The science Modern science- the sphere of research activity aimed at producing new knowledge about nature, society and thinking, including all the conditions and aspects of this production: scientists with their knowledge and abilities, qualifications and experience, with the division and cooperation of scientific work; scientific institutions, experimental and laboratory equipment; research methods; conceptual and categorical apparatus, a system of scientific information, as well as the entire amount of available knowledge that acts as a prerequisite, or means, or result of scientific research. These results can act as Science is not limited to natural sciences or exact sciences. It is considered as an integral system of knowledge, including a historically moving relationship of parts, natural history and social science, philosophy and natural science, method and theory, theoretical and applied research. The science In conditions of scientific and technological revolution Main appointment scientific activity The science- This: 1. One of the forms of social consciousness. 2. 3. 4. Functions of science Scientific knowledge:
Methods for constructing scientific novelty.
Scientific novelty is a criterion of scientific research that determines the degree of transformation, addition, and specification of scientific data. Construction of scientific novelty- the fundamental moment of any scientific search, determining the entire process of scientific creativity of a scientist. Elements novelties in scientific research in sociology:
New or improved criteria for assessing the social processes under study, based on indicators obtained empirically;
For the first time, practically social problems were posed and solved;
New foreign or domestic concepts, used for the first time to solve theoretical problems;
Terms and concepts introduced into scientific circulation in Russian sociology for the first time;
Academicism as a style of scientific communication.
Academicism- communication style, which includes:
A special scientific language, devoid of emotionality and frivolous phrases;
Restrained and constructive nature of criticism and discussion;
Respect for other members of the scientific community.
Academicism assumes the ability to:
To doubt established truths;
Defend your own views;
Fight scientific stereotypes.
Tactics of scientific controversy.
Scientific discussion is understood as a special method of cognition, the essence of which is the discussion and development of opposing ideas in order to reveal the truth or achieve general agreement. A scientific dispute arises when there is a significant difference in the views of the interlocutors, while each of them seeks to defend their own opinion. Logical aspect of the dispute- proof or refutation. Mechanism of dispute- one person puts forward a certain thesis and tries to substantiate its truth, another attacks this thesis and tries to refute its truth. Scientific controversy- rational. It occurs if: 1) there is a subject of dispute; 2) there is a real opposition of the parties’ points of view regarding the subject of the dispute; 3) the general basis of the dispute is presented (principles, provisions that are recognized and shared by both parties); 4) there is some knowledge about the subject of the dispute; 5) respect for the interlocutor is expected. Dispute rules for “speakers”:- a friendly attitude towards the interlocutor; - politeness towards the listener; - modesty in self-esteem, unobtrusiveness; - following the logic of text development; - brevity of statements; - skillful use of auxiliary means. Dispute rules for “listeners”:- the ability to listen; - a patient and friendly attitude towards the speaker; - giving the speaker the opportunity to express himself; - emphasizing interest in the speaker.
Science as a process of obtaining new knowledge.
The science is a human activity to develop, systematize and test knowledge. Knowledge allows us to explain and understand the processes being studied, make predictions for the future and make appropriate scientific recommendations. Science is the basis for the formation of an industrial society. Science has moved away from everyday knowledge but cannot exist without it. Science finds in everyday knowledge material for further processing, without which it cannot do. Modern science The science- a necessary consequence of the social division of labor, it arises after the separation of mental labor from physical labor. In conditions of scientific and technological revolution A new radical restructuring of science as a system is taking place. In order for science to meet the needs of modern production, it turns into a social institution, so that scientific knowledge becomes the property of a large army of specialists, organizers, engineers and workers. If previously science developed as a separate part of the social whole, now it begins to permeate all spheres of life. Main appointment scientific activity- gaining knowledge about reality. Humanity has been accumulating them for a long time. However, most of modern knowledge has been gained in just the last two centuries. This unevenness is due to the fact that it was during this period that science discovered its many possibilities. The science- This: 1. One of the forms of social consciousness. 2. Designation for individual branches of knowledge. 3. A social institution that: - integrates and coordinates the cognitive activities of many people; - organizes social relations in the scientific sphere of public life. 4. A special type of human cognitive activity aimed at developing objective, systematically organized and substantiated knowledge about the world. Functions of science in society: - description, - explanation, - prediction of processes and phenomena of the surrounding world, based on the laws it discovers. Scientific knowledge:- a substantive, objective and systematized way of viewing the world; - goes beyond “direct practice and experience.” The truth of knowledge at the level of scientific knowledge is verified using special logical procedures for obtaining and justifying knowledge, methods of proving and refuting it.
There are many definitions, each of which reflects certain aspects of such a complex concept as science. Let's give a few definitions.
The science- is a form of human knowledge, an integral part of the spiritual culture of society.
The science is a system of concepts about phenomena and laws of reality.
The science- this is a system of all practice-tested knowledge that is a common product of the development of society.
The science- this is the final experience of humanity in a concentrated form, elements of the spiritual culture of all humanity, many historical eras and classes, as well as a way of foresight and active comprehension through theoretical analysis of the phenomena of objective reality for the subsequent use of the results obtained in practice.
The science- this is a special sphere of purposeful human activity, which includes scientists with their knowledge and abilities, scientific institutions and has as its task the study (based on certain methods of cognition) of the objective laws of the development of nature, society and thinking in order to foresee and transform reality in the interests of society [ Burgin et al.].
Each of the given definitions reflects one or another aspect of the concept of “science”; some statements are duplicated.
The following analysis is based on the fact that science is a specific human activity [ Philosophy and methodology of science].
Let's consider what is special about this activity. Any activity:
Has a purpose;
The final product, methods and means of obtaining it;
Directed at certain objects, revealing its subject in them;
It represents the activities of subjects who, in solving their problems, enter into certain social relationships and form various forms of social institutions.
In all these respects, science differs significantly from other spheres of human activity. Let's consider each of the parameters separately.
The main, defining goal of scientific activity is to obtain knowledge about reality. Knowledge is acquired by a person in all forms of his activity - in everyday life, in politics, in economics, in art, and in engineering. But in these areas of human activity, obtaining knowledge is not the main goal.
For example, art is intended to create aesthetic values. In art, the artist’s relationship to reality is in the foreground, and not a reflection of reality itself. The situation is similar in engineering.
Its product is a project, the development of a new technology, an invention. Of course, engineering is based on science. But in any case, the product of engineering development is assessed from the point of view of its practical usefulness, optimal use of resources, expanding the possibilities of transforming reality, and not by the amount of knowledge acquired. From the above examples it is clear that.
science differs from all other activities in its purpose Knowledge can be scientific or non-scientific. Let's take a closer look distinctive features exactly.
scientific knowledge
Science includes scientists with their knowledge and abilities, scientific institutions and has as its task the study (based on certain methods of cognition) of the objective laws of nature, society and thinking to foresee and transform reality in the interests of society. [Burgin M.S. Introduction to modern exact science methodology. Structures of knowledge systems. M.: 1994].
Scientific activity includes the following elements: subject (scientists), object (all states of being of nature and man), goal (goals) - as a complex system of expected results of scientific activity, means (methods of thinking, scientific instruments, laboratories), final product ( indicator of scientific activity carried out - scientific knowledge), social conditions (organization of scientific activity in society), activity of the subject - without the proactive actions of scientists and scientific communities, scientific creativity cannot be realized.
Today, the goals of science are diverse - this is the description, explanation, prediction, interpretation of those processes and phenomena that have become its objects (subjects), as well as the systematization of knowledge and the implementation of the results obtained in management, production and other spheres of public life, in improving its quality.
Science is not only a form of social consciousness aimed at an objective reflection of the world and providing humanity with an understanding of patterns. Science, in essence, is a social phenomenon; its beginnings appeared in antiquity, approximately 2.5 thousand years ago. An important prerequisite for the development of science as a social institution is the systematic education of the younger generation.
In ancient Greece, scientists organized philosophical schools, for example, Plato's Academy, Aristotle's Lyceum, and engaged in research of their own free will. In the famous Pythagorean League, founded by Pythagoras, young people had to spend the whole day at school under the supervision of teachers and obey the rules of social life.
The social stimulus for the development of science was growing capitalist production, which required new natural resources and machines. Science was needed as a productive force for society. If ancient Greek science was a speculative research (translated from Greek “theory” means speculation), little connected with practical problems, then only in the 17th century. Science began to be seen as a way to ensure man's dominance over nature. Rene Descartes wrote:
“It is possible, instead of speculative philosophy, which only conceptually dissects a pre-given truth in hindsight, to find one that directly approaches being and attacks it so that we obtain knowledge about force... Then... realize and apply this knowledge for all the purposes for which they are suitable, and thus this knowledge (these new ways of representation) will make us masters and owners of nature” (Descartes R. Discourses on the method. Selected works. M., 1950, p. 305).
It was in Western Europe that science emerged as a social institution in the 17th century. and began to claim a certain autonomy, i.e. there was recognition of the social status of science. In 1662, the Royal Society of London was founded, and in 1666, the Paris Academy of Sciences.
