Techniques and methods of scientific knowledge. Cognition

Scientific knowledge is characterized by methods, i.e. special rules and techniques of cognitive activity.

Method- is a way to achieve certain results in knowledge and practice. The scientific method includes a system of rules, techniques and procedures used to obtain reliable knowledge. The seriousness of the research depends on the method, on the method of action. F. Bacon compared the method to a lamp that illuminated the way for a traveler wandering in the dark.

IN Ancient Greece one of the most common methods of cognition was observation. Democritus called for observing nature and identifying its laws. Socrates actively used the method discussion and dialogue with your listeners. Plato used dialogue as a way to connect opposing points of view. Aristotle developed logic as the science of the forms and methods of correct thinking and the search for truth.

In the Middle Ages, it was widely practiced in Ph. logical proof method as a way to justify your point of view. Methods of introspection and introspection were also used as methods for comprehending one’s own spiritual world.

In modern times, F. Bacon developed inductive, and R. Descartes - deductive methods. In F.ii it prevailed metaphysical a method that posited being as something unchanging, immovable. In F.i he actively declared himself dialectical method of cognition.

Methods of cognition are usually divided into general (used in all types of human cognitive activity) and purely scientific (general scientific), used primarily in scientific research.

TO general methods knowledge includes such as observation (obtaining primary material), analysis and synthesis (decomposition into parts and their connection), abstraction (selection in objects the most important properties and signs). These are also methods such as generalization (highlighting general properties objects), induction and deduction. This should also include analogy (searching for similarities between objects), modeling, experiment and other methods.

To methods scientific knowledge include those that are used in empirical and theoretical research.

Methods of empirical scientific knowledge- this is first of all an observation, a description, an analogy. They are very actively used in many sciences, and especially in biology and astronomy.

Methods of theoretical research very diverse. Thus, formalization is the operation of signs and symbols, formulas. They seem to replace a real object or process. This method actively used in mathematics, chemistry, physics.

Axiomatic method is based on the use of axioms, i.e. provisions, the truth of which cannot be doubted due to their repeated proof and even obviousness.

Genetic method allows you to trace the occurrence of certain phenomena and processes. For example, to identify the genesis of life on Earth, to study the origin of man -

Historical method reproduces the entire history of the subject, taken in all its details and forms of manifestation.

Unlike historical logical method tracks only the general logic (direction) of the development of the subject, the most important trends and contradictions of this process. This method also reproduces the history of an object, but, as it were, “cleanses” it of the random and unimportant in it, of small details, and highlights the laws of development in it.

Modeling as a method there is the creation of ideal (mental) models (substitutes) of objects. This allows one to reproduce the processes being studied and analyze them. It is possible, for example, to create a theoretical model of society's transition to rich relationships and trace all possible manifestations of this process.

By using method of ascent from abstract to concrete a transition is achieved from incomplete knowledge to complete (specific) knowledge. The method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete is the path and pattern of development of all sciences without exception, the entire history of human cognitive activity.

Scientific knowledge has different forms of its existence.

Scientific fact represents a real event or phenomenon recorded by our consciousness as objectively existing or existing. It is known, for example, that A.S. Pushkin died in a duel. Facts are the “air of science”, its empirical basis.

Hypothesis– this is a scientifically based assumption or a system of assumptions about the causes of facts and phenomena. There are, for example, hypotheses about the origin of life on Earth, about the nature of the Tunguska meteorite, etc. Hypotheses encourage the search for truth, but they are “not yet a fact.” They represent only probabilistic knowledge about something. In the case of well-reasoned evidence, the hypothesis becomes reliable knowledge.

Idea is generalized knowledge that explains the essence (essence) of objects, processes and phenomena. This is, for example, the idea of the development of all things in dialectical philosophy, the idea of class struggle in Marxism and other ideas.

Theory is a system of generalized, reliable and ordered knowledge about an object. It describes, explains and predicts its development and functioning. There is, for example, the theory of man, the theory of the atomic nucleus, the theory of natural selection and others.

The scientific picture of the world is a picture of how the world works and how it moves and develops. It is a very complex synthesis of knowledge, a holistic image of the world obtained with the help various sciences. There are also concepts of the F., religious picture of the world. The scientific picture of the world is not only a system of knowledge, but also the ideal to which scientific knowledge strives.

Chapter 1. GENERAL CONCEPT OF THE METHOD OF COGNITION

Any science academic discipline have a certain method. A method is understood as a set of principles, rules, techniques scientific activity, used to obtain true knowledge that objectively reflects reality. Methodology is the doctrine of method, the theoretical justification of the methods used in science for cognition of the material world.

The more advanced the methods for studying phenomena and the more such methods, the wider the possibilities of science.

