From the moment of its appearance on this planet, Homo sapiens began to ask questions: “What is this? What is this for? How does it work? And what, in the end, does all this mean?!” So we can safely call Adam the first philosopher in the world.
Knowledge appeared along with the appearance of man on Earth. It’s natural: asking questions and looking for answers to these questions is the prerogative of the mind. But science - as a harmonious building of questions and answers - could appear only after a person was able to collect a sufficient amount of knowledge for these questions and answers. Which, in fact, is what he did for many millennia.
Only after man was able to collect the first, more or less complete package of knowledge about the surrounding reality, did he undertake an assault on the laws of the universe. This is how philosophy appeared. Naturally, the man lost his first assault. The laws of the universe did not open their gates: the level of human knowledge did not yet allow him to achieve this. But the man did not give up. He created other sciences, created tools of knowledge and researched, researched, researched...
So, approximately, in a few words, we can describe man’s path to the knowledge of primordial truths - the fundamental laws of nature. Alas, these laws have not been discovered to this day. However, humanity is closer to this than ever before.
Let us consider the dynamics of the development of science throughout human history. The history of science can be divided into three stages:
- Pre-Newton stage. It covers the period of time from the emergence of civilization until the emergence of the teachings of the great Isaac Newton. In essence, it represents the stage of initial accumulation of knowledge. This accumulation, plus the development of mathematics, astronomy, and natural science, ultimately made it possible to make the first revolutionary leap in science.
- Newtonian stage. The first truly scientific fundamental laws of nature were given by Isaac Newton. His discoveries allowed science to make the first qualitative leap upward: Isaac Newton gave laws with the help of which science could reconsider and rethink the entire accumulated knowledge of mankind. Which is exactly what she did for the next two hundred years. All these two hundred years, science has been developing in breadth, filling the niche that Isaac Newton’s laws opened for it.
- Einstein stage. As science revised all accumulated knowledge about nature, more and more facts accumulated that did not fit into the framework of Newton's laws. And when there were too many of them, the need for a new rethinking of the laws of nature became obvious. Einstein gave new laws. Einstein's theory of relativity represents a new revolutionary leap upward, which allowed science to reconsider the entire accumulated knowledge of mankind from a new perspective. And all subsequent development of science, right up to this day, represents its evolutionary development, development “in breadth”, as filling a new niche that Einstein gave.
Yes, this is true: the scientific and technological revolution and scientific and technological progress of the last century actually represent the realization of the opportunities that the theory of Einstein and his followers gave science. There has been no qualitative leap in science since the time of Einstein that would allow us to rethink the entire store of human knowledge.
Einstein himself outlined a milestone that would give a new qualitative leap in science: theory single field. Since then, science has been in a constant search for this unified field, and to discover the laws of its existence, for every physicist, is something like marshal's baton in a recruit's backpack.
But all applicants do not see the main thing: they need it fundamentally new approach to the study of the laws of the universe. All attempts to create a unified field theory based on the laws of relativity theory are doomed to failure, because the unified field theory must represent a fundamentally new explanation of the laws of the universe (in otherwise, Einstein himself would have discovered these laws).
Newton became great because he rejected the dogmatism that dominated the knowledge of the laws of nature. Einstein became great because he rejected Newton's static picture of nature. A new leap in science will occur only after someone dares to argue with Einstein and rejects Einstein’s space-time.
Alas, modern physics is too ossified in its ideas about the fundamental laws of nature. It is understandable: the gods themselves stand on the pedestal: the great Einstein, Bohr... But the progress of science cannot be stopped. More and more data is accumulating that does not fit into the picture of modern scientific ideas. There is a need for a new rethinking of fundamental scientific principles.
Evolution of science
Scientific consensus is the collective decisions, positions and opinions of a community of scientists in a particular field of science at a particular point in time. Scientific consensus is not, in itself, a scientific argument, and is not part of scientific method, however, the content of the consensus may itself be based on scientific arguments and the scientific method.
Consensus is usually achieved through communication at conferences, publications and peer reviews. In cases where there is little controversy regarding a research topic, it is quite easy to create a scientific consensus. Scientific consensus can be used in popular science or political debate on issues that are controversial in the public sphere, but which are not controversial within the scientific community, such as evolution.
