2.1. Natural science and socio-humanitarian knowledge

The achievements of natural sciences are an integral part of universal human culture. Knowledge of the natural sciences, and most importantly the scientific method, influencing the nature of thinking, contributes to the development of an adequate attitude towards the world around us.

Natural science and socio-humanitarian knowledge should not be considered as mutually exclusive, but as complementary, although fundamentally different, components of culture.

The contrast between the two cultures has its roots in the real-life differences in methods of understanding the world in scientific and humanitarian-artistic practice. When studying nature, a natural scientist deals only with material phenomena caused by other material causes and objective laws.

The explanation of social or cultural events includes both an analysis of the objective reasons that led to their possibility or even necessity, and the subjective motives, thoughts and experiences of those who commit them. The process of transforming thoughts into text, into works of art depends on the personality of the researcher, his erudition, abilities, and sociocultural environment. Even if we make great efforts, we will still not be able to accurately reproduce the train of thought of the ancient author, if only because he is ancient. Humanitarian and artistic knowledge is inevitably subjective and bears the indelible imprint of its creator. As a result, it allows for the absence of strict, unambiguous conclusions, which would be an unacceptable shortcoming for natural science knowledge. Humanitarian and artistic knowledge, like natural science, describes and explains the phenomena of the surrounding reality, but in addition it also evaluates them in accordance with a certain scale of ethical, aesthetic and other values ​​(good - bad, beautiful - ugly, fair - unfair). But the most striking difference between humanitarian culture and natural science lies in the language in which it is expressed. Natural sciences use a clear, formalized language of terms, the meanings of which are clearly understood by any scientist. The achievements of humanitarian culture may not be expressible in words at all (paintings, statues, pieces of music).

Natural science, being the basis of all knowledge, has always had a significant impact on the development of the humanities, both with its methodological guidelines and general worldviews, images and ideas. This impact is especially powerful in the present era, the century of the scientific and technological revolution, a radical change in man’s attitude to the world, to the production system, global integration processes, both in science and in culture as a whole.

Natural scientific methods of cognition are increasingly penetrating the social and human sciences. For example, in historical research they provide a reliable basis for determining chronology, clarifying historical events, and open up new opportunities for quick analysis of a huge mass of sources, facts, etc. Natural scientific methods and principles are widely used in psychology. Without the methods of natural sciences, the outstanding achievements of modern science about the origins of man and society would be unthinkable. New prospects for the integration of natural science and humanities knowledge are opening up with the creation of the newest theory of self-organization - synergetics.

As a matter of fact, throughout the entire history of knowledge, there have been powerful currents of knowledge, ideas, images, and ideas from the natural sciences to the humanities and from the humanities to the natural; there has been close interaction between the sciences of nature and the sciences of society and man. Such interaction played a particularly important role during periods of scientific revolutions, i.e. profound transformations of the way of knowing, principles and methods of scientific activity.

2.2. Nature concept. Natural science as a process of cognition of nature

Nature - in the broad sense of the word - everything that exists, the whole world in the diversity of its forms, in the narrow sense - an object of science - the total object of natural science. Natural sciences study various aspects of nature and express the results of their research in the form of universal, but quite specific laws.

Modern natural science forms an idea of ​​the development of nature and its laws, of various forms of movement of matter and various structural levels of the organization of nature.

The general course of development of natural science includes the main stages of knowledge of nature:

direct contemplation of nature as an undivided whole; The general picture is discussed here, but the specifics are not at all clear. This view was inherent in ancient Greek natural philosophy;

analysis of nature, “dividing” it into parts, isolating and studying individual phenomena, searching for individual causes and effects, for example, dissecting living organisms, isolating the components of complex chemical substances; but behind the particulars the general picture, the universal connection of phenomena disappears;

reconstruction of a complete picture based on already known details, based on a combination of analysis and synthesis.

Currently, many sciences are studying nature - physics, chemistry, biology, geology, geography, astronomy, cosmology. They see nature from different angles

And have different subjects of study. Physics studies the most general and fundamental properties of nature, manifested in both living and inanimate nature at all its levels, and, say, geography is interested in the features of the earth's topography and climate on our planet, biology studies the processes occurring in living systems, cosmology deals with studying the evolution of the Universe.