The fruitfulness of scientific research, the degree and depth of knowledge of reality largely depend on the methods used by researchers. The methods themselves are a product of human creative, intellectual activity; they are inextricably linked with the subject of study. The constant search for new research techniques, methods, and methods ensures an increase in scientific knowledge and a deepening of ideas about the laws inherent in the subject. The theory of state and law is not a collection of ready-made truths, canons or dogmas. This is an ever-evolving, living science

, which is in continuous search. By updating and developing its methods of cognition, it is approaching the realization of its main purpose - to serve as a scientific guideline for state legal practice. So F. Bacon compared the method with a lantern illuminating the path of a scientist, believing that even a lame person walking along the road with a lantern will identify the one who is running in the dark without a road. The centuries-old world experience of state and legal development has given rise to numerous and diverse political and legal theories and doctrines. They all rely on, approaches and receive far from identical conclusions and results: some theories reject the very possibility of knowing the essence of the state and law, others believe that the state and law arise and develop spontaneously, others claim that the state and law are created and improved by the will of people.

Any theory, using its methods of cognition, brings grains of knowledge into the common treasury, allowing for a deeper and more complete understanding of certain aspects and facets of the phenomena being studied. Today, the most acceptable is a constructive-critical approach to the assessment and analysis of past and present state legal doctrines.

Today in our country there is freedom of choice of methods, methods, approaches to the study of state and law, pluralism of teachings and opinions, ideological diversity.

The methods of the theory of state and law are closely related to its subject. The latter answers the question of what theory studies, methods - how, in what ways it does it. The method is based on the subject of theory, because without theory, the method remains pointless, and science remains meaningless. In turn, only a theory armed with adequate methods can fulfill the tasks and functions facing it.

Theory and methods arise simultaneously, they are subject to similar requirements: not only the results, but also the path to them must be true. But theory and methods are not identical, cannot and should not replace each other.

The methodological basis of legal science is the materialistic theory of knowledge. According to this theory:

· things (object of knowledge) exist objectively, independently of the knowing subject, they are accessible to human knowledge;

· the only source of knowledge is sensations, which are images of objects in the external world;

· thinking differs from sensory cognition in that it is not direct, but mediated cognition as a process of abstraction, the formation of concepts and laws;

· thinking is objective because it is dialectical and follows the laws of logic;

· thinking is not only physiological and social, but also subjective, since it is carried out by the subject, since the external world is reflected in ideal, subjective forms of images, logical forms (concepts, judgments, conclusions);

· the subjective nature of thinking can serve as a source of errors and misconceptions;

· thinking is closely connected with language, language is the immediate reality of thought, language is a means of materializing the process and results of cognition;

· the method of cognition depends on the characteristics of the objects being cognized, the goals that are set in the course of cognition, and the conditions of cognition.

Chapter 2. PHILOSOPHICAL METHODS

2.1. Method of materialistic dialectics

According to the fair remark of the Serbian scientist R. Lukic,<<нельзя стать хорошим юристом, оставаясь лишь <<чистым>> a dialectician who does not have the knowledge necessary to apply the special methods inherent in law. However, one cannot become one even if one confines himself exclusively to special, purely professional methods and does not approach law from the standpoint of a more general, dialectical method>> .

The construction of the classical system of dialectics is associated with the name of the German philosopher G. W. F. Hegel. As an objective idealist, Hegel considered the world idea, reason, to be primary, and everything material that expresses this idea to be secondary. The spiritual in this case is the creator of the surrounding world. Hegel gave a classic analysis of the philosophical pair categories: quality and quantity, cause and effect, chance and necessity. He formulated three basic laws of dialectics: the law of the transition of quantity into quality, the law of unity and struggle of opposites, the law of the negation of negation.

Marxism, having adopted Hegel's dialectics and the previous teachings of materialists, solved the problem of the relationship between matter and consciousness in favor of the primacy of matter and being. Matter, the world exist by themselves, and not because they are reflected in human consciousness.

The method of materialistic dialectics, combining the dialectical approach to knowledge of the surrounding world with its materialistic understanding, is the most effective way studying natural, social and mental processes.

When studying law, the method of materialist dialectics is manifested in the fact that the state and law are considered as phenomena that, firstly, are determined by human nature, socio-economic, political, spiritual and other conditions of society.

Secondly, they are closely related to other social phenomena. It is difficult to find a sphere of social relations in society where the state and law do not manifest themselves. By correlating the state and law with other social phenomena, we can determine them character traits, role and place in society.

Thirdly, the state and law are constantly evolving. Each new stage in the forward movement of society is also a new stage in the development of the state and law. Gradual quantitative changes in the structure of the state, its functions, and legislation lead to qualitative transformations in the state legal system.

Each of the laws of dialectics manifests itself in any legal phenomenon or process. Thus, any legal norm, and especially the newly adopted one, reflects the unity and inconsistency of regulated social relations, coinciding and at the same time contradictory interests. It manifests itself when changes in social life, gradually accumulating, reach a new qualitative state and require a fundamentally different legal norm.

