2.2. Science as a process of cognition Over the two and a half centuries of its development, science has become an extremely complex and branched formation, in which, however, a systemic organization and internal structure are clearly traced. In a hierarchical order, the main elements of the structure of scientific knowledge are arranged as follows: - reliably established facts; - patterns that generalize sets of facts; - theoretical constructions that reflect systems of patterns that together describe some areas of the real world; - scientific pictures of the world that create generalized images of reality. , uniting in a systemic unity all theories that do not contradict each other. Reliably established facts (i.e., facts confirmed by numerous observations, the results of experiments, their verifications and re-verifications) are empirical basis of science. The facts accumulated in the process of research are systematized and generalized according to certain rules. In the case of a reliable discovery of the commonality of facts, their recurring uniformity and causal relationships, we can say that an empirical law has been found - a general rule that observable phenomena obey. However, the laws established at the empirical level, especially when it comes to direct observation of phenomena, and not about a specially organized experiment, they often explain little, because they do not reveal the driving forces, the root causes of these phenomena. Therefore, empirical patterns, as a rule, are not very heuristic. To clarify the nature of certain phenomena, as well as to determine the direction of further research, it is necessary to consider the issue on another - theoretical- the level of cognition. The purpose of scientific cognition, as already noted, is to establish laws - essential, stable relationships between phenomena, that is, to identify what is common to a certain area of ​​reality. To establish such a generality, science resorts to abstraction, in terms of common, recurring characteristics idealized objects and without taking into account all other characteristics of real objects that are insignificant from the point of view of the problem being solved. A natural question arises: how to determine which characteristics of an object are essential and which are not? The fact is that any process of research does not begin with the accumulation of facts, but with the advancement of a problem, or at least a task. We need some initial idea, an assumption - what exactly we intend to find out. Otherwise, a lot of disparate facts recorded in the process of observation will create such an intense “information noise” that it will be practically impossible to single out an elusive “signal” of a particular pattern from under it. At the empirical level, thus, external common characteristics are fixed ( signs) of real objects and phenomena. As for the isolation of internal features that are essential from the point of view of the task of research, this is where the phenomenon of scientific creativity manifests itself - foresight, conjecture, insight, finally. This is followed by an explanation and justification of the idea at the theoretical level of knowledge. The theory operates mainly with idealized objects, such as a material point, an absolutely rigid body, an ideal gas, and many others. This kind of abstraction is absolutely necessary for the construction of mathematical models (after all, modern theory is a product of the global mathematization of science). Moreover, the principle of abstraction is embedded in the procedure of a modern experiment, which since the time of G. Galileo has been an integral part of the dual experimental-mathematical method. In fact, any experiment is organized and carried out in such a way as to investigate a particular process with the minimum possible impact of outsiders. from the point of view of the task set factors. Of course, experiments are carried out with real objects, but the objects of study themselves are selected and prepared in a special way, and the procedure (method) of the experiment, as a rule, is designed so that it is possible to trace the dependence of the course of the process under study on a controlled change in one specific parameter, when all other parameters remain unchanged (fixed). Therefore, the results of the experiment carried out in this way are suitable for their mathematical processing. This experiment qualitatively differs from observation in the natural-philosophical sense, remaining, nevertheless, a research method at the empirical level. Currently, experimental studies are associated with the study of complex and subtle processes, therefore, they require serious technical equipment, significant energy costs, and labor costs. for processing large amounts of information. The interaction of experiment with theory is also becoming more complicated, which is reflected in the development of the theory of experimental design and methods of statistical processing of its results. 2.3. The structure of scientific knowledge Let us now trace in a generalized form the standard model for constructing scientific knowledge, keeping in mind that when structuring, dividing into stages of such a complex process, one cannot do without elements of abstracting its particular features. The process of cognition begins with the establishment of a certain set of facts through observation. If in the course of systematizing the accumulated facts some regularity or a stable, recurring dependence is found, then we can assume that a primary empirical generalization has been obtained, or empirical law.As a rule, along with facts that fit within the framework of an empirical law, facts are also found that do not fit into the discovered regularity, contradict her. At this stage, the need inevitably arises theoretical hypothesis, which would allow a purely speculative, mental modification of the known (accepted) reality so that facts that contradict laws fit into a certain general scheme (model) that must satisfy the requirement of consistency. In the conditions of developed modern science, as a rule, the accumulation of a set of facts that potentially need in a new theoretical understanding, has been going on for quite a long time and many scientists and research teams are participating in it. A certain “critical volume” of such facts must appear in order for the existence of problem situation when newly discovered facts cannot be explained and understood on the basis of existing theories. The appearance of such a problem inevitably requires the formulation of an adequate hypothesis. The theoretical hypothesis, as a trial solution to eliminate the existing contradiction, is comprehensively analyzed for its confirmation available empirical data and theoretical knowledge. Further, subject to such confirmation, from the hypothesis, according to the rules of logic, consequences are deduced that allow empirical verification. These consequences are derived both speculatively and on the basis of the use of an adequate mathematical apparatus. If a thorough empirical verification based on a series of specially planned experiments does not confirm the consequences of the hypothesis, then we can assume that this hypothesis logically refuted. If the consequences of the hypothesis are confirmed, in principle, we can talk about the birth new theory.So, the standard model for constructing scientific knowledge is “stretched” into the following chain: the establishment and accumulation of empirical facts - the primary empirical generalization - the discovery of new facts that deviate from the rule - the formulation of a problem (a hypothesis that gives an adequate explanation) - a logical (deductive) conclusion from hypotheses of empirically verifiable consequences - experimental verification of the presence of the facts predicted by the hypothesis. Reliable confirmation of the hypothesis informs its status theoretical law. Note that this model is called hypothetical-deductive and it is generally accepted that the main part of the building of modern science is built according to this scheme. It would seem that everything is very simple - it is enough to act according to the above scheme, and the scientific law will be discovered, because each new element of knowledge is logically deduced from the previous ones. However, here is the opinion of an outstanding physicist on this matter Albert Einstein: "There is no clear logical path to scientific truth, it must be guessed by some intuitive leap of thought." Indeed, the phenomenon of scientific creativity lies in the fact that at a certain stage of the process of cognition, further progress is possible only in an extraordinary way - a scientist, putting forward a successful hypothesis, foresees the truth, if you like, discovers it with his mind's eye and