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
See what “Evolution of science” is in other dictionaries:
Noun, g., used. compare often Morphology: (no) what? evolution, why? evolution, (see) what? evolution, what? evolution, about what? about evolution; pl. What? evolution, (no) what? evolutions, what? evolutions, (I see) what? evolution, what? evolutions, about what? about… … Dictionary Dmitrieva
Changes in adaptive characteristics and forms of adaptation of populations of organisms. First consistent theory E. b. was put forward in 1809 fr. naturalist and philosopher J.B. Lamarck. To explain the progressive development in nature over time, this... ... Philosophical Encyclopedia
Evolutionary doctrine (also evolutionism and evolutionism) is a system of ideas and concepts in biology that affirm the historical progressive development of the Earth’s biosphere, its constituent biogeocenoses, as well as individual taxa and species, which can be ... Wikipedia
This article is about biological evolution. For other meanings of the term in the title of the article, see Evolution (meanings). Fi... Wikipedia
Reconstruction of Archeopteryx at the Natural History Museum of Oxford University ... Wikipedia
Reconstruction of Archeopteryx at the Natural History Museum of Oxford University Oviraptosaurus Chirostenotes Enantiornithes related to Enantiornithes Evolution Fri ... Wikipedia
AND; and. [from lat. evolutio deployment] 1. The process of gradual and continuous change of someone, something. from one state to another; general development. E. Universe. Organic e. E. human. E. morals. E. science. 2. Philosophy. Form of development... ... encyclopedic Dictionary
The articles Poetry (see) and Literature (see) outline the main features of the development of literature and the content of this concept; Here we will indicate those features that are included in the concept of E. as applied to literature. And in this area, as in others,... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Ephron
A concept that gained currency and general recognition in the 19th century. The scope of this concept can be narrower or broader. When we talk about the development of a person or an organism, we apply the concept of E. to the narrowest sphere; when we talk about progress... Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Ephron
Books
- The evolution of mechanics in its mutual connection with technology. Book 2. 1770–1970, Mandryka A.P.. V this book explores the evolution of mechanics in its mutual connection with technology during the period including industrial revolution XVIII V. and the modern scientific and technological revolution...
Science acts as a social institution,
profession, sociocultural value,
multifaceted cultural phenomenon.
Representing a specific system of complex infrastructure, rather than simple sum knowledge, at the same time it exists peculiar shape spiritual production and a specific social institution with its own organizational forms. Throughout the centuries-old history of culture, people went to new goal an inefficient trial and error method, and an acceptable solution was found only after a long and unsystematic search large quantity options. But at later, subsequent stages of production intensification, it was necessary to find new solutions in a short time, which stimulated the growth of innovative knowledge. Today scientific potential determines the prestige of any state, its future, costs for science are increasing, the profession of a scientist has already become one of the most attractive.
Scientific progress is the most important part of the process of intellectualization of society, the disenchantment of culture. Each scientific discipline has its own individual history of origin and development, gradually turning into a relatively independent sphere human activity, acting as a historical product of the development of civilization and spiritual culture, gradually developing into a special social organism, developing new types of communication and interaction. The most important function of this activity is the systematization of theoretical and empirical knowledge, scientific discovery, development of laws, generalization and interconnection of facts; the integrity of a social system that unites scientists, technology and institutions with the goal of explaining and predicting events, constructing and transforming reality. Definitions of science include: systematic knowledge that forms the scientific picture of the world (SPM); ?innovativeness of scientific activity – for the reproduction of new scientific knowledge; ?belonging to a spiritual culture. Discussion on the subject of science includes questions related to various topics science: profession, theory, academic discipline.
At the same time, science, as a part of culture, participates in its reproduction and acts as an institution scientific organizations and institutions, and as the value of culture appears as the result of this institutional activity: a set of methods and knowledge in conceptual form, concepts, a system of principles and methodology. Among the functions of science is the process of obtaining and creating whole system knowledge constructing activity social subjects, the spiritual production of truth; ethos and profession, resources, information, communications. Although knowledge is acquired by a person in everyday life, politics, economics, art, but only in science are they defined as its the main objective. Scientific knowledge belongs to a specific field, but is based on the general principles of scientific methodology, is confirmed empirically, explains the nature and logic of processes, and does not contradict fundamental scientific theories.
Distinctive qualities scientific knowledge are: consistency, the ability to classify the subject and object of research, the desire for validity. These qualities are a social value and influence organizational cultures, individual activities. As a result, the product of science is not only knowledge, but also a rational style of decision-making, which is used in other types of human activity.
To obtain knowledge in a certain area of science, it is necessary to develop a program in terms of research methodology, generalize fundamental and special knowledge, development of methods and means for their implementation: tools case studies, instruments, installations, methods of measurement, storage, processing, registration and transmission of information.
Science has an integral character: the contradiction is that it should know everything, but at the same time the question arises about the essence of its differentiation into various sciences. The modern social problem that the researcher is solving cannot be considered within the framework of one science; it is multidisciplinary in nature. To have a comprehensive understanding of the problem and methods for solving it, you will need the integration of a wide variety of knowledge. Instead of five or six points of view from the positions of medicine, sociology, psychology, anthropology, a general picture of the problem of the relationship between man and society should be obtained. Therefore, we are talking about the multidisciplinary nature of the problem. If five or six people work in a team, at the same time they get to know the problem comprehensively, and not just the methods of one science. It's about about the interdisciplinary qualifications of a specialist: everyone knows something necessary from other, related specialties.