Important preconditions for such recognition can be seen in the creation of medieval monasteries, schools and universities. The first universities of the Middle Ages date back to the 12th century, but they were dominated by a religious paradigm of worldview, and the teachers were representatives of religion. Secular influence penetrates universities only after 400 years.
As a social institution, science includes not only a system of knowledge and scientific activity, but also a system of relations in science (scientists create and enter into various social relations), scientific institutions and organizations.
An institution (from the Latin institut – establishment, arrangement, custom) presupposes a set of norms, principles, rules, and models of behavior that regulate human activity and are woven into the functioning of society; this phenomenon is above the individual level, its norms and values dominate the individuals operating within its framework. R. Merton is considered the founder of this institutional approach in science. The concept of “social institution” reflects the degree of consolidation of one or another type of human activity - there are political, social, religious institutions, as well as institutions of family, school, marriage, etc.
The methods of social organization of scientists are subject to change and this is due both to the peculiarities of the development of science itself and to changes in its social status in society. Science as a social institution depends on other social institutions that provide the necessary material and social conditions for its development. Institutionality provides support for those activities and those projects that contribute to the strengthening of a particular value system.
The social conditions of science are the totality of elements of the organization of scientific activity in society and the state. These include: the need of society and the state for true knowledge, the creation of a network of scientific institutions (academies, ministries, research institutes and associations), public and private financial support for science, material and energy supply, communication (publishing monographs, journals, holding conferences), training of scientific personnel.
Currently, none of the scientific institutes preserves or embodies in its structure principles of dialectical materialism or biblical revelation, as well as the connection between science and parascientific types of knowledge.
Modern science is characterized by the transformation of scientific activity into a special profession. An unwritten rule in this profession is the prohibition of turning to authorities for the purpose of using the mechanism of coercion and subordination in resolving scientific problems. A scientist is required to constantly confirm his professionalism, through a system of objective assessment (publications, academic degrees), and through public recognition (titles, awards), i.e. the requirement of scientific competence becomes leading for the scientist, and only professionals or groups of professionals can be arbiters and experts when assessing the results of scientific research. Science takes on the function of translating the personal achievements of a scientist into a collective property.
But until the end of the 19th century. For the vast majority of scientists, scientific activity was not the main source of their material support. Typically, scientific research was carried out at universities, and scientists supported themselves by paying for their teaching work. One of the first scientific laboratories to generate significant income was the laboratory created by the German chemist J. Liebig in 1825. The first award for scientific research (the Copley Medal) was approved by the Royal Society of London in 1731.
The highest prestigious award in the field of physics, chemistry, medicine and physiology since 1901 is the Nobel Prize. The history of the Nobel Prizes is described in the book “The Testament of Alfred Nobel.” The first Nobel Prize laureate (1901) in the field of physics was V.K. Roentgen (Germany) for the discovery of rays named after him.
Today science cannot do without the help of society and the state. In developed countries today, 2-3% of total GNP is spent on science. But often commercial benefits and the interests of politicians influence priorities in the field of scientific and technological research today. Society encroaches on the choice of research methods and even on the evaluation of the results obtained.
The institutional approach to the development of science is now one of the dominant ones in the world. And although its main disadvantages are considered to be the exaggeration of the role of formal aspects, insufficient attention to the basics of human behavior, the rigid prescriptive nature of scientific activity, and the disregard for informal development opportunities, the compliance of members of the scientific community with the norms and values accepted in science is complemented by ethos of science as an important characteristic of the institutional understanding of science. According to Merton, the following features of the scientific ethos should be distinguished:
Universalism– the objective nature of scientific knowledge, the content of which does not depend on who and when it was obtained, only the reliability confirmed by accepted scientific procedures is important;
Collectivism– the universal nature of scientific work, implying the publicity of scientific results, their public domain;
Unselfishness, conditioned by the general goal of science - the comprehension of truth (without considerations of prestigious order, personal gain, mutual responsibility, competition, etc.);
Organized skepticism– a critical attitude towards oneself and the work of one’s colleagues; in science nothing is taken for granted, and the moment of denying the results obtained is considered as an element of scientific research.
Scientific norms. Science has certain norms and ideals of scientificity, its own standards of research work, and although they are historically changeable, they still retain a certain invariant of such norms, due to the unity of the style of thinking formulated in Ancient Greece. It is commonly called rational. This style of thinking is based essentially on two fundamental ideas:
Natural orderliness, i.e. recognition of the existence of universal, natural and rationally accessible causal relationships;
Formal proof as the main means of validating knowledge.
Within the framework of a rational style of thinking, scientific knowledge is characterized by the following methodological criteria (norms). It is these norms of scientific character that are constantly included in the standard of scientific knowledge.
versatility, i.e. exclusion of any specifics - place, time, subject, etc.
- consistency or consistency, provided by the deductive method of deploying a knowledge system;
- simplicity; A good theory is one that explains the widest possible range of phenomena, based on a minimum number of scientific principles;
- explanatory potential;
- presence of predictive power.
Scientific criteria. For science, the following question is always relevant: what knowledge is truly scientific? In natural science, character is of utmost importance confirmability of the theory by empirical facts .
When characterizing a natural science theory, not the term “truth” is used, but the term “confirmability”. A scientist must strive for precision of expressions and not use ambiguous terms. The main criterion for the scientific nature of natural science in this regard is the confirmability of the theory. The terms “truth” and “truth” have a broader interpretation and are used in natural science, humanities, logic, mathematics, and religion, i.e. it does not express the specificity of natural science in comparison with the term “confirmability,” which is of paramount importance for natural science.
In humanities theories are ranked according to their effectiveness .
In the 20th century define two requirements for scientific knowledge:
1) knowledge must allow one to understand the phenomena being studied,
2) carry out retro-telling of the past and prediction of the future about them.
Natural sciences fulfill these requirements through concepts. hypothetico-deductive method and based on the confirmability criterion , and the humanities - thanks to the reliance on value ideas, pragmatic method and efficiency criteria – which are the three main scientific foundations of humanities.
Cognition is the process of reflecting the world in the minds of people, moving from ignorance to knowledge, from incomplete and inaccurate knowledge to more complete and accurate knowledge.
Cognition is one of the most important types of human activity. At all times, people have strived to understand the world around them, society and themselves. Initially, human knowledge was very imperfect, it was embodied in various practical skills and in mythological ideas. However, with the advent of philosophy, and then the first sciences - mathematics, physics, biology, socio-political doctrines, progress began in human knowledge, the fruits of which increasingly influenced the development of human civilization.
KNOWLEDGE is the result of knowledge of reality, confirmed by practice, the result of the cognitive process that led to the acquisition of truth. Knowledge characterizes a relatively accurate reflection of reality in human thinking. It demonstrates experience and understanding and allows one to master the world around them. In a general sense, knowledge is opposed to ignorance, ignorance. Within the cognitive process, knowledge, on the one hand, is opposed to opinion, which cannot claim to be the complete truth and expresses only a subjective belief.
On the other hand, knowledge is opposed to faith, which also claims to be the complete truth, but is based on other grounds, on the confidence that this is exactly the case. The most significant question of knowledge is how true it is, that is, whether it can really be a real guide in the practical activities of people.
Knowledge claims to be an adequate reflection of reality. It reproduces the natural connections and relationships of the real world, strives to reject misconceptions and false, untested information.
Knowledge is based on scientific facts. “Facts, taken from their certainty, determine what is knowledge and what is science” (Thomas Hobbes).
A powerful thirst for knowledge is a purely human need. Any living creature on earth accepts the world as it is. Only a person tries to understand how this world works, what laws govern it, what determines its dynamics. Why does a person need this? It is not easy to answer this question. Sometimes they say; knowledge helps a person to survive. But this is not entirely true, because it is knowledge that can lead humanity to destruction... It is no coincidence that Ecclesiastes teaches us: much knowledge multiplies sorrow...
Nevertheless, already ancient man discovered in himself a powerful desire to penetrate the secrets of the Universe, to understand its secrets, to sense the laws of the universe. This desire penetrated deeper and deeper into the person, capturing him more and more. This irresistible desire for knowledge reflects human nature. It would seem, why does an individual, or me personally, need to know whether there is life on other planets, how history unfolds, whether it is possible to find the smallest unit of matter, what is the mystery of living thinking matter. However, having tasted the fruits of knowledge, a person can no longer refuse them. On the contrary, he is ready to go to the stake for the sake of truth. "Those who have innate knowledge stand above all. Next come those who acquire knowledge through study. Next come those who begin learning after encountering difficulties. Those who, having encountered difficulties, do not learn, stand lower everyone" (Confucius).
Three different sciences study knowledge: theory of knowledge (or epistemology), psychology of knowledge and logic. And this is not surprising: knowledge is a very complex subject, and in different sciences not the entire content of this subject is studied, but only one or another aspect of it.
The theory of knowledge is the theory of truth. She explores knowledge from the side of truth. It explores the relationship between knowledge and the subject of knowledge, i.e. between the object of knowledge and the being about which knowledge is expressed. “The real form in which truth exists can only be its scientific system.” (Georg Hegel). She studies the question of whether truth is relative or absolute and considers such properties of truth as, for example, universality and its necessity. This is an exploration of the meaning of knowledge. In other words, the range of interests of the theory of knowledge can be defined as follows: it studies the objective (logical) side of knowledge.