only then builds a logical bridge to it in the form of evidence Let's return to the last stage of the hypothetical-deductive model of the process of cognition, which ends with the appearance of a theoretical law. It should be specially noted here that with the recognition of such a law, the final point in the process of cognition is not put. The fact is that, according to the rules of the same logic, the truth of the foundation (in our case, the hypothesis) does not follow from the truth of the consequence. In fact, here the philosophical principle is fully manifested, proclaiming the relative nature of the provisions, laws and theories of all sciences studying nature without exception and society. We can only talk about a certain degree of reliability of a theoretical hypothesis, because, no matter how large the number of facts confirming it, in principle there is a non-zero probability that new firmly established facts will appear that will significantly limit the scope of the accepted theory and require development of a consistent generalizing theory. The history of science knows many examples of this. 2.4. Criteria and norms of scientific character So, the theoretical level of knowledge allows you to get the most general, holistic view of the relationships and patterns, objectively acting in a certain area of ​​the real world. Empirical verification provides authenticity established theoretical explanation, i.e., the possibility of reliable prediction of the behavior of material systems. However, it is not uncommon for the accepted theory, while satisfying the criterion of reliability, which manifests itself in the correct prediction of previously unknown phenomena, nevertheless, turns out to be inadequate to nature. This means that the accepted theoretical model of a real object does not fully reflect its internal structure and properties. Over time, it becomes unable to consistently explain a wider range of phenomena. There is a need to create a new theoretical model that would meet the criterion adequacy to nature The history of natural science knows many examples of how the heuristic potential of seemingly unshakable theories was exhausted precisely because, at the achieved level of development, their inadequacy to the nature of real phenomena and processes was revealed. A striking example of this kind is the development of ideas about the nature of light: from the concept of elastic longitudinal waves to the idea of ​​transverse electromagnetic waves and further to the concept of wave-particle duality of light. It should be noted that when developing modern theories, concepts are introduced that correspond to those that are inaccessible to direct observation characteristics of the studied reality. This leads to a certain independence of theoretical knowledge from its empirical basis. Therefore, the problem of ensuring the scientificity of knowledge, its compliance with the criteria and norms of scientificity is becoming increasingly important, especially if we take into account the activation of all kinds of pseudoscientific ideas and trends. As for scientific methodology, it formulated a number of principles for establishing the scientificity of knowledge. One of them, named verification principle, we have already touched: any judgment makes sense only if it empirically verifiable The principle of verification operates effectively in the natural sciences, often at the level of indirect verification, when the concepts introduced by the theory cannot be observed directly. For example, in elementary particle physics the concept is widely used quarks– hypothetical particles, of which, according to the theory, the experimentally observed particles participating in the strong interaction are composed – hadrons. It is not possible to detect free quarks in experiments, which has a number of explanations. However, the physical phenomena predicted by the quark theory have been reliably recorded, which is evidence of its indirect verification. However, a more reliable confirmation of the concepts and theories based on them is provided by the use falsification principle, which says: only that knowledge can be scientific, which basically refutable. Formulating this principle, a major philosopher of the twentieth century. Karl Popper repelled from a significant difference in the weight of facts in the procedures for confirming and refuting scientific knowledge. Indeed, the repetition of many confirming facts does not give final confidence in the truth of this or that law, but one clearly refuting fact is enough to recognize this law as erroneous. The law of universal gravitation is often cited as an example: any number of falling apples will not be an indisputable confirmation of its truth, but one apple flying away from the Earth is enough for it to be considered refuted. That is why every unsuccessful attempt to falsify (refute) a theory gives a new confirmation of its scientific nature. Consistent implementation of the principle of falsification deprives scientific knowledge of completeness, immutability. Here, the principle of falsification turns into the concept of a permanent scientific revolution, according to which the alleged refutability of theories eventually becomes real, which leads to their collapse, the emergence of new problems that require explanation, and this is the key to the progress of science. 2.5. Scientific revolutions and the formation of scientific paradigms Recent years have been characterized by the expansion of the functions of science: along with the description and explanation of objects and phenomena, it has begun to perform the function of a productive force in the sense that today scientific research and development are the basis of any production. The results of scientific activity in the form of scientific information are a kind of product that is directly used in the production of material values. The volume of scientific information produced by world science is constantly increasing. As quantitative estimates show, the volume of scientific production is increasing exponential law, i.e. every 15 years it increases by e times (where e = 2.72 - the base of the natural logarithm). While developing exponentially on average, science, however, from time to time dramatically changes the pace of accumulation and systematization of knowledge. Periods of smooth, painstaking accumulation of information are suddenly replaced by an avalanche-like emergence of fundamentally new ideas, hypotheses and theories that radically change seemingly unshakable ideas about the surrounding reality. The picture of the world is rewritten anew. Such is the internal logic of the development of scientific knowledge, the logic that combines evolutionary and revolutionary processes. Within the framework of the methodology, various models are discussed that reflect such a logic of the development of science. The most popular among scientists was the concept of the development of the American philosopher Thomas Kuhn who introduced the concept of paradigms , in Greek meaning: sample, example.According to T. Kuhn, the paradigm combines "...generally recognized scientific achievements, which for a certain time provide a model for posing problems and their solutions to the scientific community." Thus, the paradigm determines the scientific picture of the world for a long period of time, serves as a model, the generally accepted standard of approach to solving scientific problems, is reflected in textbooks, fundamental and popular scientific literature, and, finally, its main provisions take over the mass consciousness. As a rule, the paradigm is based on a certain theory, but the paradigm itself is not a theory as such, since it does not perform the function of explanation, but sets the general direction for the construction of all kinds of theories (during its validity). In the history of natural science, paradigms have taken their place, based on Aristotelian dynamics, Newtonian mechanics, Maxwell's electromagnetic theory, Einstein's theory of relativity. The development of scientific knowledge within the framework of the paradigm became known as normal; associated with the emergence of a new paradigm extraordinary the stage of increment of such knowledge, which marks a scientific revolution. It should be emphasized that the emergence of a new paradigm is logically inexplicable, because it in no way follows from previous knowledge. Here we have an unpredictable leap, rather, even a rise in knowledge, an irrational event, moreover, not uniquely determined. The fact is that at the critical moment of transition from one state to another, there are several possible continuations, and the realization of any one of them is determined by a combination of circumstances. This is how the logic of the evolutionary development of