With the creation of the theory of relativity, views on the spatiotemporal organization of natural objects have changed, the achievements of the physics of the microworld contribute to a significant expansion of the concept of causality, the development of genetic engineering is associated with the possibility of treating hereditary diseases, the progress of ecology has led to an understanding of the deep principles of the integrity of nature as a single system.

It is impossible to consider nature separately from man and his activities, which are carried out in nature and with the material given by it. Natural science, as a reflection of nature in human consciousness, is improved in the process of its active transformation in the interests of society.

In the 20th century, the superiority of society over nature and the need to regulate these relations - environmental protection, nature conservation measures - were realized.

2.3. Natural science as an integral part of culture

Based on the fact that a person’s environment includes nature and society, his thought is aimed at understanding their structure. In addition, a person also engages in self-knowledge. Therefore, the subject of science also becomes a person’s own inner world. In the first case (when studying the natural world), natural scientific knowledge arises, in the rest - humanitarian scientific knowledge. It cannot be said that there is an insurmountable gap between them. The whole point is that when exploring oneself and society, a person inevitably assumes that they function in a natural environment. Only this factor in humanitarian knowledge is relegated to the background. Similar but opposite trends exist in natural science, where nature is in the foreground, and man seems to go behind the scenes.

Understanding nature is one of the forms of active activity of man himself; he himself leads this process. Science is one of the objective forms of social consciousness, and the “human factor” in it is very significant. As a result of knowledge, a scientific picture of the world arises. This image of reality reveals the contours of the philosophical, worldview, ethical and moral positions of humanity, as well as the natural world. Therefore, strictly speaking, the humanitarian and natural science pictures of the world do not exist in isolation from each other. They should be interpreted only as certain projections of a single scientific picture of the world. It is the property of a single universal human culture.

IN In this regard, we especially emphasize that the concept of culture in our time is unacceptable to associate only with humanitarian knowledge, including philosophy, psychology, theory of literature, music, fine arts and their individual phenomena in the form of certain works. Culture determines the spiritual world of a person, and meanwhile it is also formed under the influence of understanding nature. Therefore, natural science knowledge is also part of universal human culture.

Another thing is that historically everything developed in such a way that the development of humanitarian knowledge often had a greater impact on human consciousness and social thought, and therefore it formed a visible part of the foundation of culture. And the achievements of technical sciences most often had technical and technological applications, and therefore influenced the production sector. But facts of a different kind are also known. Thus, it would seem that the local results obtained by I. Newton in mechanics regarding the movement of particles in space had a strong public resonance. It consisted in the fact that the Newtonian system turned into one of the indisputable dogmas of European thinking, giving rise to a fairly strong philosophical movement (mechanism).

Now the sciences of nature, despite some heterogeneity in their development, have all the more reached such heights that they are capable of exerting a colossal influence on the norms of human thinking and its spiritual world. Therefore, in our time, they should be included in the cultural space, so that it is legitimate to talk about natural science culture as another full-fledged form (on a par with the humanities).

IN in the recent past there was a different situation. First of all, at best it was believed that there were two diametrically different cultures. Their opposition went so far that the thesis of a conflict between them arose. It cannot be said that such a statement was groundless. However, in life, reconciling opposites is an almost hopeless task. It can only lead to the destruction of the weaker side. It is much more constructive to proceed from the position of searching for related traits. Then we can recognize that humanitarian and natural science culture are original manifestations of a single universal human culture, and on this basis we can look for interaction between equal and related partners.

Natural science is present in culture not in the form of a sum of private natural science disciplines. Interacting with the socio-humanitarian component of culture, it acquires a shell that has such features that are not characteristic of physics, biology, geology taken separately, such as the perception of the world in its integrity, historicity, the presence of a value scale when assessing certain views or events.

Modern natural science makes a great contribution to the development of a new style of thinking, which can be called planetary thinking, which considers the survival of unique humanity on the unique planet Earth as a priority task, tries to find solutions to problems that are equally important for all countries and peoples: global environmental problems, solar earthly connections, assessment of the consequences of military conflicts. Planetary thinking requires everyone to understand the laws of nature, understand the complexity and fragility of our world, and respect the natural processes occurring in nature and society. In order to protect itself from all kinds of environmental disasters, society must train specialists who can not only provide a technically competent solution to a problem, but also imagine its broader and more distant consequences, and assess its acceptability from the point of view of human interests and needs.