The theory of knowledge, in order to build a theory of truth, must conduct a preparatory study, consisting of an analysis of the composition of knowledge, and since all knowledge is realized in consciousness, it also has to engage in a general analysis of the composition of consciousness and develop some kind of doctrine about the structure of consciousness.
There are various ways and methods by which the truth of knowledge is verified. They are called criteria of truth.
The main criteria are the experimental verification of knowledge, the possibility of its application in practice and its logical consistency.
Experimental testing of knowledge is characteristic, first of all, of science. Assessing the truth of knowledge can also be carried out through practice. For example, on the basis of certain knowledge, people can create some technical device, carry out certain economic reforms, or treat people. If this technical device functions successfully, the reforms give the expected results, and the sick are healed, then this will be an important indicator of the truth of knowledge.
First, the knowledge gained should not be confusing or internally contradictory.
Second, it must be logically consistent with well-tested and reliable theories. For example, if someone puts forward a theory of heredity that is fundamentally incompatible with modern genetics, then we can assume that it is unlikely to be true.
It should be noted that the modern theory of knowledge believes that there are no universal and unambiguous criteria of truth. Experiment cannot be completely accurate, practice changes and evolves, and logical consistency is concerned with relationships within knowledge rather than with the relationship between knowledge and reality.
Therefore, even that knowledge that can withstand testing according to the specified criteria cannot be considered absolutely true and established once and for all.
The form of cognition is a way of cognition of the surrounding reality, which has a conceptual, sensory-figurative or symbolic basis. Thus, a distinction is made between scientific knowledge, based on rationality and logic, and non-scientific knowledge, based on sensory-figurative or symbolic perception of the world.
Scientific knowledge of such an object as society includes social knowledge (sociological approach to the process of cognition) and humanitarian knowledge (universal human approach).
However, in the modern world, not all phenomena are fully understood. There is a lot that is inexplicable from a scientific point of view. And where science is powerless, non-scientific knowledge comes to the rescue:
non-scientific knowledge itself is scattered, unsystematic knowledge that is not described by laws and is in conflict with the scientific picture of the world;
pre-scientific - prototype, prerequisite for the emergence of scientific knowledge;
parascientific - incompatible with existing scientific knowledge;
pseudoscientific - deliberately exploiting conjectures and prejudices;
anti-scientific - utopian and deliberately distorting the idea of reality.
Scientific research is a special form of the cognition process, a systematic and purposeful study of objects that uses the means and methods of science and ends with the formation of knowledge about the objects being studied.
Another form of knowledge is spontaneous-empirical knowledge. Spontaneous-empirical knowledge is primary. It has always existed and still exists today. This is cognition in which the acquisition of knowledge is not separated from the social and practical activities of people. The source of knowledge is a variety of practical actions with objects. From their own experience, people learn the properties of these objects, learn the best ways to act with them - their processing, use. In this way, in ancient times, people learned the properties of healthy grains and the rules for growing them. They did not expect the advent of scientific medicine. The people’s memory contains many useful recipes and knowledge about the healing properties of plants, and much of this knowledge is not outdated to this day. “Life and knowledge are consubstantial and inseparable in their highest standards” (Vladimir Solovyov). Spontaneous-empirical knowledge retains its importance in the era of scientific and technological revolution. This is not some second-rate, but full-fledged knowledge, proven by centuries of experience.
In the process of cognition, various human cognitive abilities are used. People learn a lot in the course of their ordinary life and practical activities, but they have also created a special form of cognitive activity - science, the main goal of which is to achieve reliable and objective true knowledge. Science is not a warehouse of ready-made and comprehensive truths, but a process of achieving them, a movement from limited, approximate knowledge to increasingly universal, deep, accurate knowledge. This process is limitless.
Science is a systematized knowledge of reality, based on observation and study of facts and seeking to establish the laws of the things and phenomena being studied. The goal of science is to obtain true knowledge about the world. In the most general way, science is defined as a sphere of human activity, the function of which is the development and theoretical systematization of objective knowledge about reality.
Science is the comprehension of the world in which we live. This comprehension is consolidated in the form of knowledge as a mental (conceptual, conceptual, intellectual) modeling of reality. “Science is nothing more than a reflection of reality” (Francis Bacon).
The immediate goals of science are the description, explanation and prediction of the processes and phenomena of reality that constitute the subject of its study on the basis of the laws it discovers.
The system of sciences can be divided into natural, humanitarian, social and technical sciences. Accordingly, the objects of study of science are nature, intangible aspects of human activity, society and material aspects of human activity and society.
The highest form of scientific knowledge is scientific theory.
A scientific theory is a logically interconnected system of knowledge that reflects significant, natural and general connections in a particular subject area.
There are many theories that have changed people's ideas about the world. These are, for example, Copernicus's theory, Newton's theory of universal gravitation, Darwin's theory of evolution, Einstein's theory of relativity. Such theories form a scientific picture of the world, which plays an important role in people’s worldview.
Each subsequent scientific theory, compared to the previous one, is more complete and profound knowledge. The previous theory is interpreted as part of the new theory as a relative truth and thereby as a special case of a more complete and accurate theory (for example, the classical mechanics of I. Newton and the theory of relativity of A. Einstein). This relationship between theories in their historical development is called the principle of correspondence in science.
But to build theories, scientists rely on experience, experiment, factual data about the surrounding reality. Science is built from facts like a house made of bricks.
Thus, a scientific fact is a fragment of objective reality or event, the simplest element of a scientific theory. “Facts, taken from their certainty, determine what is knowledge and what is science” (Thomas Hobbes).
Where it is not always possible to obtain scientific facts (for example, in astronomy, history), estimates are used - scientific assumptions and hypotheses that are close to reality and claim to be true.
The part of a scientific theory built on scientific facts is an area of true knowledge on the basis of which axioms, theorems are built and the main phenomena of this science are explained. The part of scientific theory built on estimates represents a problematic area of this science, within the framework of which scientific research is usually conducted. The goal of scientific research is to turn estimates into scientific facts, i.e. the desire for the truth of knowledge.
The specificity of scientific knowledge, in contrast to spontaneous-empirical knowledge, lies primarily in the fact that cognitive activity in science is carried out not by everyone, but by specially trained groups of people - scientists. Scientific research becomes the form of its implementation and development.
Science, in contrast to the spontaneous empirical process of cognition, studies not only those objects with which people deal in their direct practice, but also those that are revealed in the course of the development of science itself. Often their study precedes practical use. “A systematic whole of knowledge can, just because it is systematic, be called science, and if the unification of knowledge in this system is a connection of foundations and consequences, even rational science” (Immanuel Kant). For example, the practical application of atomic energy was preceded by a fairly long period of studying the structure of the atom as an object of science.
In science, they begin to specifically study the very results of cognitive activity - scientific knowledge. Criteria are being developed according to which scientific knowledge can be separated from spontaneous empirical knowledge, from opinions, from speculative reasoning, etc.
Scientific knowledge is recorded not only in natural language, as is always the case in spontaneous empirical knowledge. Specially created symbolic and logical means are often used (for example, in mathematics, chemistry).
The discursiveness of scientific knowledge is based on a forced sequence of concepts and judgments, given by the logical structure of knowledge (cause-and-effect structure), and forms a feeling of subjective conviction in the possession of the truth. Therefore, acts of scientific knowledge are accompanied by the subject’s confidence in the reliability of its content. That is why knowledge is understood as a form of subjective right to truth. In the conditions of science, this right turns into the obligation of the subject to recognize logically substantiated, discursively proven, organized, systematically related truth.
In the history of science, special means of cognition and methods of scientific research are created and developed, while spontaneous empirical knowledge does not have such means. The means of scientific knowledge include, for example, modeling, the use of idealized models, the creation of theories, hypotheses, and experimentation.
Finally, the cardinal difference between scientific knowledge and spontaneous empirical knowledge is that scientific research is systematic and purposeful. It is aimed at solving problems that are consciously formulated as a goal.
Scientific knowledge differs from other forms of knowledge (everyday knowledge, philosophical knowledge, etc.) in that science carefully verifies the results of knowledge through observation and experiment.
Empirical knowledge, if it is included in the system of science, loses its spontaneous character. “I have no doubt at all that real science can and does know the necessary relationships or laws of phenomena, but the only question is: does it remain in this knowledge on an exclusively empirical basis... does it not contain other cognitive elements, in addition , to which abstract empiricism wants to limit it? (Vladimir Solovyov).
The most important empirical methods are observation, measurement and experiment.
Observation in science differs from simple contemplation of things and phenomena. Scientists always set a specific goal and task for observation. They strive for impartiality and objectivity of observation and accurately record its results. Some sciences have developed complex instruments (microscopes, telescopes, etc.) that make it possible to observe phenomena inaccessible to the naked eye.
Measurement is a method by which the quantitative characteristics of the objects being studied are established. Accurate measurement plays a big role in physics, chemistry and other natural sciences, but in modern social sciences, especially in economics and sociology, measurements of various economic indicators and social facts are widespread.