The main philosophical categories include such paired categories as the individual and the general, cause and effect, necessity and chance, content and form, essence and phenomenon, possibility and reality. For example, an analysis of lawmaking and law enforcement from the standpoint of the category of cause and effect shows that in relation to<<общественные отношения – норма права>> the former act as a cause, the latter as an effect.

Society and the state can and must be considered as a relationship between the general and the individual. This analysis brings us to the problem of interaction between civil society and the state.

The categories of necessity and chance, applied to the mechanism of the state, show the objective necessity of the separation of powers in the state as a means of mutual deterrence and control.

The frontal application of the method of materialist dialectics in the state-legal sphere formulated the leading direction in the theory of state and law - the philosophy of state and law. Moreover, the philosophy of law developed a long time ago, we are only talking about clarifying its subject; the problem of state philosophy is on the agenda today. The philosophy of the state has as its task the understanding of the essence, nature and purpose of such fundamental categories as power, state, civil society.

The method of materialistic dialectics is used in legal sciences in conjunction with private methods.

2 .2. Idealistic approaches

Representatives of such a philosophical trend as idealism associate the existence of state and law either with objective reason (objective idealists), or with human consciousness, his experiences, subjective and conscious efforts (subjective idealists). Concentrating on the rejection of the dominance of the social over the spiritual, subjective idealists believe that it is not external social factors determine the development of the state and law, and the internal spiritual principle contained in the soul of the individual. Nowadays they have become widespread various options objective and subjective idealistic approaches to explaining state and law. These include pragmatism, intuitionism and the axiological approach.

Theory of knowledge was first mentioned by Plato in his book The Republic. Then he identified two types of knowledge - sensory and mental, and this theory has been preserved to this day. Cognition - This is the process of acquiring knowledge about the world around us, its patterns and phenomena.

IN structure of cognition two elements:

subject(“knower” - person, scientific society);
an object(“cognizable” - nature, its phenomena, social phenomena, people, objects, etc.).

Methods of cognition.

Methods of cognition generalized on two levels: empirical level knowledge and theoretical level.

Empirical methods:

Observation(studying an object without intervention).
Experiment(learning takes place in a controlled environment).
Measurement(measurement of the degree of size of an object, or weight, speed, duration, etc.).
Comparison(comparison of similarities and differences of objects).

Analysis. The mental or practical (manual) process of separating an object or phenomenon into its components, disassembling and inspecting the components.
Synthesis. The reverse process is the combination of components into a whole, identifying connections between them.
Classification. Decomposition of objects or phenomena into groups according to certain characteristics.
Comparison. Detecting differences and similarities in compared elements.
Generalization. A less detailed synthesis is a combination of common characteristics without identifying connections. This process is not always separated from synthesis.
Specification. The process of extracting the particular from the general, clarifying for better understanding.
Abstraction. Consideration of only one side of an object or phenomenon, since the rest are not of interest.
Analogy(identification of similar phenomena, similarities), a more advanced method of cognition than comparison, since it includes the search for similar phenomena in a time period.
Deduction(movement from the general to the particular, a method of cognition in which a logical conclusion emerges from a whole chain of conclusions) - in life, this type of logic became popular thanks to Arthur Conan Doyle.
Induction- movement from facts to the general.
Idealization- creation of concepts for phenomena and objects that do not exist in reality, but there are similarities (for example, an ideal fluid in hydrodynamics).
Modeling- creating and then studying a model of something (for example, a computer model of the solar system).
Formalization- image of an object in the form of signs, symbols (chemical formulas).

Forms of knowledge.

Forms of knowledge(some psychological schools are simply called types of cognition) there are the following:

Scientific knowledge. Type of knowledge based on logic scientific approach, conclusions; also called rational cognition.
Creative or artistic knowledge. (It's the same - art). This type of cognition reflects the world around us with the help of artistic images and symbols.
Philosophical knowledge. It lies in the desire to explain the surrounding reality, the place that a person occupies in it, and what it should be.
Religious knowledge. Religious knowledge is often classified as a type of self-knowledge. The object of study is God and his connection with man, the influence of God on man, as well as the moral principles characteristic of this religion. An interesting paradox of religious knowledge: the subject (man) studies the object (God), which acts as the subject (God) who created the object (man and the whole world in general).
Mythological knowledge. Cognition characteristic of primitive cultures. A way of cognition among people who had not yet begun to separate themselves from the world around them, who identified complex phenomena and concepts with gods and higher powers.
Self-knowledge. Understanding your own mental and physical properties, self-awareness. The main methods are introspection, introspection, formation of one’s own personality, comparison of oneself with other people.

To summarize: cognition is a person’s ability to mentally perceive external information, process it and draw conclusions from it. The main goal of knowledge is both to master nature and to improve man himself. In addition, many authors see the goal of knowledge in a person’s desire for

Method is a set of techniques and operations used in practical or theoretical activities. Methods act as a form of mastering reality.

Methods of cognition According to the principle of the relationship between the general and the particular, they are divided into universal (universal), general scientific (general logical) and specific scientific methods. They are also classified from the point of view of the relationship between empirical or theoretical knowledge into methods of empirical research, methods common to empirical and theoretical research, as well as purely theoretical research.