Social institutions develop and change with the participation of people, and they are included in exchange relations. Science as a system has been created by a community of scientists for more than two millennia and represents not only the attitude of a scientist to the object of knowledge, but also a system of relationships between generations, scientific cohorts, and members of the scientific community. Today science is a powerful branch of knowledge production with a developed material base, communication system, traditions, ethical standards. It has its own style, regulated by a system of unwritten but traditionally passed down rules, its own system of values. The researcher must possess scientific knowledge, be able to construct and apply knowledge in practice. In a general sense, science is the systematic study of physical or social phenomena, and in a narrower sense, it is the search for universal laws and explanations, specific analysis using observation and experiment.
As an element of culture, science feeds on its juices and itself has a powerful impact on it; it can use artistic images, but its main core consists of conceptual frameworks, networks of categories, scientific hypotheses and concepts that explain the picture of the world. Knowledge as an episteme acts as a generally valid and self-sufficient sphere of activity, in relation to which extra-scientific realities can, at best, be considered as accompanying ones. But if science is connected with a certain branch of knowledge, then it is clear that the object of attention of individual sciences becomes only fragments, cones, segments of the world: for example, social science studies man and his social life. It is unlikely that the universe, which is a vicious circle of identity with a center in a single absolute norm, today can be the measure of all things. The transformation of a person into a subject of knowledge of sociology, psychology, anthropology presupposes abstraction from freedom and compassion as the basis of morality.
However, understanding someone else's world is possible only through getting used to it, feeling, empathy, and overcoming the egoistic natural inclination. When there is a need for individual clarification of guilt, responsibility, decision, then this is accompanied by the freedom to choose desire or indifference. The meaning of the text is unique to specific person, and the truths that we construct are meaningful in specific social environments and limited historical conditions. Although traditional social science has repeatedly declared its ability to represent the experience of peoples and cultures, today it cannot be said that it can confidently speak on behalf of others.
Judgment and depreciation of common sense - be it mere beliefs, prejudices or commonplace manifestations of ignorance - are defined as deviations from ideal type Weber or Durkheim's norms. In everyday life, people explain what is happening based on common sense, without thinking about the rationale for their conclusions. Mass consciousness assembles value aspects, stereotypes, cultural norms into the worldview of concepts, methodologies, and into the context of objectified subject knowledge. At the same time, common sense tends to unjustifiably expand the scope of application and depends on what one would like to consider to be the truth. Science and common sense may not be compatible. Unlike ordinary consciousness, science relies on the levels, forms and methods of scientific knowledge, although it itself influences life styles and everyday life, organizational and national cultures, developing new types of communication and interaction of people, forms of division of labor, orientation, norms of consciousness, scientific ethos.
Discussions about the meaning of science focus on the need to develop a clear definition of this concept and its equal applicability in relation to the physical and social sciences, since the latter tend to take into account human choice and social activity. Recently, debate about the essence of science has increased as a result of criticism of the philosophy of science. The scientistic view of science is based on the implicit assumption that knowledge does not depend on personal qualities people working in this area. Neither socio-historical circumstances, nor biographical details, nor even the continuity of scientific schools explain the emergence innovative idea. A different approach is given by the sociology of knowledge; it ceases to be a monad and is derived from objective circumstances. The methodology of science includes, in addition to ideas, life story scientists and the description of society, a correlation is assumed between intrascientific and extrascientific dimensions. Careful scientific proof is not yet a guarantee of the absolute truth of a generally valid judgment.
Signs of scientific character of dissertation research follow from understanding the criteria of the theory of scientific knowledge. Any developed scientific discipline easily detects levels: empirical-applied, theoretical, methodological. The scientific theory of the dissertation contains a thesaurus, a set of basic concepts, judgments and provisions in the field of study, united into a single system of knowledge about the subject of research. A knowledge system is recognized as a theory if it satisfies the criteria of objectivity; adequacy as the ability to describe any situation; verifiability, verifiability or falsifiability, refutability; truth and reliability. In the structure of scientific theory, the main levels are distinguished: empirical basis, new demands for practice, idealized object of research, theoretical model, methodology, evidence techniques, array theoretical knowledge, forming new provisions about the object being studied. Moreover, the share of components depends on many factors and is not regulated. It is important to get closer to achieving the research goal.
Science includes about a thousand disciplines that interact with each other, studies everything that is of interest, reflects on its origin, development, other forms of culture, and influence on the life of society. The interaction of theoretical, speculative and empirical levels of scientific development influences everyday consciousness and subcultures. In principle, a sociologist solves similar problems, trying to explain why events occur in a certain sequence. However, scientific sociological explanation differs from common sense judgments in that it must be deduced from general patterns established on the basis of the rules of logical proof. The norms and ideals of scientific research require the systematic refutation of established generalizations, the search for facts that contradict generally accepted opinion.