An experiment is an “artificial” situation expediently constructed by a scientist in which presumptive knowledge (hypothesis) is confirmed or refuted by experience. Experiments often use precise measurement techniques and sophisticated instruments to test knowledge as accurately as possible. Scientific experiments often use very complex equipment.
Empirical methods, firstly, make it possible to establish facts, and secondly, to verify the truth of hypotheses and theories by correlating them with the results of observations and facts established in experiments.
Take, for example, the science of society. In modern sociology, empirical research methods play an important role. Sociology must be based on concrete data about social facts and processes. Scientists obtain this data using various empirical methods - observations, sociological surveys, public opinion studies, statistical data, experiments on the interaction of people in social groups, etc. In this way, sociology collects numerous facts that serve as the basis for theoretical hypotheses and conclusions.
Scientists do not stop at observing and establishing facts. They strive to find laws that connect numerous facts. To establish these laws, theoretical research methods are used. Theoretical research is associated with the improvement and development of the conceptual apparatus of science and is aimed at a comprehensive knowledge of objective reality through this apparatus in its essential connections and patterns.
These are methods of analysis and generalization of empirical facts, methods of putting forward hypotheses, methods of rational reasoning that allow one to derive some knowledge from others.
The most famous, classical theoretical methods are induction and deduction.
The inductive method is a method of deducing patterns based on a generalization of many individual facts. For example, a sociologist, based on a generalization of empirical facts, can discover some stable, repeating forms of people's social behavior. These will be primary social patterns. The inductive method is a movement from the particular to the general, from facts to law.
The deductive method is a movement from the general to the specific. If we have some general law, then we can derive more specific consequences from it. Deduction, for example, is widely used in mathematics to prove theorems from general axioms.
It is important to emphasize that the methods of science are interconnected. Without establishing empirical facts, it is impossible to build a theory; without theories, scientists would only have a huge number of unrelated facts. Therefore, in scientific knowledge, various theoretical and empirical methods are used in their inextricable connection.
Science is built on objective and material evidence. Analytical consciousness absorbs the many faces of life experience and is always open to clarification. We can talk about scientific knowledge only when it is generally valid. The obligatory nature of the result is a specific sign of science. Science is also universal in spirit. There is no area that could isolate itself from it for a long time. Everything that happens in the world is subject to observation, consideration, research - natural phenomena, actions or statements of people, their creations and destinies.
Modern development of science leads to further transformations of the entire system of human life. Science exists not only to reflect reality, but also so that the results of this reflection can be used by people.
Particularly impressive is its impact on the development of technology and the latest technologies, the impact of scientific and technological progress on people's lives.
Science creates a new environment for human existence. Science is influenced by the particular form of culture in which it is formed. The style of scientific thinking is developed on the basis of not only social, but also philosophical ideas that generalize the development of both science and all human practice.
Foresight is one of the most important functions of science. At one time, V. Ostwald spoke brilliantly on this issue: “... A penetrating understanding of science: science is the art of foresight. Its entire value lies in the extent to which and with what reliability it can predict future events. Any knowledge that says nothing about the future is dead, and such knowledge should be denied the honorary title of science.” Skachkov Yu.V. Multifunctionality of science. “Questions of Philosophy”, 1995, No. 11
All human practice is actually based on foresight. When engaging in any type of activity, a person assumes (foresees) in advance to obtain some very definite results. Human activity is basically organized and purposeful, and in such organization of his actions a person relies on knowledge. It is knowledge that allows him to expand the area of his existence, without which his life cannot continue. Knowledge makes it possible to foresee the course of events, since it is invariably included in the structure of the methods of action themselves. Methods characterize any type of human activity, and they are based on the development of special tools and means of activity. Both the development of tools of activity and their “application” are based on knowledge, which makes it possible to successfully foresee the results of this activity.
Tracing the social parameter of science as an activity, we see the diversity of its “sections”. This activity is embedded in a specific historical sociocultural context. It is subject to the norms developed by the community of scientists. (In particular, someone who has entered this community is called upon to produce new knowledge and is invariably subject to a “prohibition of repetition.”) Another level represents involvement in a school or direction, in a circle of communication, entering which an individual becomes a person of science.
Science, as a living system, is the production of not only ideas, but also the people who create them. Within the system itself, there is an invisible, continuous work going on to build minds capable of solving its emerging problems. School, as a unity of research, communication and teaching creativity, is one of the main forms of scientific and social associations, moreover, the oldest form, characteristic of knowledge at all levels of its evolution. Unlike organizations such as a scientific research institution, a school in science is informal, i.e. an association without legal status. Its organization is not planned in advance and is not regulated by regulations.
There are also such associations of scientists as “invisible colleges”. This term denotes a network of personal contacts between scientists and procedures for the mutual exchange of information (for example, so-called preprints, i.e. information about not yet published research results) that does not have clear boundaries.
“The Invisible College” refers to the secondary - extensive - period of growth of scientific knowledge. It brings together scientists focused on solving a set of interrelated problems, after a research program has been developed within a small compact group. In the “college” there is a productive “core”, overgrown with many authors who reproduce in their publications, preprints, informal oral contacts, etc. truly innovative ideas of this “core”, the shell around the core can grow as much as desired, leading to the reproduction of knowledge already included in the fund of science.
The sociopsychological factors of scientific creativity include the scientist’s opponent circle. The concept of it was introduced for the purpose of analyzing a scientist’s communications from the point of view of the dependence of the dynamics of his creativity on confrontational relationships with colleagues. From the etymology of the term “opponent” it is clear that it means “one who objects,” who acts as a challenger to someone’s opinion. We will talk about the relationship between scientists who object, refute or challenge someone’s ideas, hypotheses, conclusions. Each researcher has his own circle of opponents. It can be initiated by a scientist when he challenges his colleagues. But it is created by these colleagues themselves, who do not accept the scientist’s ideas, perceive them as a threat to their views (and thereby their position in science) and therefore defend them in the form of opposition.
Since confrontation and opposition take place in a zone controlled by the scientific community, which passes judgment on its members, the scientist is forced not only to take into account the opinions and positions of opponents in order to understand for himself the degree of reliability of his data that has come under fire from criticism, but also to respond to opponents. Polemics, even if hidden, become a catalyst for the work of thought.
Meanwhile, just as behind each product of scientific work there are invisible processes occurring in the creative laboratory of a scientist, these usually include the construction of hypotheses, the activity of imagination, the power of abstraction, etc., opponents with whom he is conducting a hidden polemic. Obviously, hidden polemics become most intense in cases where an idea is put forward that claims to radically change the established body of knowledge. And this is not surprising. The community must have a kind of “defense mechanism” that would prevent “omnivorousness,” the immediate assimilation of any opinion. Hence the natural resistance of society that everyone who claims to be recognized for his achievements of an innovative nature has to experience.
Recognizing the sociality of scientific creativity, it should be borne in mind that along with the macroscopic aspect (which covers both social norms and principles of organization of the world of science, and a complex set of relations between this world and society) there is a microsocial one. He is represented, in particular, in the opponent circle. But in it, as in other microsocial phenomena, the personal beginning of creativity is also expressed. At the level of the emergence of new knowledge - whether we are talking about a discovery, a fact, a theory or a research direction in which various groups and schools work - we find ourselves face to face with the creative individuality of a scientist.
Scientific information about things merges with information about others' opinions about those things. In a broad sense, both obtaining information about things and obtaining information about the opinions of others about these things can be called information activity. It is as ancient as science itself. In order to successfully fulfill his main social role (which is the production of new knowledge), the scientist must be informed about what was known before him. Otherwise, he may find himself in the position of discovering already established truths.
Literature
1. Alekseev P.V., Panin A.V. Philosophy. Textbook. - M.: Prospekt, 1999.
2. Karlov N.V. About fundamental and applied in science and education. // “Questions of Philosophy”, 1995, No. 12
3. Pechenkin A.A. Justification of scientific theory. Classic and modern. - M., Science, 1991
4. Popper K. Logic and the growth of scientific knowledge. - M.: Nauka, 1993.
5. Skachkov Yu.V. Multifunctionality of science. “Questions of Philosophy”, 1995, No. 11
6. Philosophy of science: History and methodology. - M., Publishing Center “Academy”, 2001.
7. Philosophical Encyclopedia. vol.1-5. - M., 1993.
Science expresses the objective laws of phenomena in abstract concepts and diagrams, which must strictly correspond to reality.
Other signs of scientific knowledge: logical justification and practical testing of knowledge; specialist. scientific terminology (artificial language); specialist. instruments and equipment; specific research methods; critical revision of the foundations of scientific research; the presence of a system of value orientations and goals (the search for objective truth as the highest value of science); conceptual and systemic nature of knowledge; reproducibility of scientific phenomena under certain conditions.
Structure and dynamics of scientific knowledge. Science includes: a) scientists with their knowledge, qualifications and experience, division of labor; b) scientific institutions and equipment; c) a system of scientific information (body of knowledge).