It must be taken into account that individual branches of scientific knowledge use their own special, specific scientific methods of studying phenomena and processes that are determined by the essence of the object under study. However, there are methods characteristic of a particular science that are successfully applied in other fields of knowledge. For example, physical and chemical methods research is used by biology, since the objects of study of biology include both physical and chemical forms of existence and movement of matter.

General methods of cognition are divided into dialectical and metaphysical. They are called general philosophical.

Dialectical comes down to the knowledge of reality in its integrity, development and its inherent contradictions. Metaphysical is the opposite of dialectical; it considers phenomena without taking into account their interrelationships and processes of change over time. From about the middle of the 19th century, the metaphysical method was replaced by the dialectical one.

General logical methods of cognition include synthesis, analysis, abstraction, generalization, induction, deduction, analogy, modeling, historical and logical methods.

Analysis is the decomposition of an object into components. Synthesis is the combination of known elements into one whole. Generalization is a mental transition from the individual to the general. Abstraction (idealization) – making mental changes to the object of study in accordance with the goals of the study. Induction - elimination general provisions from observations of particular facts. Deduction is analytical reasoning from the general to the specific details. Analogy is a plausible and probable conclusion about the presence of similar features of two objects or phenomena according to a certain characteristic. Modeling is the creation of a model based on an analogue, taking into account all the properties of the object under study. The historical method is the reproduction of facts from the history of the phenomenon under study in their versatility, taking into account details and accidents. The logical method is to reproduce the history of the object of study by freeing it from everything random and unimportant.

Analysis- mental or real decomposition of an object into its constituent parts.

Synthesis- combining the elements learned as a result of analysis into a single whole.

Generalization- the process of mental transition from the individual to the general, from the less general to the more general, for example: the transition from the judgment “this metal conducts electricity” to the judgment “all metals conduct electricity”, from the judgment: “the mechanical form of energy turns into thermal” to the judgment “every form of energy turns into heat.”

Abstraction (idealization)- mental introduction of certain changes to the object under study in accordance with the objectives of the study. As a result of idealization, some properties and attributes of objects that are not essential for this study can be excluded from consideration. An example of such idealization in mechanics is material point , i.e. a point with mass but without any dimensions. The same abstract (ideal) object is absolutely rigid body .

Induction- the process of deriving a general position from observing a number of particular individual facts, i.e. knowledge from the particular to the general. In practice, incomplete induction is most often used, which involves making a conclusion about all objects of a set based on knowledge of only a part of the objects. Incomplete induction, based on experimental research and including theoretical justification, is called scientific induction. The conclusions of such induction are often probabilistic in nature. This is a risky but creative method. With a strict setup of the experiment, logical consistency and rigor of conclusions, it is able to give a reliable conclusion. According to the famous French physicist Louis de Broglie, scientific induction is the true source of truly scientific progress.

Deduction- the process of analytical reasoning from the general to the particular or less general. It is closely related to generalization. If the initial general provisions are an established scientific truth, then the method of deduction will always produce a true conclusion. The deductive method is especially important in mathematics. Mathematicians operate with mathematical abstractions and base their reasoning on general principles. These general provisions apply to solving private, specific problems.

In the history of natural science, there have been attempts to absolutize the meaning of the inductive method in science (F. Bacon) or deductive method(R. Descartes), give them universal meaning. However, these methods cannot be used as separate methods, isolated from each other. each of them is used at a certain stage of the cognition process.

Analogy- a probable, plausible conclusion about the similarity of two objects or phenomena in some characteristic, based on their established similarity in other characteristics. An analogy with the simple allows us to understand the more complex. Thus, by analogy with the artificial selection of the best breeds of domestic animals, Charles Darwin discovered the law of natural selection in the animal and plant world.

Modeling- reproduction of the properties of an object of cognition on a specially designed analogue of it - a model. Models can be real (material), for example, airplane models, building models. photographs, prosthetics, dolls, etc. and ideal (abstract) created by means of language (both natural human language and special languages, for example, the language of mathematics. In this case we have mathematical model . Typically this is a system of equations that describes the relationships in the system being studied.

Historical method involves reproducing the history of the object being studied in all its versatility, taking into account all the details and accidents. Boolean method- this is, in essence, a logical reproduction of the history of the object being studied. At the same time, this history is freed from everything accidental and unimportant, i.e. it is like the same historical method, but freed from its historical forms.

Classification- distribution of certain objects into classes (divisions, categories) depending on their common characteristics, fixing natural connections between classes of objects in unified system specific branch of knowledge. The formation of each science is associated with the creation of classifications of the objects and phenomena being studied.

Classification is the process of organizing information. In the process of studying new objects, a conclusion is made in relation to each such object: whether it belongs to already established classification groups. In some cases, this reveals the need to rebuild the classification system. There is a special theory of classification - taxonomy . It examines the principles of classification and systematization of complexly organized areas of reality, which usually have a hierarchical structure (organic world, objects of geography, geology, etc.).