2.4. The science. Basic and applied sciences

Science is a sphere of human activity, the function of which is the development and theoretical systematization of objective knowledge about reality; one of the forms of social consciousness.

Although scientific activity is specific, it uses reasoning techniques used by people in other fields of activity in everyday life, namely: induction and deduction, analysis and synthesis, abstraction and generalization, idealization, analogy, description, explanation, prediction, hypothesis, confirmation , refutation, etc.

The question of the structure of scientific knowledge deserves special consideration. It is necessary to distinguish two levels: empirical and theoretical.

At the empirical level of scientific knowledge, as a result of direct contact with reality, scientists obtain knowledge about certain events, identify the properties of objects or processes that interest them, record relationships, and establish empirical patterns.

To clarify the specifics of theoretical knowledge, it is important to emphasize that the theory is constructed with an explicit focus on explaining objective reality, but does not directly describe the surrounding reality, but ideal objects, which, unlike real objects, are characterized not by an infinite, but by a well-defined number of properties. For example, such ideal objects as material points, which mechanics deals with, have a very small number of properties, namely: mass and the ability to be in space and time. The ideal object is constructed in such a way that it is completely intellectually controlled.

The theoretical level of scientific research is carried out at the rational (logical) stage of cognition. At this level, the deepest, most significant aspects, connections, and patterns inherent in the objects and phenomena being studied are revealed.

The theoretical level is a higher level in scientific knowledge. The results of theoretical knowledge are hypotheses, theories, laws.

The main methods of obtaining empirical knowledge in science are observation and experiment. Observation is a method of obtaining empirical knowledge in which the main thing is

– do not make any changes to the reality being studied during the research process itself. Unlike observation, in an experiment the phenomenon being studied is placed under special conditions. As F. Bacon wrote, “the nature of things reveals itself better in a state of artificial constraint than in natural freedom.”

While distinguishing these two different levels in scientific research, one should not, however, separate them from each other and oppose them. After all, the empirical and theoretical levels of knowledge are interconnected. The empirical level acts as the basis, the foundation of the theoretical. Hypotheses and theories are formed in the process of theoretical understanding of scientific facts and statistical data obtained at the empirical level. In addition, theoretical thinking inevitably relies on sensory-visual images (including diagrams, graphs, etc.), which the empirical level of knowledge deals with.

In turn, the empirical level of scientific knowledge cannot exist without achieving the theoretical level. Empirical research is usually based on a certain theoretical construct, which determines the direction of this research, determines and justifies the methods used.

Although they say that facts are the air of a scientist, nevertheless, comprehension of reality is impossible without theoretical constructions. I. P. Pavlov wrote about this as follows: “... at every moment a certain general idea of ​​the subject is required in order to have something to attach facts to...” The tasks of science are in no way reduced to collecting factual material. Reducing the tasks of science to the collection of facts means, as A. Poincaré put it, “a complete misunderstanding of the true nature of science.” He wrote: “The scientist must organize the facts. Science is made up of facts, like a house is made of bricks. And one mere accumulation of facts does not constitute science, just like a pile of stones

does not constitute a home."

Scientific theories do not appear as direct generalizations of empirical facts. As A. Einstein wrote, “no logical path leads from observations to the basic principles of theory.” Theories arise in the complex interaction of theoretical thinking and empiricism, in the course of solving purely theoretical problems, in the process of interaction between science and culture as a whole.

In the course of theory building, scientists use different ways of theoretical thinking. Thus, Galileo began to widely use thought experiments in the course of theory construction. During a thought experiment, the theorist seems to play out possible behavior options for the idealized objects he has developed. A mathematical experiment is a modern type of thought experiment in which the possible consequences of varying conditions in a mathematical model are calculated on computers.

One of the important distinctive qualities of scientific knowledge is its systematization. It is one of the criteria of scientific character. Scientific systematization is specific. It is characterized by a desire for completeness, consistency, and clear grounds for systematization. Scientific knowledge as a system has a certain structure, the elements of which are facts, laws, theories, pictures of the world. Individual scientific disciplines are interconnected and interdependent.