There are humanities, natural sciences and technical sciences. There are three layers in the structure of science: 1) general knowledge (philosophy and mathematics); 2) private scientific knowledge; 3) interdisciplinary integrative nature (general theory of systems and theoretical cybernetics from the mid-twentieth century). From the point of view of the characteristics of knowledge, they distinguish: a) empirical knowledge; b) theoretical knowledge; c) ideological, philosophical foundations and conclusions.
The foundations of each science are: a) ideals and norms of research; b) scientific picture of the world; c) philosophical principles.
The forms of implementation and functioning of the ideals and norms of research express the value and purpose of science and include: a) evidence and validity of knowledge; b) explanation and description; c) construction and organization of knowledge.
The scientific picture of the world provides the systematization of knowledge within the framework of the relevant science, functions as a research program that targets the formulation of scientific research problems and the choice of means to solve them.
Philosophical principles participate in the construction of new theories, guiding the restructuring of the normative structures of science and pictures of reality. Classical stage - the ideal of knowledge is the construction of an absolutely true picture of nature. Non-classical stage - an understanding of the relative truth of the picture of nature develops. Post-non-classical stage – vision of science in the context of social conditions and consequences, inclusion of axiological (value) facts when explaining and describing complex system objects (ecological processes, genetic engineering).
In interaction with science, philosophy:
a) stands above science as its guide;
b) is included in science as its integral component;
c) is in the foundation of science as its system-forming principle.
Science and philosophy are interconnected, but at the same time they are different. “Philosophy cognizes being from man and through man..., but science cognizes being, as it were, outside of man.” Philosophy is more an art than a science. Philosophy is one of the areas of culture where the criteria of science do not fully apply. Skepticism regarding philosophy as a science is expressed in the opinion that philosophy is supposedly engaged only in a speculative analysis of concepts about the properties of objects, and not facts about nature (ancient philosophers, Hegel), that it is not a system of knowledge, but only a mental activity.
However, philosophy has a number of characteristics of scientific knowledge: systematicity, fixation in concepts, categories and laws, logical argumentation, evidence, objective truth. Philosophy has chosen dialectics as its method.
Philosophy has a certain redundancy of content in relation to the needs of science of each era. For example, the ideas of atomism in ancient philosophy, etc.
The most important synthetic theories of natural science are distinguished by a pronounced philosophical character. For example, understanding the law of conservation and transformation of energy, the law of entropy, the theory of relativity, quantum theory.
“Philosophical prejudices” can hinder scientists, harm science and lead to dogmatism.
The development of knowledge occurs gradually, and also in the form of scientific revolutions. First large revolution in science(XV-XVII) destroyed the geocentric system and established the classical (mechanistic) picture of the worldview (Copernicus, Galileo, Newton).
The second scientific revolution is associated with Darwin's evolutionary doctrine, cell theory, the law of conservation and transformation of energy, Mendeleev's system of chemical elements (19th century). Creation of non-classical natural science.
The third revolution in science occurred at the turn of the 19th – 20th centuries. Einstein's theory of relativity, Rutherford's experiments with alpha particles, the work of N. Bohr and others showed that the world is complex and that human consciousness is included in the perception of reality. The world is a continuous dynamic.
The scientific picture of the world changed under the influence of non-Aristotelian logic and non-Euclidean geometry (19th century), the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics (late 20th century), general systems theory and theoretical cybernetics (from the mid-20th century).
Methodology of scientific knowledge. Methodology is a system of fundamental principles that determine the method of approach to the analysis and assessment of phenomena, the nature and direction of cognitive and practical activity. From the principles of materialism, dialectics, subjective attitude to reality, practice, the principles of objectivity, determinism, universal connection, development, concrete historical approach, etc. follow. Significant contributions to the development of the research method were made by F. Bacon (experience, inductive method), R. Descartes (rational method), Hegel (dialectics), Marxist philosophy, representatives of scientistic and anthropological movements in philosophy.
In accordance with the structure of science, the following levels are distinguished: a) philosophical methodology, which considers the general principles of knowledge and the categorical structure of science; b) general scientific methodology (theoretical cybernetics, systems approach); c) specific scientific methodology; d) research methods and techniques, i.e. a set of procedures that ensure the receipt of reliable empirical data and their primary processing.
Philosophical methods include dialectical and metaphysical. The theoretical basis of all forms of scientific knowledge is materialist dialectics, which acts as logic and theory of knowledge.
The dialectical method includes the principles of historicism, comprehensiveness, objectivity, specificity, determinism, etc. Issues of the method are not limited to the framework of science and philosophy, but go into the sphere of practice.
Modern dialectical-materialist methodology of science considers in interrelation: a) the object of scientific research; b) subject of analysis; c) the research objective; d) stages of activity.
Among the methodological trends of the twentieth century. highlight the theory of scientific paradigms and syntagmas. Paradigm(from Greek - example, sample - a theory (or model of problem formulation), adopted as a model for solving research problems. Successfully solves typical scientific problems in areas isolated from each other. Syntagma(from Greek - something connected) - a knowledge system that unites heterogeneous subsystems to solve a certain set of complex problems (for example, artificial intelligence, social management, modern ecology).
Methods of empirical and theoretical research. To the main empirical research methods refers to observation, measurement, experiment. Observation– purposeful perception of objects and phenomena in their natural form directly and with the help of instruments. Measurement– establishment of one value using another, accepted as a standard, as well as a description of this procedure. Experiment– studying a subject under specially selected conditions and observing it.
TO general logical methods Scientific knowledge includes interconnected analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, abstraction and generalization. Analysis- dividing an object into its individual parts. Synthesis– combining parts of a subject into a single formation (system). Induction– the movement of thought from the individual to the general. Deduction– movement of thought from the general to the individual. Analogy– based on the similarity of objects in some characteristics, they conclude about their similarity in other characteristics. Modeling– through one system (natural or artificial) they reproduce another, more complex system, which is the object of research.
Abstraction– some distraction from directly perceived reality (abstraction). Generalization– establishment of general properties and characteristics of objects (philosophical categories).
Methods of theoretical research: thought experiment, idealization(logical reconstruction of reality, in a theoretical ideal object the essence is separated from the phenomenon and appears in its pure form, for example, a material point is a body without dimensions, the mass of which is concentrated at the point), explanation, axiomatic method(all other statements are logically derived from the axioms and postulates based on the accepted rules of inference and definitions), ascent from abstract to concrete(from properties, individual aspects to holistic knowledge, for example, K. Marx: from a commodity as an initial abstraction characterizing the essence of capitalist production, he ascended to richer and more meaningful abstractions (money, capital, profitable value, wages, etc.), recreating a comprehensive picture of the capitalist economy as a whole), unity of historical and logical(a description of the real process of the emergence and development of an object carried out with maximum completeness; fixation of the objective logic of the development of events, abstracting from their random specific historical features. Logical is a reflection of the historical process in a form freed from accidents).
The result of empirical research is observational data, empirical facts and dependencies.
The result of theoretical research is an idea, problem, hypothesis, theory (concept), scientific picture of the world.
Idea- a concept denoting the meaning, meaning, essence of a thing. Problem grows out of the needs of human practical activity in the pursuit of new knowledge. The problem is the unity of the unknown and the known, ignorance and knowledge. Hypothesis- knowledge based on an assumption, not yet proven theoretical reasoning. Theory– a justified and proven hypothesis (must be consistent and subject to experimental testability). Gives a scientific picture of the world.
Ethics of science. The most important norms of scientific ethics are: denial of plagiarism; falsification of experimental data; selfless search and defense of truth; the result must be new knowledge, logically, experimentally substantiated.
A scientist, in addition to professionalism, methodological skills, and scientific thinking, must develop certain socio-psychological qualities. Among these qualities, one of the most important is creative intuition.
The problem of the relationship between truth and goodness develops into the problem of the connection between freedom and responsibility in the activities of scientists, into the problem of comprehensive and long-term consideration of the ambiguous consequences of the development of science.
Subject: THE PROBLEM OF MAN IN PHILOSOPHY
- Man as a subject of philosophy. Anthroposociogenesis and its complex nature.
- The problem of the nature and essence of man. The unity of natural and social in man.
- Spirituality and the problem of the meaning of life.
Interest in the problem of man (philosophical anthropology) is caused by the expansion and deepening of knowledge about the world. The ancient philosophical image of man is cosmocentric. For example, Confucius.
Plato saw man as “a bipedal creature without wings with flat claws, susceptible to knowledge based on reasoning.” The physical and spiritual characteristics of a person are highlighted here. Aristotle believed that man is a social animal, endowed with reason, improving in a just state. Aristotle gave a typology of the different “levels” of the soul, distinguishing the plant, animal and rational souls. Plants are responsible for the functions of nutrition, growth and reproduction. In the animal soul, to these functions is added sensation and the ability of desire. The rational soul, which only man possesses, is endowed, in addition to the listed functions, with the highest of abilities - reasoning and thinking. In man, only the mind is immortal: after the death of the body, it merges with the universal mind.
In addition to the idea of improving the individual through his inclusion in the state (social whole), the idea of a happy and virtuous life was pursued by freeing a person from the power of the outside world, from the socio-political sphere (for example, in the ethics of Epicurus).