science looks like, in which the continuity of scientific knowledge (the correspondence principle) demonstrates a combination of heredity and variability of the system, and natural selection retains only hypotheses adequate to nature, capable of developing into more and more general theories with high information content. The high level of entropy, characteristic of contradictory, critical situations, is abruptly replaced by a completely ordered state of the knowledge system. We also note that the establishment of a new paradigm is by no means a one-time event. It occurs with overcoming the active opposition of the supporters of the former paradigm, so the process of evaluation, critical analysis, comprehension and acceptance of the paradigm takes place already on normal stage of development of science. An alternative model put forward by the English philosopher Imre Lakatos and based on the methodology of scientific research programs, fundamentally differs from Kunov's by the provision that the choice of one of the competing programs should be made on the basis of rational basis. The research program is not seen as a fundamental theory, but as a sequence of transforming theories based on common principles. The scientific revolution in this approach consists in the replacement of one program by another, a competing one, a program that surpasses the first one in terms of heuristic power. Consequently, according to I. Lakatos, the rational competition of programs, each having its own potential of positive heuristics, is the driving force behind the development of science. scientific revolutions.When defining the meaning and content of the concept of "scientific revolution", the radical change (revolution) of the entire hierarchical structure of science, all its elements, namely: ways of interpreting observed facts, patterns, theories, and finally, the entire scientific picture of the world, which in in a generalized form, it concentrates all the other elements of scientific knowledge. One, even the largest, scientific discovery is not able to change the scientific picture of the world. However, such a discovery is capable of stimulating a series of other discoveries, which together will provide the necessary conditions for such a change. We are talking primarily about discoveries in such fundamental sciences as physics and cosmology. It is quite obvious that a change in the scientific picture of the world inevitably entails the same radical restructuring of the research methods themselves, as well as the norms and criteria for the scientific nature of knowledge. There is a generally accepted opinion that three scientific revolutions, i.e., three cases cardinal change in the scientific picture of the world. First scientific revolution fell on the VI-IV centuries. BC e., when science itself stood out from the entire array of knowledge about the world around it, creating quite definite norms and rules for ensuring the scientific character of knowledge and models for its construction. The so-called ancient scientific picture of the world, the core of which was geocentric system of world spheres, became the determining factor in the worldview for the next 20 centuries. Second scientific revolution occurred in the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries. Its starting point was the transition from geocentric to heliocentric model of the world. At the same time, profound changes took place in science, which led to the formation classical natural science. The result of this revolution was mechanistic scientific picture of the world on the basis of natural science, armed with an experimental-mathematical method. At the same time, a stereotype of scientific knowledge was formed - the idea of ​​an absolutely true picture of nature established once and for all. However, already at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. really "burst" third scientific revolution which crushed the claims of classical mechanics for an exhaustive description and explanation of all natural phenomena. In fact, the quintessence of the coup that took place was the decisive refusal to single out in the model of the world any there was no "main" center. All frames of reference are equal, therefore, our ideas depend on the "binding" to a specific frame of reference, and therefore are relative, like the scientific picture of the world itself. New natural-scientific picture of the world was the result of a deep rethinking of such fundamental initial concepts as space, time, continuity, causality, which led to a mismatch of new ideas with the criteria of the so-called common sense. The general ideas about the world have changed significantly: it has become obvious that an absolutely complete, true picture will never be created, for knowledge is relative, and absolute truth is unattainable. 2.6. Possibilities and limits of the scientific method The obvious tendency to accelerate scientific progress is capable of giving rise in the mass consciousness to the illusion of the limitlessness of its possibilities. Meanwhile, penetrating into the depths of the universe, science is forced to overcome ever more serious obstacles. Actually, for this, scientific methods are being improved in order to overcome such obstacles - when “on the forehead”, and when and “bypassing”. However, there are boundaries of knowledge that are of a fundamental nature. The existence of one of these boundaries is due to the fact that they themselves the foundations of science are not absolute and in principle can be refuted. The rational scientific method cannot be built otherwise than on the unsubstantiated introduction of the most general primary assumptions - postulates, axioms, from which all subsequent provisions and laws of the theory are then derived (more or less strictly). called "hidden qualities", introduced by Aristotle and his followers to explain natural phenomena, since these hypotheses did not allow experimental verification. Later, Einstein revised the principles of the absoluteness of space and time introduced by Newton, the reversibility of time, universal determinism, which turned out to be inadequate to reality outside the macrocosm. In principle, the postulates of homogeneity, materiality, and symmetry of the world, which form the fundamental basis of modern ideas about it, are also refutable. The reliability of these provisions is practically confirmed by the fact that the consequences derived from them do not contradict the observed reality (as well as each other). However, it cannot be unequivocally asserted that this consistency will persist beyond the limits of the reality studied by science. Here we move on to the next limitation of the cognitive possibilities of science associated fundamental limitation of human experience in time and space. Regarding what is beyond experience, the truth of any statement is probabilistic. Another barrier of this kind is rooted in nature itself human, whose sensory apparatus adequately perceives the objects of the macroworld, but loses this ability when studying objects of the mega- and microworld. There is not and cannot be such an image from among the objects around us that would correspond to how, say, an electron looks like. In addition, the means of research used by a person are also objects of the macrocosm and therefore "do not fit" with such objects of research as, for example, an elementary particle or a galaxy. Moreover, when interacting with objects of the microcosm, our macrodevices begin to affect them. irremovable influence, which, in turn, limits cognitive possibilities. The exit of knowledge beyond the macrocosm that forms our everyday experience, and hence the ability to think figuratively, is forcibly accompanied by an ever wider use of mathematical and logical abstractions. In modern physics, there are many concepts that simply correspond to certain mathematical parameters and nothing more. However, one should not forget that mathematics and logic are all created in the same macrocosm, and at some level of penetration into the depths of the universe, they can also stop working. Expanding the horizons (as it is customary to say), science at the same time reveals the areas of the impossible. So, for example, the theory of relativity strictly limits the speed of light, the impossibility of creating a "perpetual motion machine" is well known. All this indicates that science is not omnipotent, its possibilities are not unlimited. The boundaries of the scientific method are determined by science itself (in the person of scientists, of course), so it cannot be argued that they are defined absolutely accurately and correctly. But these boundaries certainly exist, and this is another evidence that the real world is much more complex and diverse than the picture of the world that science paints.

