spiral, then metaphysics recognizes development either in a straight line or in a circle, or does not recognize the direction of development at all;
In the system of thinking - if the dialectical way of thinking reduces to the steps "thesis - antithesis - synthesis", then the metaphysical one relies on the formulas "either - or", "if not that, then this", that is, metaphysical thinking is inflexible and one-sided;
In relation to the surrounding reality - dialectics sees the world in all its diversity ("color vision of the world"), and metaphysics - monotonously, according to the principle "black - white";
In relation to cognition, according to dialectics, cognition is a gradual and purposeful process towards absolute truth, through the consistent comprehension of yet cognizable (relative) truths (that is, from simple to complex and absolute, taking into account their unity);
According to metaphysics absolute truth can be known immediately, with the help of supersensible and superexperienced methods that are "speculative" in nature;
In relation to the surrounding world - dialectics sees the world as integral and interconnected, metaphysics - consisting of separate things and phenomena.
In this way, metaphysics and dialectics are two opposite theoretical systems of understanding reality and development.
scientific knowledge - this is a type and level of knowledge aimed at producing true knowledge about reality, the discovery of objective laws based on a generalization of real facts. It rises above ordinary cognition, that is, spontaneous cognition, connected with the life activity of people and perceiving reality at the level of the phenomenon.
Epistemology - it is a science of knowledge.
Features of scientific knowledge:
Firstly, its main task is to discover and explain the objective laws of reality - natural, social and thinking. Hence the orientation of the study to the general, essential properties of the object and their expression in the system of abstraction.
Secondly, the immediate goal and highest value of scientific knowledge is an objective truth, comprehended mainly by rational means and methods.
Thirdly, to a greater extent than other types of knowledge, it is focused on being put into practice.
Fourth, science has developed a special language, characterized by the accuracy of the use of terms, symbols, schemes.
Fifth, scientific knowledge is a complex process of reproduction of knowledge that forms an integral, developing system of concepts, theories, hypotheses, and laws.
At sixth, scientific knowledge is characterized by both rigorous evidence, the validity of the results obtained, the reliability of the conclusions, and the presence of hypotheses, conjectures, and assumptions.
Seventh, scientific knowledge needs and resorts to special tools (means) of knowledge: scientific equipment, measuring instruments, devices.
Eighth, scientific knowledge is characterized by process. In its development, it goes through two main stages: empirical and theoretical, which are closely related.
Ninth, the field of scientific knowledge is verifiable and systematized information about various phenomena of life.
Levels of scientific knowledge:
Empirical level cognition is a direct experimental, mostly inductive, study of an object. It includes obtaining the necessary initial facts - data on individual aspects and relationships of the object, understanding and describing the obtained data in the language of science, and their primary systematization. Cognition at this stage still remains at the level of the phenomenon, but the prerequisites for the penetration of the essence of the object have already been created.
Theoretical level characterized by deep penetration into the essence of the object under study, not only by identifying, but also by explaining the patterns of its development and functioning, by constructing theoretical model object and its in-depth analysis.
Forms of scientific knowledge:
scientific fact, scientific problem, scientific hypothesis, proof, scientific theory, paradigm, unified scientific picture of the world.
scientific fact - this is the initial form of scientific knowledge, in which the primary knowledge about the object is fixed; it is a reflection in the consciousness of the subject of the fact of reality. At the same time, a scientific fact is only one that can be verified and described in scientific terms.
scientific problem - it is a contradiction between new facts and existing theoretical knowledge. A scientific problem can also be defined as a kind of knowledge about ignorance, since it arises when the cognizing subject realizes the incompleteness of this or that knowledge about the object and sets the goal of eliminating this gap. The problem includes a problematic issue, a project for solving the problem and its content.
scientific hypothesis - this is a scientifically substantiated assumption that explains certain parameters of the object under study and does not contradict known scientific facts. It must satisfactorily explain the object under study, be verifiable in principle, and answer the questions posed by the scientific problem.
In addition, the main content of the hypothesis should not be in conflict with the laws established in the given system of knowledge. The assumptions that make up the content of the hypothesis must be sufficient so that they can be used to explain all the facts about which the hypothesis is put forward. The assumptions of a hypothesis should not be logically inconsistent.
The advancement of new hypotheses in science is associated with the need for a new vision of the problem and the emergence of problem situations.
Proof - this is a confirmation of the hypothesis.
Types of evidence:
Practice that directly confirms
Indirect theoretical proof, including confirmation by arguments pointing to facts and laws (inductive path), derivation of a hypothesis from other, more general and already proven provisions (deductive path), comparison, analogy, modeling, etc.