This is the norm that R. Merton called organized skepticism. A strong epistemological position recognizes the inevitable relativity of scientific knowledge. It is possible to go beyond the limits of contextual limitations only by reflecting on the localization and temporalization of one’s own or someone else’s text. The claim to the universal truth of scientific representation only masks the total will to power, the desire to shape and subordinate the scientific search to the tyranny of the dominant discourse. In addition, the centralized structure of planning and management of scientific research, monopolism, and unequal relations have a negative impact on the development of science.
Thus, science develops through refutations of its own truths, but this process takes place within the framework of a certain system of epistemic norms and social institutions that regulate scientific conclusion. What is at work here is not the personal experience of recognition and foresight, but the impersonal procedure for substantiating generally valid conclusions that can be reproduced if given conditions, conventionality of semantic and linguistic norms.
Thus, the problem of time is the content of the term temporalism in the broadest aspect, although it can be used in a narrower sense: physical temporalism, geological, social. Within the physical description of time, the concepts of positive and negative cosmological, inverse temporalism have gained recognition in the literature. Opponents of new terms and fans of the Russian language should keep in mind that each such term has a long semantic trail that has developed in certain circumstances.
For example, in scientific and especially in educational literature on the issue of time are not always clearly distinguished concepts of relative, relational and relativistic. Let us note here the content of each of these concepts.
· Relative (relativus– lat.) – a category of philosophy, meaning the relative nature of the absolute in knowledge, truth, existence, in the relationship of movement, time and space, subject and object.
· Relational (relatien– German) is a general scientific concept that means taking into account the connection and concept of time and movement. The relational concept of time, for example, is the opposite of the substantial concept.
· Relativistic (relativistic– German) – private scientific physical concept, denoting belonging to the theory of relativity.
Professional vocabulary utilitarian, it saves time for specialists and experts when explaining theoretical concepts, the essence of which can be contained in a few meager, conventionally accepted terms. Deciphering the symbol and concept of time, a person’s life chronotope turned out to be connected with the cultural and historical evolution of temporalism in the humanitarian and natural science knowledge.
Since the conceptual apparatus of sociology also mainly developed in the West, many terms were borrowed from English translations German and French literature or original works of English and American sociologists. It is important to provide applicants and experts with access to the conceptual resources that have accumulated in the international sociological community. Although the development of new areas of reality led to the differentiation of science, fragmentation into specialized areas of knowledge, the history of science is permeated by a combination of differentiation and integration. Recently, comprehensive scientific programs have been adopted, gaps in scientific knowledge are being filled, and disciplinary barriers are being overcome.
The scientific paradigm, the theoretical arsenal of social science are interdisciplinary in nature, they synthesize various scientific knowledge, their semantic load is transferred to each other, enriching each scientific specialty. The task of fundamental sciences is to analyze the interaction of the basic structures of man, nature and society, and the immediate goal of applied sciences is to apply the results of fundamental sciences to solve not only cognitive, but also social practical problems. The criterion for success here is not only the achievement of truth, but also the effectiveness of implementation; the dissertation candidate must write about this in the section on the practical significance of his work.
Being one of the types of activity, scientific practice is woven into the fabric of culture, and therefore, as part of its whole, requires the presence of stereotypes of action and standardization. The level of culture and the degree of scientificity of the method as a way of organizing activity determine the level of scientific practice as an element of all socio-historical practice, and the latter, being conscious, turns into activity, which is the only possible condition for an individual’s familiarization with culture and his stay in it. It is impossible to obtain an adequate reflection of the process of movement of scientific knowledge by excluding from the analysis the influence of socio-historical practice and social time on the development of science and culture as a whole. The development of science is not reduced to the filiation of ideas; it only ultimately coincides with the logic of the development of knowledge, just as methodological analysis reveals from the real time of the practice of scientific discovery the structure of prediction and the structure of the discovery itself in a pure, atemporal, logical form.
Science acts as a means of forming a scientific picture of the world. Thus, a long history of predictions and times had to pass before scientific concepts of time and theories of foresight were created. Both man's predictive ability and his understanding of time ultimately find their justification in activity, in the evolution of practice. The development of the ability to foresight immediately enters the living fabric of culture, the essence of which largely characterizes the understanding of time. Primitive presentism and a naive-static approach to time, the atemporality of mythological consciousness are determined by stagnant forms of transformation of the experienced into the motionless; reality was not differentiated by modes of time and therefore did not need prediction. Although a temporal orientation is still outlined: retro-tales about an ideal mythical period without death, illness, taboo. The origins of science are rooted in the practice of early human societies, when the production and cognitive aspects of people’s activities were inseparable. Mythology is considered a distant prerequisite for science, in which for the first time an attempt was made to build an integral system of ideas about the surrounding reality.