1. The program of the discipline Concepts of modern natural science for the direction 080100. 62 economics of bachelor's training Author Gorbatov V.V.

   discipline program

   "Concepts of modern social science" is a general educational discipline intended for the preparation of bachelors. It is designed to promote the acquisition of a broad basic higher education, to promote the further development of the individual,

2. The program of the discipline Concepts of modern natural science for the direction 030501. 65 specialist training jurisprudence Author Gorbatov V. V

   discipline program

   "Concepts of modern social science" is a general educational discipline intended for training specialists. It is designed to promote the acquisition of a broad basic higher education, to promote the further development

3. The concept of modern natural science Chapter 1: The subject of natural science

   Document

   Natural science is a set of sciences about animate and inanimate nature, taken in their interconnection as a single whole. The basis of natural science is physics, astronomy, chemistry, biology, medicine and computer science.

4. Natural science has passed through three stages and entered the fourth. 1 Stage of ancient Greek natural philosophy

   Document

   1) The stage of ancient Greek natural philosophy (.VI century BC - XV century AD) - direct contemplation of nature as an undivided whole; the general picture is covered correctly, but the particulars are completely unclear; this is the stage of "syncretic"

5. Higher professional education of T. Ya. Dubnishchev of the concept of modern natural science

   Document

   D79 Concepts of modern natural science: textbook. allowance for students. universities / Tatyana Yakovlevna Dubnishcheva. - 6th ed., Rev. and additional - M.: Publishing Center "Academy", 2006.

Cognition is the process of obtaining knowledge about the world around us and about oneself. Cognition begins from the moment when a person begins to ask himself questions: who am I, why did I come into this world, what mission should I fulfill. Cognition is a continuous process. It occurs even when a person is not aware of what thoughts guide his actions and deeds. Cognition as a process studies a number of sciences: psychology, philosophy, sociology, scientific methodology, history, science of science. The purpose of any knowledge is self-improvement and expansion of one's horizons.

The structure of knowledge

Cognition as a scientific category has a clearly defined structure. Cognition necessarily includes a subject and an object. The subject is understood as a person who takes active steps to implement knowledge. The object of knowledge is that to which the attention of the subject is directed. Other people, natural and social phenomena, any objects can act as an object of knowledge.

Methods of knowledge

Under the methods of cognition understand the tools with which the process of acquiring new knowledge about the world around is carried out. Methods of cognition are traditionally divided into empirical and theoretical.

Empirical methods of knowledge

Empirical methods of cognition involve the study of an object with the help of any research actions, confirmed by experience. Empirical methods of cognition include: observation, experiment, measurement, comparison.

• Observation- this is a method of cognition, during which the study of an object is carried out without direct interaction with it. In other words, the observer can be at a distance from the object of knowledge and at the same time receive the information he needs. With the help of observation, the subject can draw his own conclusions on a particular issue, build additional assumptions. The method of observation is widely used in their activities by psychologists, medical personnel, and social workers.
• Experiment is a method of cognition, in which there is an immersion in a specially created environment. This method of cognition involves some abstraction from the outside world. Experiments are used to conduct scientific research. In the course of this method of cognition, the hypothesis put forward is confirmed or refuted.
• Measurement is an analysis of any parameters of the object of knowledge: weight, size, length, etc. In the course of comparison, significant characteristics of the object of knowledge are compared.

Theoretical methods of knowledge

Theoretical methods of cognition involve the study of an object through the analysis of various categories and concepts. The truth of the put forward hypothesis is not confirmed empirically, but is proved with the help of existing postulates and final conclusions. Theoretical methods of cognition include: analysis, synthesis, classification, generalization, concretization, abstraction, analogy, deduction, induction, idealization, modeling, formalization.

• Analysis involves the mental analysis of the whole object of knowledge into small parts. The analysis reveals the connection between the components, their differences and other features. Analysis as a method of cognition is widely used in scientific and research activities.
• Synthesis involves the unification of individual parts into a single whole, the discovery of a link between them. Synthesis is actively used in the process of any knowledge: in order to accept new information, it is necessary to correlate it with existing knowledge.
• Classification is a grouping of objects united by specific parameters.
• Generalization involves grouping individual items according to their main characteristics.
• Specification is a refinement process carried out in order to focus attention on significant details of an object or phenomenon.
• abstraction implies focusing on the private side of a particular subject in order to discover a new approach, to acquire a different view of the problem under study. At the same time, other components are not considered, not taken into account, or insufficient attention is paid to them.
• Analogy is carried out in order to identify the presence of similar objects in the object of knowledge.
• Deduction- this is the transition from the general to the particular as a result of the conclusions proven in the process of cognition.
• Induction- this is the transition from the particular to the whole as a result of the conclusions proven in the process of cognition.
• Idealization implies the formation of separate concepts denoting an object that do not exist in reality.
• Modeling involves the formation and consistent study of any category of existing objects in the process of cognition.
• Formalization reflects objects or phenomena using generally accepted symbols: letters, numbers, formulas or other conventional symbols.

Types of knowledge

The types of cognition are understood as the main directions of human consciousness, with the help of which the process of cognition is carried out. Sometimes they are called forms of knowledge.

Ordinary knowledge

This type of cognition implies the receipt by a person of elementary information about the world around him in the process of life. Even a child has ordinary knowledge. A small person, receiving the necessary knowledge, draws his conclusions and gains experience. Even if a negative experience comes, in the future it will help to form such qualities as caution, attentiveness, and prudence. A responsible approach is developed through understanding the experience gained, its inner living. As a result of everyday knowledge, a person develops an idea of ​​how one can and cannot act in life, what one should count on, and what one should forget about. Ordinary knowledge is based on elementary ideas about the world and connections between existing objects. It does not affect general cultural values, does not consider the worldview of the individual, its religious and moral orientation. Ordinary knowledge seeks only to satisfy the momentary request about the surrounding reality. A person simply accumulates useful experience and knowledge necessary for further life activity.

scientific knowledge

This type of knowledge is based on a logical approach. Its other name is . Here a detailed consideration of the situation in which the subject is immersed plays an important role. With the help of a scientific approach, an analysis of existing objects is carried out, and appropriate conclusions are drawn. Scientific knowledge is widely used in research projects of any direction. With the help of science prove the truth or disprove many facts. The scientific approach is subject to many components, cause-and-effect relationships play an important role.