The desire for validity and evidence of knowledge is an important criterion for scientific character. Justification of knowledge, bringing it into a unified system has always been characteristic of science.

The very emergence of science is sometimes associated with the desire to prove knowledge. Various methods of substantiating scientific knowledge are used. To substantiate empirical knowledge, multiple tests, reference to statistical data, etc. are used. When substantiating theoretical concepts, their consistency, compliance with empirical data, and ability to describe and predict phenomena are checked.

When characterizing scientific activity, it is important to note that in its course scientists sometimes turn to philosophy. Of great importance for scientists, especially for theorists, is the philosophical understanding of established cognitive traditions, consideration of the reality being studied in the context of the picture of the world.

Speaking about the means of scientific knowledge, it should be noted that the most important of them is the language of science. Galileo argued that the book of Nature was written in the language of mathematics. The development of physics fully confirms these words. In other sciences, the process of mathematization is very active. Mathematics is part of the fabric of theoretical constructions in all sciences.

The progress of scientific knowledge significantly depends on the development of the means used by science. The use of the telescope by Galileo, and then the creation of telescopes and radio telescopes, largely determined the development of astronomy. The use of microscopes, especially electronic ones, played a huge role in the development of biology. Without such means of knowledge as synchrophasotrons, the development of modern particle physics is impossible. The use of computers is revolutionizing the development of science. The methods and means used in different sciences are not the same. Differences in methods and tools used in different sciences are determined by the specifics of subject areas and the level of development of science. However, in general, there is a constant interpenetration of methods and means of various sciences.

According to their focus, according to their direct relationship to practice, individual sciences are usually divided into fundamental and applied. The task of fundamental sciences is to understand the laws governing the behavior and interaction of the basic structures of nature, society and thinking. These laws and structures are studied in their “pure form”, regardless of their possible use.

The immediate goal of applied sciences is to apply the results of fundamental sciences to solve not only cognitive, but also social and practical problems.

Applied sciences can develop with a predominance of both theoretical and practical issues. For example, in modern physics, electrodynamics and quantum mechanics play a fundamental role, the application of which to the knowledge of specific subject areas forms various branches of theoretical applied physics - metal physics, semiconductor physics, etc. Further application of their results to practice gives rise to practical applied sciences - metal science, semiconductor technology, etc.

Until recently, science was a free activity of individual scientists. It was not a profession and was not specially funded in any way. Typically, scientists supported their living by paying for their teaching jobs at universities. However, today a scientist is a special profession. In the 20th century, the concept of “scientist” appeared. Now in the world about 5 million people are professionally engaged in science.

The development of science is characterized by opposition between different directions. New ideas and theories are established in intense struggle. M. Planck said about this: “Usually new scientific truths win not in such a way that their opponents are convinced and they admit they are wrong, but for the most part in such a way that these opponents gradually die out, and the younger generation assimilates the truth immediately.”

Life in science is a constant struggle of different opinions, directions, a struggle for the recognition of ideas.

2.5. Concept and characteristic features of the scientific picture of the world

The scientific picture of the world (according to the definition of the “Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary”) is a holistic system of ideas about the general properties and patterns of nature, resulting from a generalization of basic natural science concepts and principles.

In addition to the general scientific picture of the world, which summarizes the data of all sciences about living and inanimate nature, there are private natural-scientific pictures of the world based on the achievements of individual sciences (physical, biological pictures of the world). Particular natural scientific pictures of the world are included in the general scientific picture in an unequal manner. The defining element is the picture of the world of that area of ​​cognition that occupies a leading position. In ancient times, the doctrine of nature existed in the form of a single natural philosophy, not divided into specialized disciplines. Therefore, ancient pictures of the world are distinguished by their integrity and indivisibility, which is partly the secret of their charm. Since the advent of science in the modern sense of the word (XVII century) and almost to the present day, the leader of natural science has been physics, and the physical picture of the world has been the leading one in the natural science picture of the world.

The main forms of motion can be arranged in a hierarchical order - from the simplest, which determine the deep, basic properties of our world, to the highest, which arise at later stages of self-organization of matter. At the lowest level there are physical forms of movement: mechanical, electromagnetic, etc. With the achievement of a certain level of complexity, chemical and biological arise, and with the emergence of a society of intelligent beings, the highest social form of the movement of matter known to us.