Initial knowledge was purely practical in nature, serving as guidelines in specific types of human activity. This knowledge, obtained on the basis of simple observation, did not reveal the essence of the phenomena and the relationship between them, which would make it possible to explain why a given phenomenon occurs in one way or another and to predict its further development. Mythological consciousness and the image of time are addressed to the individual human psyche; this circumstance determines the ancient ideas about fate and fate. The prerequisites of science are associated with the emergence of a desire to substantiate scientific knowledge as an independent field of activity in the natural philosophy of Ancient Greece. Thales of Miletus raised the question of the need to prove geometric constructions and carried out a number of such proofs, which was the reason to call this period the date of birth of scientific research. In the structure of ancient consciousness, it becomes possible to make a rigid, fatal prediction of future events, inevitable due to ideological prescriptions and stereotypes, due to the stability of relations between people in this era. Taken globally, world events are unpredictable, they merge in an eternal cycle.
But ancient times is not reduced to the cyclical time of the Pythagoreans and Heraclitus, because it receives systematic development from Aristotle: time breaks out of the circle and becomes vector. In Greek philosophy, the idea of timeless existence and timeless predication is developed, in connection with the widespread idea of the authenticity of knowledge about the eternal. True, overcoming previous paradigms took the path of destroying presentism, primarily by ignoring the value of existence in the present. In connection with this distribution of emphasis, theological prognostication is divided into retrospection and prediction itself, reflection of individual predictions in the concept of fate and theological providence is realized. The temporalism of the Apocalypse becomes not only linear, but also finalistic, which leads to a new form of foresight. In religious consciousness, there is a differentiation of historical time and foresight and an attempt to understand them, although the possibility of active human participation in the development of events is rejected. The prognostics of the Middle Ages was also developed by astrological predictions, contributing to the development of the subjective prognostic function of the medieval consciousness. In general, the ideological horizon of time and foresight has expanded due to the fact that the prognostic reflection of the era has largely emerged from presentative closed cycles and has become essentially evaluative in the knowledge of time and the course of history.
If in mythological consciousness the personification of time in the image of Chronos reflected concern about human lack of freedom and fatal predetermination, then the Renaissance man comes to realize himself as the creator of himself and his destiny. Axiological reflection of time was a huge leap in worldview, integrating new type activities and a new life position. The higher the reflection social practice, the stronger the socialization of foresight and the more successful the development of historical time.
A step forward along the path of the historical evolution of social foresight was utopia, which denied providentialism and eschatology. While theological prognostication followed the path of mystification, and utopia followed the path of illusory prediction, philosophy formed a conceptual foresight and evaluative reflection of time. It is Lotman’s syntactic type of culture that is an expression of the practicalism of the figures of the era, rehabilitation practical activities. Significant party The organization of this type of culture was its involvement in temporary development. It is this type of culture that then dominates in the era of centralization.
Since the 16th century, science has become an independent factor in spiritual life. The successes of science during the years of Galileo, Copernicus and Newton are considered the first scientific revolution. Its result was a holistic mechanistic picture of the world. More high degree reflections of foresight and historical time determine the development of the social consciousness of the era, freeing human consciousness from fetishes, forming a new type of activity. With a new level of cultural self-awareness of the era, the culture of the time is enriched both by the development of natural philosophy and the artistic exploration of time. The temporalism of the Renaissance is structural: historical time, artistic, natural, personal, active. The historical time of the Middle Ages was external in relation to the existence of humanity, while for the man of the Renaissance, time characterizes the existence of culture, is recognized as the most important criterion of a person’s historical orientation, from the point of view of the entry of subjective time into the mainstream of socio-historical, from the standpoint of fundamental ethical value.
Later, the classical scientific paradigm semantizes time as a dry, rational, dispassionate category, which in comparison with antiquity, the Middle Ages and the Renaissance meant its complete dehumanization: the totality of matter in natural philosophy did not allow the assumption of human temporality. Philosophy, starting with non-classical and developing into post-non-classical philosophy, tries to overcome the flaw of an abstract person and introduce him into a specific cultural and historical context, a system of universal human moral values. A redefinition of the situation, according to L.G. Ionin, occurred in the 18th century: Rousseau divided all vertical classifications into two groups - natural and political, or cultural. In the process of transition to a non-classical form, science becomes one of the main types of activity, and objectivity itself is fused with the means of obtaining knowledge and the operational schemes through which this knowledge is obtained.