In scientific activity, the process of cognition is carried out by putting forward hypotheses and proving them in a practical way. As a result of the ongoing research, a scientist can confirm his assumptions or completely abandon them if the final product does not meet the stated goal. Scientific knowledge relies primarily on logic and common sense.

Artistic knowledge

This type of knowledge is also called creative. Such knowledge is based on artistic images and affects the intellectual sphere of a person's activity. Here, the truth of any statements cannot be proved scientifically, since the artist comes into contact with the category of beauty. Reality is reflected in artistic images, and is not built by the method of mental analysis. Artistic knowledge is limitless in its essence. The nature of creative knowledge of the world is such that a person himself models the image in his head with the help of thoughts and ideas. The material created in this way is an individual creative product and gets the right to exist. Each artist has his own inner world, which he reveals to other people through creative activity: the artist paints pictures, the writer writes books, the musician composes music. Every creative thinking has its own truth and fiction.

Philosophical knowledge

This type of cognition consists in the intention to interpret reality by determining the place of a person in the world. Philosophical knowledge is characterized by the search for individual truth, constant reflection on the meaning of life, appeal to such concepts as conscience, purity of thoughts, love, talent. Philosophy tries to penetrate the essence of the most complex categories, to explain mystical and eternal things, to determine the essence of human existence, existential questions of choice. Philosophical knowledge is aimed at understanding the controversial issues of being. Often, as a result of such research, the actor comes to understand the ambivalence of everything that exists. Philosophical approach implies a vision of the second (hidden) side of any object, phenomenon or judgment.

religious knowledge

This type of knowledge is aimed at studying the relationship of a person with higher powers. The Almighty is considered here both as an object of study, and at the same time as a subject, since religious consciousness implies the praise of the divine principle. A religious person interprets all the events taking place from the point of view of divine providence. He analyzes his inner state, mood and waits for some definite response from above to certain actions committed in life. For him, the spiritual component of any business, morality and moral principles are of great importance. Such a person often sincerely wishes others happiness and wants to do the will of the Almighty. A religiously minded consciousness implies the search for the only correct truth, which would be useful to many, and not to one particular person. Questions that are put before the personality: what is good and evil, how to live according to conscience, what is the sacred duty of each of us.

mythological knowledge

This type of knowledge refers to a primitive society. This is a variant of the knowledge of a person who considered himself an integral part of nature. Ancient people looked for answers to questions about the essence of life differently than modern people, they endowed nature with divine power. That is why the mythological consciousness has formed its gods and the corresponding attitude to the events taking place. Primitive society relieved itself of responsibility for what happens in everyday reality and completely turned to nature.

self-knowledge

This type of knowledge is aimed at studying one's true states, moods and conclusions. Self-knowledge always implies a deep analysis of one's own feelings, thoughts, actions, ideals, aspirations. Those who have been actively engaged in self-knowledge for several years, note a highly developed intuition. Such a person will not get lost in the crowd, will not succumb to the "herd" feeling, but will make responsible decisions on his own. Self-knowledge leads a person to an understanding of his motives, comprehension of the years lived and committed deeds. As a result of self-knowledge, a person's mental and physical activity increases, he accumulates self-confidence, becomes truly courageous and enterprising.

Thus, cognition as a deep process of acquiring the necessary knowledge about the surrounding reality has its own structure, methods and types. Each type of cognition corresponds to a different period in the history of social thought and the personal choice of a single person.

Problem

The process of scientific knowledge begins with the formulation of a problem.

The problem is what is not known and what needs to be known, knowledge about ignorance.

The statement of the problem is conditioned by the needs of practical activity and contradictions between existing theories and new facts.

When setting it, it is important: firstly, the awareness of a certain situation as a task; secondly, a clear understanding of the meaning of the problem, its formulation with a distinction between the known and the unknown. The formulation of the problem includes some prior knowledge of the ways to resolve it, which requires going beyond the achieved knowledge.

A. Einstein, L. Infeld emphasized that it is much more important to formulate a problem than to solve it; the solution often depends on mathematical and experimental skills. In order to ask a new question, open up a new possibility, look at an old problem from a new point of view, it is necessary to have a creative imagination, and only it mainly moves science forward.

The concept of a fact is not something taken for granted, as it seems at first glance. After all, the fact is the absence of those phenomena, the existence of which was assumed or considered already proven, if these assumptions and evidence are refuted. Delusions, illusions are also facts - the phenomena of consciousness, knowledge. Facts can be directly perceived by our senses; the presence of facts is also established by indirect observation, which fixes not the facts themselves, but the effects that they have on directly observable phenomena. Finally, the establishment of facts is possible through assumptions, conjectures, hypotheses that allow the existence of some facts unknown to science, if these assumptions, conjectures, hypotheses are ultimately confirmed.

9 Factual knowledge makes sense only in connection with a certain theo-! rhetic concept that serves as its justification.

In itself, the reading of the instrument cannot be considered a scientific fact. It becomes one when it correlates with the phenomenon under study, which necessarily implies an appeal to theories that describe the operation of the devices used.

In contrast to observational data, facts are always reliable, objective information, such a description of phenomena and the connections between them, in which subjective layers are removed. Therefore, it is wrong to present facts as directly sensory experiences or as statements fixing these experiences, the so-called. protocol sentences independent of the theoretical interpretation. Any scientific fact is one of many projections of this or that real phenomenon obtained from the corresponding theoretical point of view. Thus, depending on the nature of the conceptual interpretation, the same phenomena serve as the basis for the "production" of various facts. For example, two theories of light - Newton's corpuscular theory and Huygens' wave theory.

A fact is a fragment of reality, expressed in scientific language and included in the system of scientific knowledge by displaying these data in the conceptual system of some theory.

Hypothesis

The solution of the problem involves the development of a certain hypothesis.

| A hypothesis as a form of knowledge is a scientifically substantiated assumption based on facts; problematic, unreliable, probabilistic knowledge; tentative solution to the problem.