The laws governing the highest forms of movement are extremely complex. We are just beginning to understand the patterns of functioning of living organisms and their communities. As for the laws by which society develops, our knowledge is in its infancy. You can begin to study the higher levels of a complex system only after clarifying the most fundamental elements and properties of the system. It was these circumstances that determined the leading role of physics in the general scientific picture of the world from the 17th century to the present day.

Currently, fundamental physical research is concentrated mainly in two areas: high-energy physics and cosmology. Physics has already almost completely mastered the living space allotted to it. And discoveries in biology are experiencing a boom, accompanied by an increase in the number of studies, especially in borderline areas - biophysics, biochemistry, molecular biology. All this speaks of the transition of the leading position from physics to biology in accordance with the pattern according to which the course of knowledge to a certain extent repeats the evolution of the subject being studied - matter - from relatively simple to complex. Thus, it is possible that the 21st century will be the century of biology, and the 22nd century should be the century of social sciences.

At earlier stages of development and knowledge of reality, mythological and religious pictures of the world took place. Let us determine the two most important differences between the scientific picture of the world and those mentioned above:

1. The scientific picture of the world is based on the idea of ​​natural conditionality and natural order in nature. She rejects notions of supernatural involvement

And otherworldly forces in the emergence, development and existence of the world.

2. Instead of the tradition of uncritical transfer of knowledge from generation to generation, the tradition of rational criticism is adopted. A scientific statement differs from an unscientific or pseudoscientific one in that it can be refuted and can be objectively verified. In contrast, almost all religions demand belief without evidence, viewing doubt as apostasy.

In science studies and philosophy, discussions about whether there are different types of knowledge – humanities and natural sciences, and whether there are cardinal differences between the humanities and natural sciences, are still ongoing.

Since the time of the scientific activity of the Baden school of neo-Kantianism, ideas about the types of sciences have included the provisions that the natural sciences study objective objects, and their goal is to describe the general, typical, universal (the search for the laws of nature), and the humanities cognize the manifestations of the human spirit, subjectivity and the uniqueness of human life. Among the thinkers who contrasted the natural and human sciences, one should first of all name V. Dilthey, who believed that the natural sciences (Naturwissenschaften) deal with “silent” things, and the laws of their existence should be explained (Erklärung), that is, sum everything up individual cases under general laws, while the sciences of the spirit (Geisteswissenschaften) deal with the mental life of a person (experiences, values, intentions, etc.) and an understanding (Verständnis) of each case is needed, “getting used to” the spiritual experiences of a person (“Nature we we explain, but we understand spiritual life”). We must also remember V. Windelband, who proposed the already mentioned ideographic and nomothetic approaches to science. He wrote that in the natural sciences, natural objective patterns are studied and the general, universal is revealed, and in the humanities, manifestations of the spirit are studied (significant historical events, the lives of great figures, brilliant literary works, etc.) the values ​​of human life and described subjective, the unique, the individual is determined (“The law and the event will remain next to each other as incommensurable quantities of our understanding of the world”).

Today, it has become generally accepted that the humanities and natural sciences differ primarily in their objects: the humanities study man, and the natural sciences study nature. Some researchers talk about the social and human sciences, which study the manifestations of human social behavior. Science becomes humanistic when it puts man at the center of all problems, and humanitarian-social when its manifestations in society and culture are considered. It should be emphasized that there is no sharp boundary between humanitarian and humanitarian-social science: each person is formed, exists, and is realized only in interaction, in dialogue with another person, with culture, as a set of artifacts, works, norms, values, and ideals.

Of course, it is the difference between objects (man - nature) and the problems that arise in the course of their study that ultimately makes the sciences natural or humanitarian. We can say that the natural sciences study nature in man, the humanities study man in nature. The problems of the natural sciences lie in the answers to the questions of the existence of the material world, in the limit - the cosmos. The problems that are considered in the humanities are connected with man as a cosmos, with the meaning of life, with an explanation of the internal mechanisms of consciousness, conditioning feelings, aspirations, possibilities, limitations, behavior of any of us.