Mutations of worldview mean that the image of the world is forced out to the court of philosophical and scientific methodology, which either adapts to the new picture or radically revises it. In the second half of the nineteenth century, the discovery of social inequality and the demand for equality was understood as part of the grandiose spiritual revolution of the time, marking the beginning of a new cultural era- the modern era.
The concept of a social problem, writes G.S. Batygin, was formed in early XIX centuries in the context of reformist ideology, they meant poverty, crime, morbidity, prostitution, illiteracy. The social survey movement was strengthened by socialist ideas, extremely popular in educated circles in Europe and America, and sociology and socialism went hand in hand at that time. At the same time, the level of predictive action of science turned out to be dependent on the cultural and historical type of activity. At the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, new discoveries in physics revealed the limitations of classical theory, the mechanistic concept of the world, and led to the creation new physics theories of Einstein, Planck, Rutherford and covered the main branches of science. Science has become an integral and most important part of our civilization, acquiring social, economic, and political functions.
With the new role of science in culture, the appearance of science as a social institution is changing. In modernizing the functions of science in the evolution of culture and the nature of social systems, it is no longer the personal experience of recognition and foresight that works, but the impersonal procedure for substantiating generally valid conclusions that can be reproduced if given conditions are met. Traditionally, the type of scientific reflection is associated not only with historical era And national culture, but also by personality, a specific person. And no matter how remote from technical applications any dissertation work may seem, it represents a link in the chain of actions and decisions that determine the fate of the human race. scientific picture the world evolves along with culture. The concept of a scientific community is akin to the Kuhnian paradigm, but is more broadly associated with sociocultural determination.
The correlation of cultural traditions and representational images with the evolution of the social picture of the world, closely related to the type of scientific rationality and the authorities of philosophical systems, is valuable. The orthodox traditional course of Marxism should act as a certain historical stage in the development of world philosophy. V.S. Stepin conveys the ideological cliché figuratively: they put a stupid cap on philosophy and sent them to destroy science. German classical philosophy cultivated intellectuality, clarity, isolation, self-sufficiency and self-awareness. She gave, as it were, a general blueprint of history, but, according to Sartre, it does not contain the concept of conscience and moral judgment. In contrast to the Western classical type, Eastern philosophy emphasized communicative sociality, meditation, and the connection of consciousness with nature. Existential, later European type philosophizing and the Russian tradition of human philosophy already contained an appeal to the soul, existence, here-being, as well as an ethos of reconciliation, openness to human existence, the idea of conciliarity, the national idea. Together with Western concepts of man, Russian high philosophy had a certain influence on the sociology of postmodernism.
Classical sociology built a typology of social systems according to the principle of old - new, conservative - progressive. Sociologists have focused on typologies of social communities and the scale of systems, but social level analyzed two the most important types societies: pre-industrial and industrial. These are the classic models of F. Tennis, E. Durkheim, G. Simmel, G. Spencer, T. Parsons. If we use the idea of vertical classification, then in modern society, which differs from traditional society in a number of parameters, a redefinition of the situation occurred with the rise of the bourgeois class.
P. Berger believes that capitalism is not only an element of practice, but also a certain concept; historically, the capitalist phenomenon in its fully developed form coincided with the phenomenon of industrialism. New economic institutions and technologies have transformed the world, capitalism is closely related to technology and transformations of the material conditions of human life, new system stratification based on classes, political system in the face nation state and democratic institutions, a culture that is historically associated with the bourgeois class and emphasizes the importance of the individual. Thus, all elements are mutually intertwined and are presented by both defenders and critics within the framework economic culture capitalism.
The growth in popularity of mass periodicals led, G.S. Batygin analyzes, to the emergence of another type of social survey - audience surveys by authorities mass media. This was an attempt to systematically organize field interviews, including selecting respondents by gender, age, profession and place of residence. Traditionally, the focus has been on elections, collecting information about different sides American life. Particularly important was the contribution of sociologists to the study of the influence of question formulations, types of argumentation and attitudes on the procedure and content of expressing opinions. Institute public opinion J. Gallup found a method for a multi-stage probabilistic sampling survey with the most accurate forecast.
A true fundamental revolution in the scientific understanding of time was the provisions of A. Einstein, and the revolution in physics at the turn of the 19th–20th centuries, its principles and epistemological principles of Einstein overcame the crisis of absolute substantial temporalism in physical theory, demonstrating the possibility of overcoming the standard framework of the classical paradigm in a revolutionary leap of theory . This was only the first, albeit significant, contribution to the construction of a new cultural-historical temporalism. The philosophy of the 20th century is trying to overcome the flaw of abstract man and introduce him into a specific cultural, historical and temporal context. The development of science in the 20th century is characterized by a radical revision of the conceptual foundations of the problem of time, as well as the apparatus of scientific forecasting, closely related to the paradigm of time. After the limitation of the Newtonian understanding of time, Einstein's progressive ideas, which have not only physical but also general cultural significance, increasingly influence general style thinking in various fields culture. And this influence will continue until the relativistic paradigm, having a history of more than half a century, completely destroys the preservation of faith in a single and unique time for the whole world and all processes.