No scientific theory is born ready-made; at first it exists as a hypothesis. The hypothesis also does not arise immediately: initially it is a very preliminary assumption, a guess. Guess most often has a very shaky, unstable character, undergoes modifications. As a result, a hypothesis is formed as the most probable assumption, based on the strength of psychological and logical confidence in its plausibility. Basic requirements for the hypothesis:

the hypothesis must be compatible with all the facts to which it concerns; explain them and have the ability to predict new facts;

the hypothesis must be available for verification (empirical or logical proof);

the hypothesis must be tested for compatibility with the fundamental intertheoretical principles of the given science.

For example, if a physicist finds that his hypothesis is in conflict with the principle of conservation of energy, he will be inclined to abandon such a contradiction and look for a new solution to the problem. However, there are periods in the development of science when the scientist tends to ignore some (but not all) of the fundamental principles of his science. This happens at times when a radical break in the fundamental principles and concepts is necessary. For example, the founders of electrodynamics were forced to abandon the principle of long-range action. Planck abandoned the principle of continuity of action, which until that moment was considered inviolable in physics. N. Bohr called such hypotheses "crazy ideas". But what distinguishes them from conjecture and schizophrenic delirium is that, breaking with one or two principles, they do not break with others, they are consistent with them, which determines the seriousness of the proposed scientific hypothesis.

Ways of forming hypotheses: based on sensory experience, using the method of mathematical hypothesis.

Hypothesis testing - empirical confirmation and refutation. However, the empirical confirmation of the consequences and 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. Therefore, the status of an explanatory theory is given to that hypothesis that has maximum objectivity and predictive power.

Some methodologists believe that all our knowledge is hypothetical in nature, differing only in the degree of probability of the subjective nature of hypotheses (Popper). However, most researchers still proceed from the fact that the highest form of knowledge organization is theory.

In a broad sense, theory is a complex of ideas, ideas and views aimed at explaining and interpreting certain phenomena and processes.

In the narrow sense - the most developed form of organization of scientific knowledge, designed to give a more or less holistic view of the patterns, essential characteristics of a certain sphere of natural and social reality.

A mere description or systematization of facts cannot be considered a theory. It necessarily involves not only a description, but also an explanation. The explanation includes the disclosure of patterns and cause-and-effect relationships in those processes and phenomena that are covered by this theory.

| Theory is a system of reliable knowledge, objective, proven, tested by practice, knowledge of the essential characteristics of a certain fragment of reality.

Scientific theory is an integral system of knowledge, the various components of which are located in a logical relationship with each other and are derived from a certain set of concepts, assumptions; a logically connected and internally differentiated system of statements and laws about objects studied by a certain science.

The main components of the theory: 1)

the initial empirical basis, which includes many facts recorded in a given field of knowledge, obtained in experiments and requiring theoretical explanation; 2)

the initial theoretical basis - a set of primary assumptions, postulates, axioms, general laws, theories that together describe an idealized object; 3)

the set of admissible rules of logical inference and proof within the framework of the theory; four)

a set of statements derived in the theory with their proofs, constituting the main body of theoretical knowledge. 5)

laws (of varying degrees of generality) that express essential, stable, recurring, necessary connections between phenomena covered by this theory; 6)

assumptions, hypotheses.

Sometimes in the structure of a scientific theory, formal calculus is singled out - the logical apparatus of the theory (mathematical equations, logical symbols, rules, etc.), and meaningful interpretation.

The construction and interpretation of the content of the theory is associated with the scientist's worldview, certain methodological principles, and the historical level of development of science and technology. і Thus, theory as a special form of mastering the world is always connected with certain philosophical and worldview attitudes.

Modern scientific knowledge is not a simple collection of separate theories. It is a complex multi-level formation that combines a fairly complete system of fundamental and applied theories, phenomenological (describing phenomena) and axiomatized theories, etc. One can speak of a hierarchy of theories: few fundamental theories; a wide range of special theories, numerous theoretical models applicable to experimental devices and developments in technical sciences.

Concepts

і Concept (lat. conceptio - understanding, a single idea) - a system of views that express a certain way of seeing, understanding phenomena and processes, including a complex conglomeration of logical-theoretical, philosophical, social, psychological components. This is a more general form of the systemic organization of knowledge than theory.

In socio-humanitarian knowledge, a concept can be a form of knowledge that “replaces” a theory (for example, the dispositional concept of personality or the concept of social exchange in sociology).

The concept introduces into the theoretical discourses of disciplines their initial principles and prerequisites that determine the basic concepts - concepts and reasoning schemes, forming fundamental questions ("ideas"). It is essentially a form of knowledge organization at the metatheoretical level.

The emphasis on conceptuality in scientific knowledge implicitly actualized the sociocultural and value-normative component in it, shifting the emphasis from “cognitive”, “logical”, “intrasystemic” in theory to “praxeological”, “semantic”, to its “discovery” outside83 .

The methodology of post-non-classical science pays special attention to the study of the conceptual organization of scientific knowledge (the concepts of "personal knowledge" by M. Polanyi, "thematic analysis of science" by J. Holton, "research program" by I. Lakatos, "paradigm" by T. Kuhn, etc.) .

Krymsky S.B. Scientific knowledge and principles of its transformation. - TO.,

Mamchur E.A. Problems of socio-cultural determination of scientific knowledge. - M., 1987. 3.

Nikitin E.P. Explanation is the function of science. - M., 1970. 4.

Nikiforov A.L. Scientific fact and scientific theory. - M., 1984. 5.

The latest philosophical dictionary. - Minsk, 2001. 6.

Rakitov A.I. Philosophical problems of science. - M., 1977. 7.

Ruzavin G.I. Methods of scientific research. - M., 1971. 8.

Ruzavin G.I. Scientific theory. - M., 1988. 9.

Stepin V.S. Formation of scientific theory. - M., 1976. 10.

Stepin V.S. theoretical knowledge. - M., 200. 11.

Shvyrev V.S. Analysis of scientific knowledge: main directions, forms, problems. - M., 1988. 12.

Shvyrev V.S. Theoretical and empirical in scientific knowledge. M., 1978.

Control questions: 1.

Describe the features of general logical research methods - analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction. 2.

What methods and means are used at the empirical level of research? What is the role of instruments in modern science? 3.

Describe the features of the axiomatic method of constructing theories and the limits of its effective application. four.