One of the first classifications in natural science was the classification of flora and fauna by the outstanding Swedish naturalist Carl Linnaeus (1707-1778). For representatives of living nature, he established a certain gradation: class, order, genus, species, variation.

Methods of cognition of empirical are divided into measurement, observation, description, experiment and comparison.

Observation is an organized and more focused perception of the object of study. An experiment differs from an observation in that it requires the constant activity of the participants. Measurement is the process of material comparison of a certain quantity with a standard or established unit of measurement. In science, the relativity of the properties of the object of study in relation to these means of research is taken into account.

Methods of knowledge of theoretical combine formalization, axiomatization, and the hypothetico-deductive method.

Formalization is the construction of abstract and mathematical models that are aimed at revealing the essence of the object being studied. Axiomatization is the creation of theories based on axioms. The hypothetico-deductive method consists of creating deductively related hypotheses from which an empirical conclusion can be drawn about the fact being studied.

Forms and methods of cognition are directly related to each other. By forms of knowledge we mean scientific facts, hypotheses, principles, problems, ideas, theories, categories and laws.

From the manual

All methods of cognition can be divided into the following classes:

General methods are philosophical methods with the help of which the universal certainty of an object is cognized. The main philosophical ways of thinking are dialectical and metaphysical.

The dialectical cognizes objects in the process of their genesis, taking into account the universal connection of objects and phenomena with each other. Metaphysical, however, believes that the essence of things is unchanged, objects are studied in isolation from each other.

General logical methods – methods used in all types of knowledge - scientific, everyday, artistic, etc. These include analysis, synthesis, generalization, abstraction, deduction, induction, abduction, classification, etc. These methods are studied by formal logic. Actually scientific - these are the ones listed above theoretical And

empiricalmethods of scientific research that are used in any field of scientific knowledge. TO empirical

Observation - methods knowledge includes the following: purposeful passive study of objects, relying mainly on data from the senses. Observation can be direct or indirect through various instruments and other technical devices. Basic requirements for scientific observation: unambiguous design (what exactly is being observed); the possibility of control through either repeated observation or using other methods (for example, experiment).

Experiment - active and purposeful intervention in the course of the process being studied, a corresponding change in the object under study or its reproduction in specially created and controlled conditions determined by the goals of the experiment. The main features of the experiment: a) a more active (than during observation) attitude towards the object of study, up to its change and transformation; b) the ability to control the behavior of an object and check the results; c) repeated reproducibility of the studied object at the request of the researcher; d) the ability to detect properties of phenomena that are not observed in natural conditions. They are classified according to their functions as research, testing, and reproducing experiments. Based on the nature of objects, they are distinguished between physical, chemical, biological, social, etc. There are qualitative and quantitative experiments. A thought experiment, a system of mental procedures carried out on idealized objects, has become widespread in modern science. But a thought experiment already belongs to theoretical methods of cognition.

Comparison - a cognitive operation that reveals the similarity or difference of objects, i.e. their identity and differences. It makes sense only in the aggregate of homogeneous objects that form a class. Comparison of objects in a class is carried out according to characteristics that are essential for this consideration. Moreover, objects that are compared on one basis may be incomparable on another.

Description - a cognitive operation consisting of recording the results of an experiment (observation or experiment) using certain notation systems accepted in science.

Measurement - a set of actions performed using certain means in order to find the numerical value of the measured quantity in accepted units of measurement. It should be emphasized that methods of empirical research are never implemented “blindly”, but are always “theoretically loaded” and guided by certain conceptual ideas.

Theoretical methods knowledge is, first of all, ways of building theory - the most reliable form of knowledge. These include

Formalization - display of content knowledge in sign-symbolic form. When formalizing, reasoning about objects is transferred to the plane of operating with signs (formulas), which is associated with the construction of artificial languages (the language of mathematics, logic, chemistry, etc.). The main thing in the formalization process is that operations can be performed on formulas. Thus, operations with thoughts about objects are replaced by actions with signs and symbols.

Axiomatic method - a method of constructing a scientific theory in which it is based on certain initial provisions - axioms (postulates), from which all other statements of this theory are deduced from them in a purely logical way, through proof. The axiomatic method is only one of the methods for constructing already acquired scientific knowledge. It has limited application because it requires a high level of development of an axiomatized substantive theory.