In medieval philosophy, man was seen as the image and likeness of God, as a moment of movement towards God. On the other hand, the view was maintained that man is a rational animal (duality: he has God’s gift - free will, but the flesh and earthly life of man are sinful).
The Renaissance proclaimed the idea of greatness, freedom, dignity, and the power of the human mind. Humanism was discovered and defended by A. Dante, F. Petrarch, Leonardo da Vinci, T. More, E. Rotterdam, N. Machiavelli, D. Bruno, F. Bacon, F. Skorina and others.
In modern times, attention was paid to the inner world of man. For example, subjectivity, expressed in the formula of R. Descartes “I think, therefore I exist,” became the criterion of all things and the most reliable reality. The beginning of the “activity paradigm” was laid, within the framework of which a person became aware of himself.
Philosophers of the New Age tried to reveal the natural foundations of man. T. Hobbes argued that physical and spiritual abilities, the basic qualities of people can be realized in a state built on the basis of a social contract. B. Pascal anticipated the idea of the uniqueness of human cognition in comparison with nature. D. Locke attached an important role to the formation of harmony between the physical and spiritual principles of the individual (“A healthy mind in a healthy body”). French materialists of the 18th century. also tried to overcome the opposition between body and spirit.
Representatives of classical German philosophy sought to overcome the mechanistic interpretation in understanding man. Hegel believed that a person realizes his spiritual essence by overcoming naturalness, through inclusion in the diversity of relations of social life (family, property, state, law, etc.). However, practical activity was understood abstractly, as the activity of thinking, will, and spirit. Kant developed a dualistic view of man as existing in a “world of nature” and a “world of freedom.” According to L. Feuerbach, the essence of a person is largely determined by his body, and the person himself has a mind, heart and will capable of love. Man, including nature as his basis, is the universal and highest subject of philosophy. In this approach, along with advantages, there are also disadvantages: there is no historical view of man, it does not explain why different people have such different contents of their spiritual life.
Russian thinkers A.I. Herzen and N.G. Chernyshevsky noted that a person is not only exposed to the external world, but also changes it.
Russian philosophy of the 19th century. considered man in the concepts of “philosophy of totality” and “philosophy of individuality.” The first direction was represented by the Slavophiles, who believed that a truly moral subject, combining personal and collective principles, was possible only within the framework of the peasant community as an ideal “moral world.” Westerners focused on Western European civilization, the personal principle, and criticized Orthodoxy. F.M. Dostoevsky divided history into three stages: patriarchy (natural collectivity), civilization (painful individualization) and Christianity as a synthesis of the previous ones.
K. Marx and F. Engels developed the general materialist idea of the determination of man by objective natural and social reality. This concept is supplemented by the idea of human activity and activity, which developed within the framework of idealism. At the same time, Marx discovered a tendency towards an increasing role of the subjective factor in history. V.I. Lenin, developing these provisions, formulated the ideology of revolutionary activism.
Representatives of anthropological philosophy, especially existentialism, chose existence, the spiritual world of man, as the main theme of their reflections. Existentialists believe that humanism is under threat due to the technization of society and man, the danger of nuclear war, and the Marxist doctrine that absolutizes the universality of labor and technology.
In the context of accelerating social progress, religious philosophy is being updated in the direction of an “anthropological turn.”
Modern foreign theorists are concerned with questions of the meaning of life and value orientations of a person, ways of his self-realization.
In general, modern socio-philosophical thought names a number of patterns of development of the essential forces of man:
· their continuous complication;
· advanced development of abilities as an indicator of qualitative change in personality;
· increasing the degree of freedom of human development;
· growth of the thoroughness of historical action.
The Becoming of Man ( anthropogenesis) and formation of society ( sociogenesis) together constitute anthroposociogenesis, which lasted 3-3.5 million years. In accordance with the evolutionary labor theory, it is believed that man descended from apes.
The behavior of human ancestors (homins) is characterized by: a) instinctive behavior; b) the decisive role of genetic inheritance; c) herd lifestyle; d) biophysiological division of functions.
According to the hypothesis, overcoming the shortcomings of the biological mode of behavior of human ancestors and the greatly deteriorating conditions of their habitat prompted the emergence of a fundamentally new, social way of existence of the pre-human and his transformation into a person. To make the leap into a social mode of existence, human ancestors had the necessary biological prerequisites: a brain; upright walking; a developed hand capable of performing labor operations; a larynx capable of producing articulate sounds; a look that allows you to see in three dimensions and navigate in space; development of complex patterns of behavior and adaptation to various environmental conditions; long-term care by parents of children, leading to better biological maturation and learning; the relative stability of sexual desire, affecting the quality of the offspring. Pre-man turned out to be prepared to pick up a stick or stone, thus lengthening his limbs, strengthening his natural capabilities by artificial means. From adaptation to nature, he moved on to its transformation and work. “Labor created man himself.”
The beginning of the manufacture of labor tools is a historical milestone in the formation of man and society. There is evidence that the manufacture of simple tools began 1-1.5 million years earlier than the appearance of speech and thinking. Initially, the decisive role in production and everyday life was played by skills, abilities, not the mind. This makes it possible to assert that Man in his development goes through the stages of skillful, upright and reasonable man.
Already in the 60s. XIX century Haeckel, Huxley and Focht formulated one of the difficulties of the labor theory of human origins - the “missing link,” a morphologically defined form between ape-like ancestors and modern man. And in the 90s. XX century Genetic scientists, examining DNA molecules from the remains of a Neanderthal man a hundred thousand years ago, found in the vicinity of Düsseldorf, came to the conclusion that Neanderthals were not the predecessors of modern humans, but were an extinct side line of evolutionary development.
A number of researchers who are skeptical about the labor theory of human origins pay special attention to spiritual factor the appearance of man. According to Teilhard de Chardin, the “paradox of man” is that the transition took place not through morphological changes, but internally, through the development of consciousness, psyche, reason, only veiled by morphology.”
Many insects, birds, and mammals developed more radical innovations than human ancestors: complex nests, beaver dams, geometric angles, urban anthills, etc. This means that man’s advantage was not that he began to use tools, but that that he was originally a self-improving animal using mainly his mind.
In a number of cases, animals carry out instrumental activities that contain “manual intelligence” or “practical thinking” (A.N. Lentyev). In the objective and practical activity of a person, the physical and spiritual abilities of a person are embodied, thinking, speech, self-awareness and various abilities develop. In the physical and mental development of a person, the labor factor is of decisive importance:
a) an increase in the number of connections and their complication (man - a tool of labor - an object of labor - nature);
b) the result of labor is separated in time from the direct labor act;
c) in the process of labor, a person learned the external connections and internal properties of things, developed his analytical and synthetic abilities;
d) along with the formation of the hand, the human brain increased and became more complex;
e) in the process of labor, the instinctive basis of behavior was weakened, the will, intellect, and human needs were formed.
In the process of labor, a sociocultural association of people and language are formed as a means of organizing joint actions, storing and transmitting knowledge, and communication.
Thus, work, thinking and speech formed man.
Depending on the material and labor factor, the American scientist L. Morgan (1818-1888) identified three historical eras in human history - savagery(use of fire, hunting, invention of the bow), barbarism(pottery, domestication of animals and cultivation of useful plants, smelting iron ore) and civilization(invention of alphabetic writing, creation of firearms).
K. Marx and F. Engels based the classification of history on the economic basis in all its depth, considering the development of the means of production and their influence on the nature of social relations (social division of labor: cattle breeding from agriculture; money; mental from physical).
Labor is the most important system-forming concept, not only political and economic, but also sociocultural.
One of the factors of anthroposociogenesis is moral. Moral and social norms arose as an expression of value behavior (prohibitions on incest, on the murder of a relative, the requirement to maintain the life of any member of the clan, and later - the human race as a whole and animals). Punitive measures (ostracism).
The production of people by people themselves played an important role in the development of man and society ( demographic factor).
The continuation of the human race as a biosocial process is in organic unity with the sphere of production of means of life and the habitat. The main features of the quality of the population are health, psychophysiological comfort of life, dynamic behavior style in unity with stability.
During anthroposociogenesis, a person acts as a product and at the same time a creator of circumstances. This leads to a number of approaches to man.
Object-genesis approach identifies the factors of human formation: a) macroenvironment (space, environmental, demographic, socio-economic, political living conditions); b) microenvironment (family, work collective); c) social communities of people, interpersonal communication; d) public and political organizations, parties; e) system of training and education; f) mass media and cultural institutions.
K. Marx in his “Theses on Feuerbach” defined man as the totality of all social relations. However, a person is correlated not only with society, but also with the Universe, with all of History, with another person as an individual being of the Cosmos.
S. Freud emphasized the role of the unconscious and argued that culture is derived from a person’s unconscious drives.
Subjective-functional approach reveals a person’s involvement in the main spheres of activity, communication and knowledge and characterizes him as a productive, socio-political and spiritual force of society.
Biologization(naturalistic) concepts of man absolutize the role of natural principles in man. Sociologizing theories represent a person only as a cast of the social relations surrounding him.