What are the characteristic features of the hypothetical-deductive method of constructing theories? 5.

Describe the features of modeling as a method of scientific research. What kinds of modeling are typical for modern science? 6.

What is a scientific problem? What factors influence its formation? 7.

What is a scientific fact? eight.

What role does a hypothesis play in scientific knowledge? How does it differ from theory? 9.

Name the features of theory as a form of scientific knowledge. What is the structure of modern scientific theories?

Forms of scientific knowledge

Under the forms of scientific knowledge understand those logical constructions that reproduce the objective reality. These are, first of all, such elementary logical forms as scientific concepts, scientific judgments, scientific conclusions. Further, these are such highly organized logical constructions as scientific problems, scientific hypotheses and scientific theories.

scientific problems

The process of any scientific knowledge begins with the formulation of the problem as the starting point for the direction of scientific activity. A problem in a broad sense is understood as a theoretical or practical issue that needs to be resolved. Using this word, they usually emphasize the importance of the issue being resolved or the need to resolve it. Problems are posed to science in the process of development of society, based on its needs. A scientific problem is a question posed by the course of the development of science, "knowledge about ignorance." Science develops from posing problems to solving them and putting forward new problems. This process often leads to a change in theoretical concepts and methods of cognition, to scientific revolutions.

In science itself, a problematic situation occurs when the new empirical material (new facts) does not fit into the framework of the existing theory or when the advanced development of the theory begins to be constrained by a lack of experimental data. In both cases, the consciousness of what exactly is unknown and what needs to be known makes it possible to formulate the problem and determines the direction of theoretical and experimental research.

S.L. Rubinstein wrote in Fundamentals of General Psychology: “The starting point of the thought process is usually a problem situation. A person begins to think when he needs to understand something. Thinking always begins with a problem or a question, with surprise or bewilderment, with a contradiction. The problem situation determines the involvement of the individual in the thought process.

Not any object is chosen as an object of study, but only one, the study of which is realistic at a given stage in the development of human society. It follows that the formulation of the problem must necessarily include a set of basic ways to solve it. Correctly posing a problem, deriving it from previous knowledge, means in many respects determining the success of solving the problem. It is sometimes no less difficult to pose a problem than to find its solution: the correct formulation of the problem to a certain extent directs the search activity of thought, its striving. No wonder it is believed that the correct formulation of the problem is already half of its solution.

Thus, in order to formulate a scientific problem, it is required to find out its relevance (importance), to substantiate the possibility of its solution with the existing level of knowledge in this industry, and also to establish the expected efficiency (utility) according to the accepted criterion.

Scientific facts

The process of cognition includes the accumulation of facts. No science can exist without systematization and generalization, without logical comprehension of facts. “No matter how perfect the wing of a bird, it could never lift it up without leaning on the air. Facts are the air of a scientist, without them you will never be able to take off” (Academician I.P. Pavlov). One and the same fact can receive different interpretations (including erroneous ones). In antiquity, even before Archimedes, it was "proved" by experience that air has no weight. They weighed the ball inflated and not inflated - the weight was the same ... Now almost every schoolboy knows what the ancient experimenters made a mistake.

Sometimes scientific and search difficulties do not consist in the paucity of facts, but in their abundance. And then it is important to understand which of them are not relevant at all, and which ones play a secondary role. Great luck is to choose the most fundamental facts correctly. For Einstein, one of these facts was the invariance of the speed of light. Evidence is only the facts, united in a system, and adequately interpreted. Facts become an integral part of scientific knowledge when they appear in a systematized, generalized form.

Scientific hypotheses

The study of a problem begins with the nomination hypotheses, which is a reasonable assumption put forward in order to clarify the patterns and causes of the phenomena under study.

Hypotheses can be scientific, non-scientific and pseudo-scientific. Non-scientific hypotheses are hypotheses in a non-scientific field that do not claim to be scientific. Pseudo-scientific hypotheses pretend to be scientific without any reason. They are not based on numerous facts and observations, or do not allow any verification at all.

scientific hypothesis- this is an attempt to give an explanation (interpretation) of some rather large set of interconnected facts, incomplete theoretically or practically untested in practice. When scientists do not have sufficient factual material, they use scientific hypotheses as a means of achieving scientific results, which, after verification, may turn out to be true or false.

The hypothesis is connected with the transition from the knowledge of phenomena to the knowledge of the essence of the processes under study, as well as with the transition from purely empirical to theoretical generalizations. Every truth, every axiom or theory was once a hypothesis. A hypothesis often acts as an initial formulation, a draft version of the laws being discovered. The creation of a hypothesis is often associated with scientific intuition (of course, multiplied by wisdom and diligence).

As a form of scientific knowledge, a hypothesis is characterized primarily by the fact that it is a reasonable assumption and this distinguishes it from all sorts of guesses and unfounded assumptions.

Hypotheses are probabilistic. On their basis, the systematization of previously accumulated knowledge takes place and the search for new scientific results is carried out - this is the essence and purpose of the hypothesis as a form of science development. A hypothesis may be consistent with other scientific systems or contradict them. Neither gives grounds to reject the hypothesis or to accept it. A hypothesis may even contradict a credible theory. Such a contradiction should be taken seriously enough, but it should not be thought that it necessarily leads to the refutation of the hypothesis. Perhaps the contradiction between a hypothesis and a reliable theory, which always has a specific historical character, indicates the need to reconsider our attitude to the reliability of this theory, to make changes to it that limit the scope of its application. For example, the theory of relativity limited the application of Newtonian mechanics. It is also possible that two contradictory systems of knowledge express extreme cases of one more general theory. Both systems are true, but limited. Such a situation, for example, developed in physics, when the following propositions were proved: "Light consists of particles" and "Light has a wave nature."

The hypothesis is put forward in the hope that it, if not in full, then at least partially, will be transformed into reliable knowledge. For example, hypotheses about the possibility of converting thermal and electromagnetic energy into mechanical energy, built on the basis of the law of conservation and transformation of energy, have become reliable knowledge. This happened as soon as the steam engine and electric motors were created.

The hypothesis goes through three stages: construction (accumulation, analysis and generalization of facts, putting forward an assumption to explain them), verification (derivation of consequences arising from the hypothesis and comparison of the consequences with facts), proof (practical verification of the findings). The proposed hypothesis is proved or disproved. A proven hypothesis turns into a scientific theory.