The decoding of the symbols of time occurred in the philosophies of the 20th century with the awareness of the ultimate borderline situations in the life of an individual. Isolation from the temporal roots of authentic existence gives rise to marginality and the risk of existence, its prerequisite is the impersonality of the rigid determinism of the social structure. The totality of experiences regarding Hamlet’s attitude to time and the eternal philosophical question of existence is transferred directly to modern times, increasing the urgency of the issue. The life path of an individual merges with the temporality of age and turns out to be dependent on the life time of the nation, the time of culture. In the chronotope of culture, the fullness of time gradually increases depending on the type of activity.
It is known that the entropy justification for the direction of time, following Boltzmann, was developed by A. Eddington, G. Reichenbach, A. Grünbaum. Nietzsche would have had one less intellectual joy if he had known about the law of thermodynamics. Based on the same entropy definition of the order of time, scientists came to the conclusion about the statistical nature, the statistical nature of the direction of time, the state of negative energy it was proposed to consider it as the movement of electrons backwards in time. In cultural and historical evolution, the idea of time is represented by an archetype that structures activity, culture, and the picture of the world. It evolves from primitive presentism and ancient cyclism to the linear time of Augustine and Newton, then to a whole fan of forms of artistic, psychological, natural and sociocultural time of post-non-classical culture, as well as time inversions, superpositions and time loops of postmodernism.
Human thought passes through the awareness of the plurality and equality of value and normative systems, from understanding and empathy of borderline situations to compassion, embodied in completely pragmatic and rational help and support. In the 20th century, the collapse of totalitarianism and the lack of consumer abundance, openness, and deep informatization in conditions of the juvenile psyche of social subjects formed famous type homo soviticus with such social characteristics, as an idea of one’s own exclusivity, paternalistic orientation, combination indoor installation to egalitarianism with a hierarchical world order and imperial claims. And only the phenomenon of a later type is more often characterized by common sense, ambivalence, marginality, and tolerance. Awareness of one's own mortality and imperfection, the injustice of society turned out to be perhaps the most adequate and deep knowledge about human nature.
On the way to dismembering the roots social institutions, scientific progress, German theorizing, there is a loss of pre-philosophical syncretism, which is rediscovered as newfound therapeutic ideals: anthropologism, the priority of personal relationships, the desire for a rural idyll among prisoners of urbanization. What Western reflection on civilization has lost is now rapidly being rediscovered as an understanding of meaning, an experience of an era, human temporality, and an extra-theoretical insight into a situation. At the same time, modernist layers of culture preserve the Western type of civilization, create a new typology of personality and lifestyle, codify the law and authority of deduction, while reviving induction.
The world we live in does not turn out to be a simple linear mechanism: rather, it is a world without stability, guarantees and simple linear dependencies. The post-non-classical situation of society has completely overthrown the academicism of the faceless, subjectless world, painting a picture of a creative, moral individual, vital intelligence and spontaneous life culture. The imaginative range of experience in a holistic view of the world does not correspond to the classical technogenic stereotypes of pure oppositions; rational deep programs of human life do not appear clearly everywhere, giving way to unclear intentions. Human subjectivity, removed from the world in the past, was restored; the destruction of the Cartesian-Newtonian value of knowledge led to the understanding of the subject not only as a knower, but also as a living one.
Scientific rationality as anonymous, independent of man was replaced by a new paradigm of the rationality of science, included in culture as a system of ideas about man and the human world.
Previous paradigms turned out to be powerless in considering history as a system human experience, but of man as a spiritual being. Man, according to Ortega, is a drama, his life is a universal event, at every moment of which the possibilities of his life's path open up. To a linear thinker who is about to philosophize about social life individual in the situation of postmodernism, you will have to come across unusual principles and characteristics of professionalization, interdisciplinarity of the subject, conceptualization social action through reflection of fate. Deep anxiety, tension, not of everyday, but of existential origin, organically entered into psychological sphere modern society, the subject of which increasingly capitulates, or leads to the capitulation of another.
With the development of civilization, this risk increases, but the response to deep shocks is found in the bosom of philosophical reflection and technologies for mitigating the shock for humans and society. When T. Kuhn proposed using the concept of a paradigm, he meant a certain cognitive model that interacts with social dimension science, successively passing through the states of normal science and scientific revolution. The subsequent leap into the non-classical field of science meant landing in the nonlinear processes of nature and society, unpredictability and opacity, burdened by human anxiety and concern about world processes, with which the image of Newton’s absolute linear time, one for all processes, could not harmoniously coexist.