Hypothetical deductive method – This is a way of constructing a theory in which a hypothesis is first put forward - a scientifically based assumption about the causes of certain phenomena, and then consequences are deduced from it, which are then subjected to experimental testing. Idealization - a mental procedure associated with the formation of abstract objects that are fundamentally impossible to implement in reality (“point”, “ideal gas”, etc.). An idealized object acts as a reflection of real objects and processes. Modeling - a method of studying certain objects by reproducing their characteristics on another object - a model. According to the nature of the models, material and ideal modeling are distinguished, expressed in the appropriate symbolic form. Material models are natural objects that obey natural laws in their functioning - physics, mechanics, etc. When materially modeling a specific object, its study is replaced by the study of a certain model that has the same physical nature as the original (models of airplanes, ships, spacecraft, etc.). With ideal modeling, models appear in the form of graphs, drawings, formulas, systems of equations, sentences of natural and artificial (symbols) language, etc. Currently, mathematical (computer) modeling has become widespread. Systems approach - consideration of objects as systems. It is characterized by: research into the mechanism of interaction between the system and the environment; studying the nature of the hierarchy inherent in a given system; providing a comprehensive multidimensional description of the system; consideration of the system as a dynamic, developing integrity.

Logical and historical methods These are methods that are interconnected. the task of the historical method is to reconstruct the real history of the subject, and the task of the logical method is to identify the internal logic of its development, based on knowledge of the history of the subject, necessary sequence stages of development of the subject.

Structurally - functional (structural) method is based on identifying in integral systems their structure - a set of stable relationships and interconnections between its elements and their roles relative to each other. Structure is understood as something unchanged under certain transformations, and function as the “purpose” of each of the elements of a given system (functions of any biological organ, functions of the state). Basic requirements of the structural-functional method: study of the structure, structure of a system object; study of its elements and their functional characteristics; analysis of changes in these elements and their functions; consideration of the development (history) of the system object as a whole; representation of an object as a harmoniously functioning system, all elements of which “work” to maintain this harmony.

In conclusion, it should be noted that each method will turn out to be ineffective and even useless if it is used not as a “guiding thread” in scientific or other forms of activity, but as a ready-made template for reshaping facts. The main purpose of any method is, on the basis of relevant principles (requirements, instructions, etc.), to ensure the successful solution of certain cognitive and practical problems, the increase in knowledge, the optimal functioning and development of certain objects.

Specially- scientific ( or private scientific) - methods used either in only one science or in several.

6. Basic patterns of growth of scientific knowledge .

Basic patterns of growth of scientific knowledge.

The problem of the growth of scientific knowledge is the central problem of the philosophy of science - both as a discipline and as a direction in philosophy. In modern Western philosophy, it is most fully studied by such movements as postpositivism (“late” Popper K., T. Kuhn, I. Lakatos, P. Feyrabend, S. Toulmin, etc.) and evolutionary epistemology (K. Lorenz, D. Campbell , J. Piaget, G. Vollmer). Representatives of evolutionary epistemology reconstruct the development of scientific ideas and theories using evolutionary models.

If in neopositivism the main attention was paid to identifying the structure of ready-made scientific knowledge, then it replaced it in the 60s. the subsequent historical form of positivist philosophy - postpositivism - first turned to the real history of science. The first concepts of the growth of scientific knowledge appeared.

K.Popper(1902 -1994) understands the growth of scientific knowledge as a process of putting forward hypotheses and carrying out their refutation. The fact is that he proceeds from the fact that there are no infallible theories, each contains an error (the principle fallibilism). Science knows exactly which of its judgments are false, but cannot guarantee the ultimate truth of any of its judgments. Therefore, the process of developing knowledge is a process of identifying errors in existing theories and generating new ones, which will also be refuted over time. Those theories that basically cannot be refuted by experiments, he called them unscientific (the principle falsification). If it was traditionally believed that the progress of scientific knowledge consists of an ever closer approach to objective truth, then for Popper - due to his fallibilism - this makes no sense. He depicts his model of the growth of scientific knowledge with the following diagram:

P1 – T – OT – P2

where P1 is some initial scientific problem, T is the theory with the help of which it is solved, OT is the refutation of this theory or the elimination of errors in it through criticism or experimental verification, P2 is a new, deeper problem, for the solution of which it is necessary to build a new, more deep theory. In other words, K. Popper sees the criterion for the progress of scientific knowledge in deepening scientific problems.

The growth of scientific knowledge is understood by Popper by analogy with biological evolution. Just as the development of a biological species is carried out through trial and error (a species for which it is vitally important to adapt to its environment offers, due to hereditary variability, different adaptation options, but nature, using the mechanism of natural selection, rejects the unsuccessful ones and consolidates the successful ones), so do scientific theories. During the cognitive process, a number of competing theories are generated to solve a particular scientific problem and then they are “rejected” or the errors contained in them are eliminated. The growth of scientific knowledge is considered by Popper as a special case of general world evolutionary processes.

The American historian of science and epistemologist proposed his concept of the growth of scientific knowledge T.Kun(1922-1995) in the work “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” (1962).