The natural-social in man is embodied in the unity of body and soul. Human actions are regulated not only by bodily needs, but also by social ones - society, history, spiritual and moral motives, etc.
Man is included in two worlds - nature and society. The biological in man is the initial, although not sufficient, beginning for explaining history and man himself. It is presented in the form of inclinations and abilities, drives. The social in a person is expressed in the fact that he embodies all the wealth of social development and is a product of the system of training and education. The dynamism and vitality of society largely depends on the maximum realization by individuals of their inclinations. Genetic and social differences are factors in human progress.
Compared to the social, the biological is more conservative. The human body does not always have time to adapt to negative and rapid changes in the environment (ecological disaster).
In general, it is necessary to improve social conditions and human biological capabilities simultaneously, ensuring their optimal interaction.
Spirituality there is a commitment to kindness, love, mercy, compassion and tolerance, conscience, beauty, freedom and honor, loyalty to ideals, the desire to reveal the secrets of existence and the meaning of life.
Human spirituality is manifested: 1) in the uniqueness of human individuality; 2) in involvement in universality, in the integrity of nature and culture.
The loss of the meaning of life has always been viewed as one of the greatest tragedies, as the loss of the main point of support. In the mythology of the ancient Greeks, the gods punished Syphysis for criminal acts with meaningless labor - they made him an eternal duty to roll a heavy stone up a mountain, which, upon reaching the top, rolled down. And the daughters of King Danae, who stabbed their sleeping husbands with daggers on their wedding night, are forced to fill a vessel that has no bottom with water.
The focus of culture has always been on the tasks of rational arrangement of social life, maintaining correspondence between society and nature, and harmonizing the inner world of man. In the search for harmony, people give preference to either external (material prosperity, fame, success) or internal harmony (spirit). Obviously, the meaning of life lies not in the opposition of internal and external harmony, but in their complementarity. The meaning of life for a person is in the comprehensive development of one’s abilities, making a personal contribution to the progress of society and culture through improving one’s own status (material and spiritual).
A person realizes the inevitability of his death. Death is an eternal theme of culture, “the inspiring genius of philosophy” (Socrates). The meaning of death is to create conditions for enriching life; the inevitability of death makes life meaningful and responsible (existentialism, Russian religious philosophy).
Modern interest in the problem of death is due to: a) the situation of a global civilizational crisis, which can lead to the self-destruction of humanity; b) a change in the value attitude towards life and death in connection with the general situation on Earth (devaluation of life due to poverty, lack of medical care, rampant terrorism, etc.).
The issue of the right to death is actively discussed in the literature, especially when it comes to euthanasia (“easy” death to end suffering from incurable diseases).
In some modern ideas, the idea of the formation of an incorruptible soul substance is renewed on a new basis. This idea is based on: Firstly, on the law of conservation and transformation of energy (complete destruction of psychic energy is impossible); Secondly, on the idea of the infinity of matter in space and time; Thirdly, the possession of reason makes a person a being of cosmic scale, of inexhaustible depth. Death does not mean complete disappearance with the destruction of the body, but implies the exit of an intellectual-emotional clot in the form of a biofield structure to a higher level of existence.
Types of relative immortality: a) in the genes of the offspring; b) mummification of the body; c) dissolution of the body and spirit of the deceased in the Universe, their entry into the eternal cycle of matter; d) the result of a person’s life creativity.
Another idea is about the immortal soul (Heraclitus, Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, Kant, Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, V.S. Solovyov, N.F. Fedorov, etc.).
Under certain conditions, people can acquire biological immortality as a result of “cloning.” Its essence is to destroy the barrier between “mortal” cells and “immortal” eggs. During cloning, it was possible to introduce the genetic information of an “immortal” egg into the nucleus of a mortal cell. Each surviving cell of the deceased can then be “resurrected” if the code of another fertilized egg is implanted into its nucleus (maybe the ancient Egyptians had a reason to embalm their dead?). Here we are talking only about biological immortality. But man cannot be reduced to biology. This idea can lead to an attempt to control human behavior (zombieing).
Realization of the meaning of life is possible in the case of comprehensive, harmonious and holistic development of a person. The realization of the meaning of life and human self-worth is most possible in world history. The individual level of a person depends on general historical and civilizational (formational) development and at the same time is relatively independent. Therefore, in realizing the meaning of life, it is inferior to the dynamics of the cultural-historical process, but in some of its implementations, especially among outstanding personalities, it is ahead of its time. The highest meaning of human life lies in the self-development of man through the dialogue of his uniqueness and universality, freedom and responsibility for the development of the world to the level of the noosphere.
Subject: PERSONALITY AND SOCIETY
1. The problem of personality in the history of philosophy.
2. Individual, individuality, personality.
3. Historical types of relationships between man and society.
4. Alienation as a phenomenon of human existence.
5. The role of the people and the individual in history.
In antiquity, the role of a person was assessed as a citizen of the polis. In general, the approach to man was speculative. Medieval philosophy tore the spiritual nature of man away from the physical, subordinated the personality to the divine will, paid attention to inner life, discovered self-consciousness as a special subjective reality, and contributed to the formation of the concept of “I”.
XVII century (emerging capitalism) formed such personality traits as initiative, activity, and uniqueness of each individual. In the 17th century theories of the world citizen1 appeared as an exponent of universal human values, civil society and the rule of law.
At the turn of the XVIII-XIX centuries. there were the following basic concepts of personality: 1) focused on centralization and regulation of all spheres of life, belittled personality (Morelli, Babeuf, etc.). 2) humanistic concept - elevated the personality.
K. Marx and F. Engels noted that the essence of a person is revealed in the society in which a person functions. By changing the conditions of his existence, participating in transformations, a person becomes the creator of history, revealing in this process the facets of personality.
3) Representatives of the biologizing-individualistic concept explain personality solely by the action of heredity and argue that natural selection operates not only in nature, but also in society. Representatives of the structuralist approach, recognizing the social conditioning of the individual, reduce society to the impersonal structures of society and the human spirit. Many foreign philosophers have overcome the narrow structuralist view of personality, linking personality with the functioning of a social character (E. Fromm), with the process of socialization (J. Habermas).
One-sided is the position that contrasts society and the individual, masses of people and a unique personality (for example, Teilhard de Chardin). Modern philosophy approaches the issue of the role of the people and the individual in history in a comprehensive and concrete manner. For example, L.N. Gumilyov, in his discussions about ethnicity, wrote about passionaries (purposeful individuals who are able to lead others, infecting them with their enthusiasm), harmonious individuals and subpassionaries (the passive mass of the population). At different stages of ethnic development, the ratio of these groups of people changes.
Individual- a human unit, a representative of the human race and a historically defined society or group.
Individuality- a system of inherited and acquired social properties inherent in a particular person, characterizing his uniqueness and exclusivity. The most important sign of individuality is universalism, the ability to master many types of activities. For example, outstanding figures of the Renaissance (Leonardo da Vinci - painter, mathematician, mechanic and engineer; N. Machiavelli - statesman, historian, poet, military writer).
The comprehensiveness of personality development does not only belong to the Renaissance. A physicist, mathematician, mechanic and astronomer, Newton performed alchemical experiments and commented on the Bible. Physicist Jung deciphered Egyptian hieroglyphs. Mathematician Helmholtz is the author of fundamental works on the physiology of hearing and vision. A Nobel Peace Prize laureate, physician Schweitzer held doctoral degrees in philosophy, theology, music and law. Composer Borodin had a doctorate in medicine.
The opposite of individuality is integrativeness(plurality in man), which manifests itself in: 1) facelessness, uniformity, regulation of life; 2) synthesis of individuality, universality, which facilitates familiarization with the achievements of world culture.
Personality is a person as a “refraction” of the social (and spiritual) in the individual. Human socialization includes: 1) the “me-me” relationship; 2) “I-you”; 3) “I-we”; 4) “I am humanity”; 5) “I am nature”; 6) “I am second nature”; 7) “I am the universe.” Based on the communication of the “I” with various environments, various reflections and feelings are formed, and certain norms of behavior and activity of people are formed.
The most important forms of socialization are: customs, traditions, norms, language, through which education, training and human activities are carried out. Personality manifests itself through properties: ability to work, consciousness and intelligence, freedom and responsibility, direction and originality, character and temperament.
It is typical for higher mammals play behavior. It has also passed into human behavior (inherent in children and peoples at a primitive stage of development). The game has become a form of free self-expression of a person, not associated with the achievement of any utilitarian goal that brings joy and pleasure.
A game– an abbreviated and generalized expression of social relations. The culture of humanity is free and fair play (J. Huizinga), a person must choose: “to be nothing or to play” (J.-P. Sartre). Game is one of the most important phenomena of human existence.
Word "personality"(persona) originally denoted a theatrical play mask in European languages, then the actor himself and his role. In the future, the social role (father, doctor, artist, teacher, etc.) is a set of functions, patterns of behavior and actions performed by a person with a certain social status. Assumes responsibility.
Various variations appear in human behavior.