Domestic sociology has a short and complicated history; several generations of scientists did not have the opportunity to get acquainted with the works of modern sociologists, sociological knowledge developed dramatically and in isolation from the global evolution of sociological thought. Many trends that have developed in the West, in Soviet science were absent, and those that were allowed were under the pressure of ideological restrictions. Since the 1960s, theorists, despite differences in definitions, have recognized that differences in property, prestige and power are functional aspects inequalities. The classic aspects of inequality are money, power, prestige, and knowledge. Even if these indicators do not have sufficient empirical justification, they still represent the determining conditions for the implementation of generally accepted life goals in modern society. Additional indicators may be: type of income, type of housing, place of residence, education, income of the head of the family, cultural level.
Modern European civilization is considered a product of the implementation of the modernist project, that is, it owes all its distinctive features to the era of modernity and the modernist project. Science, art, morality, industry, freedom, democracy, progress are a product of modernity, as well as achieved equality, rational public organization, high standard of living and other achievements of civilization. One of the main acquisitions of the spiritual culture of postmodernism is the position that a person is immanent and not transcendental to the world; subcultures of social groups are not an ideological construct, but act as a system of meanings, a means of expressing a way of life and a mechanism of adaptation to the dominant culture of society.
These dotted sketches of the evolution of scientific ideas will help the applicant not only think about the horizon social problems, which are studied in the dissertation, but will also awaken scientific curiosity and draw attention to further reading, will introduce you to classics and modern authors on the topic of research.
Service - free online dating on dating.ru. User-friendly interface, time-tested reliability and solidity. In no way inferior to such services as mamba, rambler, etc.
The evolution of science and the problem scientific revolutions.
Evolution of science.
Science branched out from everyday knowledge in ancient times. Over a long period of time, there was a process of accumulation of individual empirical facts. And already in ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, India, the first signs of the formation of scientific knowledge began to appear - ancient medicine, astrology (an area still not recognized by official science, but which has accumulated a lot of empirical data), and mathematics arose. In ancient Greece and Rome, more people were involved in science, and theories arose that tried to explain the facts accumulated by that time.
However, ancient science did not rely on experience and did not have sufficient methodology, which led to some diversity of opinions on certain problems. Except that in mathematics - a science that often did not need to be tested by experience and whose methodological apparatus was based on the generally accepted laws of formal logic - a unity of opinions and continuity of knowledge could be traced.
During the early Middle Ages, the development of science was greatly influenced by religion. Was this a constructive influence? We can say no. In fact, during this period no fundamentally new directions or new theories arose (except, perhaps, one that explains fundamental phenomena as the result of “God’s providence”); There are not many famous names. There was even a regression - the knowledge accumulated over centuries was easily destroyed in the fire of the Alexandrian library. New knowledge and facts accumulated extremely slowly - the monasteries where they were concentrated did not specifically do this.
During the Renaissance, and especially in modern times, the situation in science began to change dramatically for the better. It was in modern times that science began to truly develop.
Interest in the phenomenon of science and the laws of its development is as old as science itself. Since time immemorial, science has been studied both theoretically and empirically.
By the end of the 20th century, the philosophical theory of the development of science is considered to be largely formed. The concepts of T. Kuhn, K. Popper and I. Lakatos, St. Toulmin, P. Feyerabend and M. Polanyi occupy a worthy place in the treasury of world philosophical thought. However, due to their versatility and relevance, questions of the philosophy of science continue to attract the attention of philosophers and scientists of various specialties.
Thus, two phases are clearly visible in the development of science - the phase of the calm development of science and the phase of the scientific revolution. It is quite obvious that the phase that determines the further direction of the development of science is the scientific revolution.
The problem of scientific revolutions.
Scientific revolutions usually affect the ideological and methodological foundations of science, often changing the very style of thinking. Therefore, their significance can go far beyond that specific area where they occurred. Therefore, we can talk about specific scientific and general scientific revolutions.
The emergence of quantum mechanics is a striking example of a general scientific revolution, since its significance goes far beyond physics. Quantum mechanical concepts at the level of analogies or metaphors have penetrated into humanitarian thinking. These ideas encroach on our intuition, common sense, and affect our worldview.
The Darwinian revolution went far beyond biology in its significance. She radically changed our ideas about man's place in Nature. It had a strong methodological impact, turning the thinking of scientists towards evolutionism.
New research methods can lead to far-reaching consequences: to a change in problems, to a change in the standards of scientific work, to the emergence of new areas of knowledge. In this case, their introduction means a scientific revolution.
Sometimes a new area of the unknown opens up before the researcher, a world of new objects and phenomena. This can cause revolutionary changes in the course of scientific knowledge.
Thus, the basis of the scientific revolution may be the discovery of some previously unknown areas or aspects of reality.