The most important concept of Kuhn's concept is the concept paradigms . A paradigm can be defined as one or more fundamental theories that have received general acceptance and have guided scientific research for some time. A paradigm (in Greek paradeigma - example, example to follow) offers for scientific research a set of problem solving samples, which is what it consists of most important function

. In the light of the paradigm dominant at a certain period in the development of science, facts are studied and interpreted. The concept of a scientific community is very closely related to the concept of a paradigm. A paradigm represents a certain view of the world accepted by the scientific community. And the scientific community is a group of people united by faith in one paradigm. The scientific community proceeds from the fact that in order to adequately solve any scientific problem (or puzzle, as Kuhn puts it), the paradigm has methodological means. But sooner or later in science they begin to arise- problems that are insoluble by means of the existing paradigm, and the point here is not in some individual abilities of this or that scientist, not in increasing the accuracy of instruments, but in the fundamental inability of the paradigm itself to solve it. As such anomalies grow, a condition occurs that Kuhn calls a crisis. Scientists find themselves faced with many unsolved problems, unexplained facts and experimental data. For many of them, the recently dominant paradigm no longer inspires confidence, and they begin to look for new theoretical means that may be more successful. What previously united scientists is leaving - the paradigm. The scientific community is splitting into several groups, some of which continue to believe in the paradigm, others put forward hypotheses that claim to be a new paradigm. Normal research freezes. Science, in fact, ceases to function.

The period of crisis ends when one of the proposed hypotheses proves its ability to cope with existing problems, explain incomprehensible facts, and thanks to this attracts the majority of scientists to its side. It acquires the status of a new paradigm. The scientific community is restoring its unity. Kuhn calls this paradigm shift scientific revolution.

So, Kuhn’s model of the development of science looks like this: normal science, developing within the framework of a generally accepted paradigm; an increase in the number of anomalies, ultimately leading to a crisis; scientific revolution, meaning a paradigm shift.

The accumulation of knowledge, the improvement of methods and tools, the expansion of the scope of practical applications, that is, everything that can be called progress, occurs only during the period of normal science. The scientific revolution leads to the discarding of what was obtained at the previous stage, and the work of science begins, as it were, anew, from scratch. Thus, in general, the development of science is discontinuous: periods of progress and accumulation of knowledge are separated by revolutionary failures and tears in the fabric of science.

K. Popper, in fact, represented the growth of scientific knowledge as permanent(constant) revolution: The methodological concept he proposed required the immediate rejection of the theory if at least one fact refuted it. But in reality this does not happen. Therefore, student and critic of K. Popper I.Lakatos(1922-1979) developed new concept growth of scientific knowledge - “the concept of the methodology of research programs”, or the concept of “sophisticated falsificationism”.

I. Lakatos understands the development of science as the history of its origin, functioning and alternation research programs. A research program (SRP), the basic unit of development and evaluation of scientific knowledge, is a coherent sequence of scientific theories united by a set of fundamental ideas and methodological principles.

The research program (SRP) contains 1) a “hard core” - an integral system of fundamental assumptions that is preserved in all theories of this program, 2) a “protective belt” consisting of “auxiliary hypotheses” that reconcile theory with facts, accept bear the blows of experimental checks, which can be changed or discarded, but at the same time ensure the safety of the “hard core”; 3) methodological rules that prescribe which research paths are promising (“positive heuristics”) and which should be avoided (“negative heuristics”).

As long as the "hard core" of the research program is moving toward ever broader and full descriptions and explanations of reality (and performs better than other - alternative - systems of ideas and methods), it is of great value in the eyes of scientists. However, the program is still not “immortal”. Sooner or later, a moment comes when its creative potential is exhausted: the development of the program slows down sharply, the number and value of new models created with the help of “positive heuristics” fall, “anomalies” pile on top of each other, the number of situations when scientists spend more increases forces to keep the “hard core” of their program intact, rather than to fulfill the task for which this program exists. The research program is entering a stage of “degeneration”. However, even then scientists are in no hurry to part with it. Only after a new research program emerges and conquers the minds, which not only makes it possible to solve problems that were beyond the power of the “degenerate” program, but also opens up new horizons of research and reveals broader creative potential, does it displace the old program.

According to I. Lakatos, the change from one theory to another, the transition from one NIP to another occurs on rational grounds. Here he argues with T. Kuhn, who believed that the transition of the scientific community from one paradigm to another is determined by random, subjective factors: the influence of the ideological attitudes of the era, the society to which the scientist belongs, his personal cognitive experience, etc. Lakatos builds a rationalistic model of changing theories and research programs, i.e. choice among competing theories, hypotheses, etc. occurs on the basis of rational signs. A new theory replaces an old one if it “has some additional empirical content compared to its predecessor, that is, it predicts some new, previously unexpected facts.” In other words, the new theory should not only reinterpret, based on different theoretical concepts, the same facts that were interpreted by the old one, but also have a broader empirical basis, and also have greater predictive power. .

Lakatos also disagrees with his teacher K. Popper in understanding the growth of science as a permanent revolution. It is not the facts that force one to reject a certain theory, but another, better theory: “There can be no falsification before a better theory appears.” The picture of scientific knowledge presented as a series of duels between theory and facts is not entirely correct. In the struggle between the theoretical and the factual, Lakatos believes, there are at least three participants: facts and two competing theories. A theory becomes obsolete not when a fact contradicting it is announced, but when a theory that is better than the previous one announces itself.