Scientific theories

scientific theory is a developing system of reliable knowledge that describes, explains and anticipates phenomena in a particular subject area. This is one of the highest forms of organization of scientific knowledge.

Scientific theory is a complex system of knowledge, the components of which are: the initial empirical base (generalized and systematized facts), the theoretical basis (laws, axioms, postulates); logical means that ensure the correctness of conclusions and proofs, the main content of the theory: the provisions of the theory, its conclusions and the argumentation system

Requirements for scientific theory:

- adequacy to its object;

- the maximum possible completeness of the description of this subject area;

- internal consistency - consistency with known and verified facts, for the description and explanation of which it was put forward, consistency of facts with the known laws of science;

- the connection of all its provisions and conclusions, their rationale;

– fundamental verifiability;

– simplicity of the theory, i.e. the ability to explain all known facts from one starting point.

Unlike a hypothesis, a sufficiently tested theory cannot have many equivalent "competitors" in the form of other theories.

1.4. The concept of "scientific research"

Under scientific research the process of developing scientific knowledge is understood as one of the types of cognitive activity. Scientific research is one of the most important forms of cognitive activity, leading to the acquisition of new theoretical knowledge that expresses certain stable principles, trends, patterns and laws.

Scientific research is characterized by objectivity, reproducibility, evidence, accuracy.

Purpose of scientific research- a comprehensive, reliable study of an object, process or phenomenon; their structure, connections and relations on the basis of the principles and methods of cognition developed in science, as well as obtaining and introducing into production (practice) results useful for a person.

Research objectives - this is the choice of ways and means to achieve the goal in accordance with the hypothesis put forward. Objectives are best formulated as a statement of what needs to be done in order for the goal to be achieved. The setting of tasks is based on the division of the research goal into subgoals, and their number is determined by the depth of the research. Method is the way to achieve the goal of the study.

Any scientific research has its own object and subject. object scientific research is a material or ideal system. A system can be defined as a set of interrelated elements that form a single whole and have a common purpose or purpose. Subject- this is the structure of the system, the patterns of interaction of elements inside the system and outside it, the patterns of development, various properties, qualities, etc.

Scientific research topic- this is a definition of the phenomenon under study, covering a specific area (aspect) of a scientific problem. The topic is usually formulated in terms of the subject of research.

Scientific research has two interrelated levels − empirical and theoretical; can be controlled through empirical reproduction and theoretical verification of the evidence.

At the empirical level, with the help of observations and experiments, new facts are established that make it possible to find the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of the objects and phenomena under study. The methodological basis of experimental research is experiment planning theory. At this level, the answer to the question of how the process proceeds is received.

At the theoretical level, patterns common to a given subject area are defined and formulated, which make it possible to explain previously revealed facts and empirical laws, as well as to predict future events and facts, i.e., theories are created. At the theoretical level, studies receive answers to questions about how the process is going on and why it is going the way it is. The existence of a theory that explains facts in a uniform way is a necessary condition for scientific knowledge.

By analogy with the classification of sciences considered earlier, three types of scientific research are distinguished: fundamental, applied and development.

Basic Research aimed at the discovery and study of new phenomena and laws of nature, at the creation of new principles of research. Their goal is to expand the scientific knowledge of society, to establish what can be used in practical human activities. Such studies are carried out on the border of the known and the unknown and have the greatest degree of uncertainty.

Applied Research aimed at finding ways to use the laws of nature to create new and improve existing means and methods of human activity. The goal is to establish how scientific knowledge obtained as a result of fundamental research can be used in practical human activities. Applied research, in turn, is divided into search, research and development work.

Exploratory research aimed at establishing the factors affecting the object, finding ways to create new technologies and equipment based on the methods proposed as a result of fundamental research. As a result research work new technologies, pilot plants, devices, etc. are being created. aim development work is the selection of design characteristics that determine the logical basis of the design.

As a result of fundamental and applied research, new scientific and scientific and technical information is formed. The purposeful process of converting such information into a form suitable for industrial use is commonly referred to as developing. It is aimed at creating new equipment, materials, technologies or improving existing ones. The ultimate goal of development is to prepare research materials for implementation.

Scientific research according to the degree of importance for the national economy is divided into:

- for the most important work performed according to special resolutions of state bodies;

- for work carried out according to the plans of sectoral ministries and departments;

– for work carried out on the initiative and plans of research organizations.

Depending on the source of funding, scientific research is divided into state budget, economic contracts and unfunded. State budget scientific research is financed from the state budget. Contractual research is financed by customer organizations on the basis of economic contracts. Unfunded research is carried out under cooperation agreements.

Each research work can be attributed to a certain direction. A scientific direction is understood as a science or a complex of sciences in the field of which research is being conducted. In this regard, they distinguish: technical, biological, physical-technical, historical, etc. directions with subsequent detailing.

In particular, when conducting scientific and technical research, the following stages can be distinguished:

one). Information search and compilation of research methodology. At the first stage, first of all, information is collected regarding the conditions and methods for solving problems of this class. Sources of information presented in the form of scientific articles, reports, abstracts, annotations, patents are subjected to a comprehensive analysis. As a result, conclusions are formulated on the review of information, the goals and objectives of the study.

2). Theoretical studies. The study of the physical entity. Determination of the fundamental laws that govern the process or phenomenon under study. Formulating a hypothesis and its logical and mathematical development with obtaining conclusions, relationships, formulas. Construction of a mathematical model. Assessment of the influence of various factors on the functioning of the object, determination of specific processes and characteristics that are to be studied experimentally.

3). Preparation and conduct of the experimental part of the study. At this stage, the project of the experimental installation is being implemented, i.e., the installation is manufactured, assembled and adjusted, and also equipped with the necessary measuring equipment. Simultaneously with the preparation of the experimental setup, a specific experimental plan is drawn up. Variable ranges are set. In addition, it specifies what measurements and under what conditions are to be made, what is the sequence of measurements, etc.

four). Processing of experimental data, analysis and generalization of results. Any experiment ends with the processing of the data obtained and the presentation of the results in the form of tables, graphs, formulas, statistical estimates, as well as in the form of verbal descriptions. The stage ends with the formulation of new facts and laws, theoretical and practical conclusions, explanations and scientific predictions.