A proven hypothesis is the basis for constructing a scientific theory.
scientific theory - it is a form of reliable scientific knowledge about a certain set of objects, which is a system of interrelated statements and evidence and contains methods for explaining, transforming and predicting the phenomena of a given object area. In theory, in the form of principles and laws, knowledge is expressed about the essential connections that determine the emergence and existence of certain objects. The main cognitive functions of the theory are: synthesizing, explanatory, methodological, predictive and practical.
All theories develop within certain paradigms.
Paradigm - it is a special way of organizing knowledge and vision of the world, influencing the direction of further research. paradigm
can be compared with an optical device through which we look at a particular phenomenon.
Many theories are constantly being synthesized in unified scientific picture of the world, that is, an integral system of ideas about the general principles and laws of the structure of being.
Methods of scientific knowledge:
Method(from the Greek. Metodos - the path to something) - it is a way of activity in any of its forms.
The method includes techniques that ensure the achievement of the goal, regulating human activity and the general principles from which these techniques follow. Methods of cognitive activity form the direction of knowledge at a particular stage, the order of cognitive procedures. In terms of their content, the methods are objective, since they are ultimately determined by the nature of the object, the laws of its functioning.
scientific method - this is a set of rules, techniques and principles that ensure the natural knowledge of the object and the receipt of reliable knowledge.
Classification of methods of scientific knowledge can be done for various reasons:
First foundation. According to the nature and role in cognition, they distinguish methods - tricks, which consist of specific rules, techniques and algorithms of actions (observation, experiment, etc.) and methods-approaches, which indicate the direction and general method of research (system ANALYSIS, functional ANALYSIS, diachronic method, etc.).
Second base. By functional purpose allocate:
a) universal methods of thinking (analysis, synthesis, comparison, generalization, induction, deduction, etc.);
b) empirical level methods (observation, experiment, survey, measurement);
c) theoretical level methods (modeling, thought experiment, analogy, mathematical methods, philosophical methods, induction and deduction).
Third ground is the degree of generality. Here the methods are divided into:
a) philosophical methods (dialectical, formal-logical, intuitive, phenomenological, hermeneutic);
b) general scientific methods, that is, methods that guide the course of knowledge in many sciences, but unlike philosophical methods, each general scientific method (observation, experiment, analysis, synthesis, modeling, etc.) solves its own, characteristic task only for it ;
c) special methods.
General human methods of thinking:
- Comparison- establishing the similarities and differences of objects of reality (for example, we compare the characteristics of two engines);
- ANALYSIS- mental dismemberment of an object as a whole
(we divide each engine into constituent elements of the characteristic);
- Synthesis- mental unification into a single whole of the elements selected as a result of the analysis (we mentally combine the best characteristics and elements of both engines in one - virtual);
- abstraction- selection of some features of the object and distraction from others (for example, we study only the design of the engine and temporarily do not take into account its content and functioning);
- Induction- the movement of thought from the particular to the general, from individual data to more general provisions, and as a result - to the essence (we take into account all cases of engine failures of this type and, based on this, we come to conclusions about the prospects for its further operation);
- Deduction- the movement of thought from the general to the particular (based on the general laws of the WORK of the engine, we make predictions about the further functioning of a particular engine);
- Modeling- construction of a mental object (model) similar to the real one, the study of which will allow obtaining the information necessary for knowing the real object (creating a model of a more advanced engine);
- Analogy- a conclusion about the similarity of objects in some properties, on the basis of similarity in other signs (a conclusion about an engine breakdown by a characteristic knock);
- Generalization- the union of individual objects in a certain concept (for example, the creation of the concept of "engine").
Global problems
The global problems of modernity should be understood as a set of problems on the solution of which the further existence of civilization depends.
Global problems are generated by the uneven development of different areas of the life of modern mankind and the contradictions generated in the socio-economic, political, ideological, socio-natural and other relations of people. These problems affect the life of mankind as a whole.
Global problems of mankind- these are problems that affect the vital interests of the entire population of the planet and require the joint efforts of all states of the world for their solution.
North-South problem- This is the problem of economic relations between developed countries and developing ones. Its essence lies in the fact that in order to bridge the gap in the levels of socio-economic development between developed and developing countries, the latter require various concessions from developed countries, in particular, expanding access for their goods to the markets of developed countries, increasing the flow of knowledge and capital (especially in the form of assistance), write-offs of debts and other measures in relation to them.
One of the main global problems is the problem of poverty. Poverty is understood as the inability to provide the simplest and most affordable living conditions for the majority of people in a given country. Large scale poverty, especially in developing countries, poses a serious threat not only to national but also to global sustainable development.
World food problem lies in the inability of mankind to date to fully provide itself with vital food. This problem appears in practice as a problem absolute food shortage(malnutrition and hunger) in the least developed countries, and nutritional imbalances in the developed. Its solution will largely depend on the efficient use of natural resources, scientific and technological progress in the field of agriculture and the level of state support.