Let us now consider in general what patterns of development of scientific knowledge stand out in modern epistemology.

In the history of science, two extreme approaches to analyzing the development of scientific knowledge have developed: cumulativeism and anticumulativeism.

Cumulativeism proceeds from the fact that the development of knowledge occurs through its quantitative growth, through the gradual addition of new provisions to the already accumulated amount of knowledge. The process of development of scientific knowledge is understood as continuous; the possibility of qualitative changes in the very foundations of knowledge is excluded.

Anticumulativism believes that during the development of cognition there are no stable (continuous) and conserved components. The history of science is presented by supporters of this point of view as an ongoing struggle of theories and methods, between which there is no continuity. Representatives of this point of view among the researchers discussed here include K. Popper.

The debate about which factors - internal or external - determine the development of scientific knowledge has led to the identification of opposing points of view on this problem: internalism and externalism.

Internalism – the point of view according to which the development of science is carried out mainly under the influence of internal factors, i.e. due to the internal logic of development (for example, the need to create a new theory if the old one can no longer explain any open scientific facts, the need to resolve emerging contradictions in theoretical concepts, etc.)

Externalism - the point of view according to which the development of science is carried out under the influence of factors external to science - the influence of the state, religion and other socio-cultural factors.

So, what are the patterns of development of scientific knowledge? Let's name the most important of them:

1. Science develops under the influence of both external and internal factors.

The process of scientific knowledge is a unity of gradual, quantitative changes and fundamental qualitative ones. The quantitative increase in knowledge is primarily inherent in the empirical level scientific research is the gradual accumulation of new facts, observations, experimental data within the framework of existing theories. As T. Kuhn showed, the development of science in its normal period has a cumulative nature. The period scientific revolutions

– this is a period of qualitative changes in the very foundations of knowledge; there is a break in continuity, a leap, a radical break in the fundamental laws and principles. In the process of development of scientific knowledge, the principle of continuity is observed. , put forward by one of the creators of quantum physics N. Bohr. According to this principle, a previously proven and experimentally confirmed theory is not rejected as completely false when a new theory arises, but is considered as its special case. In other words, the new theory only narrows the scope of applicability of the old one. According to this principle, all those laws of nature that were discovered on the basis of scientific methods will never be removed from the scientific picture of the world, further process knowledge will only concretize them, establishing more precisely the boundaries of their action.

The development of science is characterized by the dialectical interaction of two opposing processes - differentiation (separation of new scientific disciplines) and integration (combination of a number of sciences).

The most important pattern in the development of science is the increasing complexity and abstraction of scientific knowledge, increasing its mathematization and computerization.

Method is a set of techniques and operations used in practical or theoretical activities. Methods act as a form of mastering reality.

Methods of cognition according to the principle of the relationship between the general and the particular, they are divided into universal (universal), general scientific (general logical) and They are also classified from the point of view of the relationship of empirical or theoretical knowledge into methods, methods general for empirical and theoretical research, as well as purely theoretical research.

It must be taken into account that individual branches of scientific knowledge use their own special, specific scientific methods of studying phenomena and processes that are determined by the essence of the object under study. However, there are methods characteristic of a particular science that are successfully applied in other fields of knowledge. For example, physical and chemical are used by biology, since the objects of study of biology include both physical and chemical forms of existence and movement of matter.

General methods of cognition are divided into dialectical and metaphysical. They are called general philosophical.

General logical methods of cognition include synthesis, analysis, abstraction, generalization, induction, deduction, analogy, modeling, historical and

Analysis is the decomposition of an object into components. Synthesis is the combination of known elements into one whole. Generalization is a mental transition from the individual to the general. Abstraction (idealization) - making mental changes to the object of study in accordance with the goals of the study. Induction is the derivation of general provisions from observations of particular facts. Deduction is analytical reasoning from the general to the specific details. Analogy is a plausible and probable conclusion about the presence of similar features of two objects or phenomena according to a certain characteristic. Modeling is the creation of a model based on an analogue, taking into account all the properties of the object under study. The historical method is the reproduction of facts from the history of the phenomenon being studied in their versatility, taking into account details and accidents. The logical method is to reproduce the history of the object of study by freeing it from everything random and unimportant.

Methods of cognitionempirical are divided into measurement, observation, description, experiment and comparison.

Observation is an organized and focused perception of the object of study. An experiment differs from an observation in that it requires the constant activity of the participants. Measurement is the process of material comparison of a certain quantity with a standard or established unit of measurement. In science, the relativity of the properties of the object of study in relation to these means of research is taken into account.

Methods of cognitiontheoretical combine formalization, axiomatization,

Forms and methods of cognition are directly related to each other. Forms of knowledge include hypotheses, principles, problems, ideas, theories, categories and laws.