The first option is weathervane-adaptive. A person thinks and acts unprincipled, voluntarily submitting to circumstances, social fashion, his own inclination, power and ideology. When circumstances and power change, the opportunist is potentially ready to change his views and serve the new doctrine.
The second option is conservative-traditionalist. Its bearer has insufficient creative potential and is not able to react flexibly to changing circumstances, and is captive of previous dogmas.
The third option is personal independent behavior. Autonomy of consciousness and behavior is respectful if it does not turn into stubbornness.
The fourth option is stable and flexible behavior. Resilience is expressed through beliefs, a worldview “core,” flexibility is expressed through the ability to respond to new things and clarify positions on certain issues.
In each historical era, a set of conditions is formed that determine the social type of a person and the nature of his relationship with society:
1) “merger” of the individual and society (collective);
2) antagonistic relations between them;
3) unity between man and society, free individuality, based “on the universal development of individuals and on the transformation of their collective, social productivity into their public property”2 (Marx).
With the merger of the individual and society, a person is included in a strictly regulated localized system of social relations (clan, community), in reality and in his consciousness he did not stand out from the collective and was directly dependent on it.
The formation of personality occurs on the basis of the development and complication of work activity, the division of labor, the formation of private property and, accordingly, private interests.
During the development of private property, the merging of the individual and society was replaced by antagonistic relations between them, which was expressed in the emergence of various forms of exploitation of workers based on non-economic coercion: slavery, serfdom, collection of tribute from conquered peoples, etc.
With the advent of capitalist mature commodity production, individualism develops. Relations between people basically become relations between commodity producers and consumers, i.e. real relations. A new type of sociality is emerging - material dependence and personal independence. The individual has the opportunity to appropriate the wealth of material and spiritual culture accumulated by humanity. But the realization of this opportunity is hampered by relations of exploitation and various forms of alienation.
On the basis of public property, a new type of personality is emerging. Opportunities are opening up for combining personal and public interests, the individual and the team. However, the command-bureaucratic system of socialism in the USSR developed to a greater extent the elements of personal and material dependence rather than free individuality.
Social ownership of the means of production is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the full development of a new type of sociality. A high level of social labor productivity, an increase in free time, democratization of public life, and the development of creative initiative are also required.
In every historical era there are both dominant and remnant forms of sociality.
In addition to social ones, there are socio-psychological personality types. Hippocrates also divided people into choleric, sanguine, phlegmatic and melancholic. At the beginning of the twentieth century. C. G. Jung discovered 16 types of psyche, which he divided into 4 groups-quadras. Each of them has its own rules of behavior and value system. TO first quadra include individuals who successfully generate ideas, create various successful or utopian projects (I. Newton, A. Einstein, K. Marx, F. Engels). Co. second quadra include individuals with a tendency to implement projects in life (V.I. Lenin), they are characterized by enormous capacity for work, will, determination and perseverance, flexibility and realism, and the ability to act in extreme situations. Representatives third quadra critically rethink primary ideas, identify their defects (M.S. Gorbachev, B.N. Yeltsin). Fourth quadra- creators.
One more classification of social personality types can be given.
Personalities-doers(artisans, workers, engineers, teachers, doctors, managers, etc.). The main thing for them is action, changing the world and other people, including themselves.
Thinkers(sages, prophets, chroniclers, outstanding scientists) come into the world in order to watch and reflect.
People of feelings and emotions(representatives of literature and art), whose brilliant insights sometimes outstrip the scientific forecasts and prophecies of the sages.
Humanists and devotees They are distinguished by a heightened sense of feeling the mental state of other people, love for their neighbor as for themselves, and rush to do good.
The phenomenon of alienation characterizes a situation when, firstly, contradictory communication develops between “I” and “not-I”, i.e. what man has created is opposed to him; secondly, when any phenomena and relationships in the distorted consciousness of people turn into something other than what they are in themselves. Alienation is the process and result of the separation of the function of a thing (system) from its basis, leading to a distortion of its essence.
Some fragments of the idea of alienation are found in ancient philosophy. For example, in Plato, T. Hobbes, J.-J. Rousseau, C. A. Saint-Simon, I. Fichte, G. Hegel, L. Feuerbach (in German classical philosophy, alienation is singled out as an independent object of study), K. Marx. The basis for any alienation of a person, according to Marx, is economic alienation, or alienated (forced, forced) labor, which was considered in a system of a number of relations:
a) alienation of society and man from nature; b) alienation from the work product and the results of his labor; c) alienation from the work process and the content of labor; d) alienation from the working content of the individual and or his generic essence; e) alienation in society of a person from another person. Marx draws attention to the contradictory nature of labor, which brings both satisfaction and suffering, which depends not only on the content of labor, but primarily on the state of social relations in which it is carried out. In Capital, Marx analyzed in detail the social condition where people exist as functions and things dominate the creator. In a world of alienation, a person is focused on “having” rather than “being.”
Disalienation is considered by Marx according to the same parameters as the process of alienation: a) harmonization of relations between society (man) and nature; b) on the appropriation of the subject of labor and its result; c) on appropriation or liberation of the activity itself; d) by the appropriation by man of labor of a common “generic essence”; e) to harmonize human-human relationships.
Harmonization with external nature is carried out in activities in which a person realizes his goals not according to the laws of utilitarian benefit, exploitation of nature, but according to the “laws of beauty.” The inner nature of man himself is also transformed: instead of satisfying animal needs, a person appears with diverse, ever-increasingly complex needs. The main thing according to Marx is the abolition of private property as a true removal of alienation.
F. Engels - alienation is not only economic, but also social, political, spiritual, etc. V.I. Lenin - alienation can be overcome through the efforts of the subjective factor of history and the state along the path of significant growth of productive forces, changes in the quality of production relations.
A number of propositions about the nature of alienation were expressed in the philosophy of the twentieth century. Z. Freud (culture and society are forces alien and hostile to the individual), K. Jaspers (the main source of alienation is technology), M. Heidegger (alienation is a form of human existence in the impersonal world of everyday life), A. Camus (man is a stranger, “ strangers" in the world), E. Fromm (alienation is associated with the transformation of a person into a "thing", with an escape from freedom).
In the philosophical thought of the twentieth century. alienation is mainly viewed through the prism of the processes of dehumanization of society, leading to the “dehumanization” of the individual due to the crisis of technogenic civilization, the loss of the meaning of life and the value system of man and society, the dominance of the ideals of rationalism, the cult of science and technology.
Alienation is objective. Technological alienation - the poor development of tools of labor puts the entire burden of production on a person due to his physical overexertion (a person as an appendage of some means of labor or some production function).
Economic alienation (production and consumption are severed).
Political alienation (person and state). Alienation in spiritual life (rejection from history due to loss of historical memory).
Overcoming negative forms of alienation is rooted in social progress, gaining technological, economic, socio-political and spiritual freedom; conditions for the realization of one’s individuality against the general background of collectivity, the disclosure of a person’s creative qualities, his universal development, and integrity. But absolutely alienation is irremovable; it is a normal characteristic of a person, testifying to his abilities for self-expression and dedication. In general, alienation is dual: it promotes a person’s self-expression and at the same time depersonalizes him.
It is necessary to distinguish between the concepts of “population” and “people”.
Population - This is a collection (mass) of people living in certain space-time coordinates. People- a set of groups of workers who create material wealth and spiritual values, solve progressive historical problems in a given era and ensure the satisfaction of the personal and social needs of the population. The most important features of a people are their common cultural traditions, history, language, territory, and social character. The essence of a people is to be a socio-historical subject, which is expressed in the social activity of the people who form the people. The condition for the existence of a people is the existence of a civil society.
The categories “people” and “personality” are correlated. Some thinkers break this correlation, absolutizing the meaning of one and neglecting the other. In Soviet philosophy, for example, the role of the people in history was often exaggerated. Representatives of the theory of the elite (20th century) see among the people only a destructive, negative force.
A people is a collection of individuals. In the “people-person” relationship, the dialectical “both-and” principle operates. The increasing role of the people (through the activities of classes, social groups, collectives, parties) leads to an increase in the importance of the individual in all historical deeds.
In general, any personality has a contradictory impact on the historical process and culture: at some stages of life it accelerates the course of history, and at others it slows down. For example, I.V. Stalin, N.S. Khrushchev, L.I. Brezhnev.
Outstanding personalities play the role of innovators and organizers. These individuals cannot change history on a world-historical scale or disrupt its general objective logic, but in some way they influence the form of history’s movement as exponents of the needs and tasks of their era. American scientist Michael Hart in the book “The One Hundred Most Influential Personalities in History, Arranged in Order” (see “Arguments and Facts”, 1995, No. 9), the list begins with Mohammed, then the scientists and inventors Newton (2), Gutenberg, Einstein, Pasteur, Galileo, Darwin. Among the figures of literature, art and music are Shakespeare, Homer, Michelangelo, Picasso, Beethoven and Bach. Among philosophers, he begins with Marx. Of the natives of the CIS space, three figures are named - Lenin (15), Stalin (63) and Peter the Great (91).
Subject: MAN IN THE WORLD OF CULTURE, CIVILIZATION AND