Global energy problem is the problem of providing mankind with fuel and energy at the present time and in the foreseeable future. The main reason for the emergence of the global energy problem should be considered the rapid growth in the consumption of mineral fuels in the 20th century. If the developed countries are now solving this problem primarily by slowing down the growth of their demand by reducing energy intensity, then in other countries there is a relatively rapid increase in energy consumption. To this may be added growing competition in the world energy market between developed countries and new large industrial countries (China, India, Brazil). All these circumstances, combined with military and political instability in some regions, can cause significant fluctuations in the level of world prices for energy resources and seriously affect the dynamics of supply and demand, as well as the production and consumption of energy products, sometimes creating crisis situations.
The ecological potential of the world economy is increasingly undermined by the economic activity of mankind. The answer to this was concept of environmentally sustainable development. It involves the development of all countries of the world, taking into account the present needs, but not undermining the interests of future generations.
Environmental protection is an important part of development. In the 70s. 20 century economists realized the importance of environmental problems for economic development. The processes of environmental degradation can be self-reproducing, which threatens society with irreversible destruction and depletion of resources.
Global demographic problem falls into two aspects: the population explosion in a number of countries and regions of the developing world and the demographic aging of the population of developed and transition countries. For the former, the solution is to increase the rate of economic growth and reduce the rate of population growth. For the second - emigration and reforming the pension system.
The relationship between population growth and economic growth has long been the subject of study by economists. As a result of research, two approaches have been developed to assess the impact of population growth on economic development. The first approach is to some extent connected with the theory of Malthus, who believed that population growth outstrips food growth and therefore the world population inevitably becomes poorer. The modern approach to assessing the role of population on the economy is complex and reveals both positive and negative factors influencing population growth on economic growth.
Many experts believe that the real problem is not population growth per se, but the following problems:
§ underdevelopment - backwardness in development;
§ depletion of world resources and destruction of the environment.
The problem of human development is the problem of matching the qualitative characteristics of the labor force with the nature of the modern economy. In the conditions of post-industrialization, the requirements for physical qualities and especially for the education of an employee, including his ability to constantly improve his skills, increase. However, the development of the qualitative characteristics of the labor force in the world economy is extremely uneven. The worst performance in this regard is shown by developing countries, which, however, are the main source of replenishment of the world labor resources. This is what determines the global nature of the problem of human development.
Increasing globalization, interdependence and the reduction of temporal and spatial barriers are creating a situation of collective insecurity from various threats from which a person cannot always be saved by his state. This requires the creation of conditions that enhance the ability of a person to independently withstand risks and threats.
The ocean problem is a problem of conservation and rational use of its spaces and resources. At present, the World Ocean, as a closed ecological system, can hardly withstand the increased anthropogenic load many times over, and a real threat of its death is being created. Therefore, the global problem of the World Ocean is, first of all, the problem of its survival and, consequently, the survival of modern man.
If we consider that scientific knowledge is based on rationality, it is necessary to understand that non-scientific or extra-scientific knowledge is not fiction or fiction. Non-scientific knowledge, just like scientific knowledge, is produced in some intellectual communities in accordance with certain norms and standards. Non-scientific and scientific knowledge have their own means and sources of knowledge. As is known, many forms of non-scientific cognition are older than cognition, which is recognized as scientific. For example, alchemy is much older than chemistry, and astrology is older than astronomy.
Scientific and non-scientific knowledge have sources. For example, the first is based on the results of experiments and sciences. Its form can be considered a theory. The laws of science result in certain hypotheses. The forms of the second are considered myths, folk wisdom, common sense and practical activity. In some cases, non-scientific knowledge can also be based on feeling, which leads to the so-called revelation or metaphysical insight. Faith can be an example of non-scientific knowledge. Unscientific knowledge can be carried out with the help of art, for example, when creating an artistic image.
Differences between scientific and non-scientific knowledge
First, the main difference between scientific knowledge and non-scientific knowledge is the objectivity of the former. A person who adheres to scientific views understands the fact that everything in the world develops regardless of certain desires. Authorities and private opinions cannot influence such a situation. Otherwise, the world could be in chaos and hardly exist at all.
Secondly, scientific knowledge, unlike non-scientific knowledge, is aimed at the result in the future. Scientific fruits, unlike non-scientific ones, cannot always give quick results. Before being discovered, many theories are subject to doubt and persecution by those who do not want to recognize the objectivity of phenomena. A sufficient amount of time may pass before a scientific discovery, in contrast to an unscientific one, is recognized as having taken place. A striking example is the discoveries of Galileo Galileo or Copernicus regarding the motion of the Earth and the structure of the solar Galaxy.
Scientific and non-scientific knowledge are always in confrontation, which causes another difference. Scientific knowledge always goes through the following stages: observation and classification, experiment and explanation of natural phenomena. All this is not inherent in non-scientific knowledge.
Narrow specialization in science is a relatively young phenomenon by historical standards. Analyzing the history of science since ancient times, it is easy to see that all sciences - from physics to psychology - grow from one root, and this root is philosophy.
Speaking of the scientists of the ancient world, they are most often collectively referred to as philosophers. This does not contradict the fact that their works contain ideas that, from a modern point of view, can be attributed to (Democritus’ idea of atoms), psychology (Aristotle’s treatise (“On the Soul”), etc. - these ideas are in any case distinguished by universality understanding of the world. This applies even to those ancient scientists who are recognized for some scientific specialization. For example, Pythagoras is spoken of as about, but even he was looking for the universal laws of the world structure in numerical ratios. That is why he was able to so naturally mathematical ideas in the field of musicology. Precisely Plato also tried to build a model based on his cosmogonic ideas.
Such extreme generalization has been characteristic of philosophy in all ages of its existence, including. But if in antiquity it included the rudiments of all future sciences, then at present these “seeds” have long sprouted and grown into something independent, which raises the question of the relationship of philosophy with other sciences.
The basis of science is experiment. It is in it that the objective facts are established. In philosophy, an experiment is impossible due to the extreme generalization of its subject matter. Studying the most general laws of the existence of the world, a philosopher cannot single out a specific object for experiment, therefore, a philosophical doctrine cannot always be reproduced in practice.
Thus, the similarity of philosophy and science is obvious. Like science, philosophy establishes facts and patterns and systematizes knowledge about the world. The difference lies in the degree of connection between scientific and philosophical theories with concrete facts and practice. In philosophy, this connection is more indirect than in science.
Sources:
- Philosophy and Science
Cognition of reality can be carried out in several ways. V ordinary life a person intuitively or consciously uses everyday, artistic or religious forms of comprehension of the world. There is also a scientific form of knowledge, which has its own set of methods. It is characterized by a conscious division of knowledge into stages.
Features of scientific knowledge
Scientific knowledge is very different from ordinary knowledge. Science has its own set of objects to be studied. Scientific reality is focused not on reflecting the external signs of a phenomenon, but on understanding the deep essence of objects and processes that are in the focus of science.
Science has developed its own special language, developed specific methods for investigating reality. Cognition here occurs indirectly, through the appropriate tools, which are best suited for identifying the patterns of movement of various forms of matter. Philosophy is used as the basis for generalizing conclusions in scientific knowledge.
All stages of scientific knowledge are summarized in a system. The study of the phenomena observed by scientists in nature and society occurs systematically in science. Conclusions are drawn on the basis of objective and verifiable facts, they are distinguished by logical organization and validity. Scientific knowledge uses its own methods of substantiating the reliability of the results and confirming the truth of the knowledge obtained.
Stages of scientific knowledge
Knowledge in science begins with the formulation of a problem. At this stage, the researcher outlines the area of research, identifying already known facts and those aspects of objective reality, knowledge of which is not sufficient. A scientist, setting a problem for himself or the scientific community, usually points to the boundary between the known and the unknown, which needs to be crossed in the process of cognition.
At the second stage of the cognition process, the formulation takes place, which is designed to resolve the situation with insufficient knowledge about the subject. The essence of a hypothesis is to put forward a reasonable assumption, which is based on a certain set of facts to be verified and explained. One of the main requirements for a hypothesis is that it must be verifiable by methods accepted in a given branch of knowledge.
At the next stage of knowledge, the scientist collects primary data and systematizes them. In science, observation and experiment are widely used for this purpose. Data collection is systemic in nature and is subject to the methodological concept adopted by the researcher. The results of the research summarized in the system make it possible to accept or reject the hypothesis put forward earlier.
At the final stage of scientific knowledge, a new scientific concept or theory is built. The researcher summarizes the results of the work and gives the hypothesis the status of knowledge with the property of reliability. As a result, a theory is born that describes and explains in a new way some set of phenomena previously outlined by the scientist.
The provisions of the theory are substantiated from the position of logic and are brought to a single basis. Sometimes, in the course of constructing a theory, a scientist comes across facts that have not been explained. They can serve as a starting point for the organization of new research work, which allows for continuity in the development of concepts and makes scientific knowledge endless.
How to cook ham in the oven at home
Pain in the lower abdomen during pregnancy, reasons for what to do Can the lower abdomen hurt if pregnant
Protein for muscle gain
The best vitamins for men according to customer reviews
How to lose weight on a vegan diet?