However, there is still no clear separation of these sciences from each other according to the criterion of distinguishing objects: human anatomy, medical sciences, economics, etc., although they study man, do not, as a general rule, belong to the humanities, and attempts to clearly separate these sciences from each other , especially at the level of applied sciences, or in the form of educational disciplines, are usually unsuccessful. This is especially noticeable in education. Thus, according to the All-Russian Classifier of Specialties in Education OK 009-2003, the enlarged group “Humanities” includes, among others, book and publishing, document management, physical education and sports, etc.

A more justified judgment is that the difference between the humanities and natural sciences lies not only and not so much in objects, but in the subjects, problems, tasks, methods of these sciences, in the characteristics of the knowledge that is obtained in these sciences and the ways of its use by society. Indeed, it can be argued that it is not sciences that are divided into natural and humanities, but types of knowledge and methods of obtaining it. And a person can be an object of natural science, but a partial person, taken as a unit of a process alienated from the person himself. In the humanities, man is considered in his essential manifestations, existing as products of cultural evolution. Natural sciences look for mechanisms and actions determined by nature, humanitarian sciences look for human reasons and human meanings. This is especially noticeable when considering the cognitive attitudes of researchers. Yu.A. Agafonov accurately noted: a researcher with an attitude towards natural scientific knowledge guesses the “rules” that guide nature, he discovers laws, answering the question “Why?”; A humanist puts forward theories, focusing only on the logical integrity of the theory and its recognition in the scientific community, attributing meaning to the reality being studied, and answering the question “Why?” .The ideal of a “natural scientist” is the truth about what does not depend on us: for a scientist there are no ideals; For a humanist, the value of having one’s own ideal is more important, not only in knowledge, but also in life.

The goal of all sciences is to obtain true knowledge about the world, covering both the external world (nature, space, society) and the inner world of man, however, at the meta-subject level, these areas are distinguished as material and ideal, while the ideal constitutes the inner world of man, the content of his consciousness . The goal of the natural sciences is to discover objective truth that does not depend on man, while the goal of the humanities is to discover subjective truths that are discovered only in the process of searching for meaning, “attributing” meaning to human actions and personality.

The difference in objects, goals and problems that arise when studying them entails differences in research methods and the nature of knowledge. The methods of the natural sciences are designed to explain the patterns of the emergence and existence of world phenomena, to improve the existence of the individual and society, the humanities - to understand, empathize, make them your own in order to understand the meaning of your existence. A person in the humanities turns to himself, explains himself, knowledge here is initially in a dialogical form, and the methods of obtaining it are associated with the interpretation of certain manifestations of a person, including his behavior and created works, texts, and artifacts. In a certain respect, we can say that the subject of each natural science has a single meaning, the subject of the humanities is initially multiple in the scope of human meanings, and the knowledge obtained from trials and the knowledge obtained from the self-movement of the human spirit initially have a different basis. Therefore, theoretical knowledge of the natural sciences tends to be unambiguous, dispassionate, it clearly expresses the search for the only true statement, the desire to formulate, explain, and describe this statement. Theoretical knowledge of the humanities sciences gravitates towards interpretative, metaphorical, passionate knowledge. Natural scientific knowledge gravitates towards the pragmatic benefit of people, humanitarian knowledge - towards values, the meaning of human existence. Humanitarian knowledge is knowledge not only about man himself, but also about what has been done and is being done by man, what is created by man. This means that it is subjective, biased, and depends on the position of the researcher.

Difficulties with an exhaustive definition of the essence of humanitarian knowledge exist because the parameters of the processes being studied are complex; often they can only be captured by identifying the approximate area and direction. Therefore, most humanitarian fields of knowledge exist not only in the form of science - they can also be ideology, art, and philosophy. It is philosophical knowledge, as humanitarian knowledge, that explains and interprets natural science knowledge that reveals its characteristics. Understanding the development of scientific knowledge, regardless of its “naturalness” or “unnaturalness,” shows that trends and theories, paradigms and approaches, different in their methodological foundations, may not be opposed, but combined in efforts to understand a person and support him in improvement. Knowledge can also exist as a result of comparing different points of view, as a certain “suspension” that combines scientific and artistic, figurative and conceptual, polysemantic and unambiguous. The instrument of the humanities is a word, a great word, born in the human soul and addressed to the human soul, a word that builds the harmony of the world from fragments of chaos, a word built according to the standards of beauty, goodness, love - great values ​​that save the soul in the face of life and death. It is in the humanities that the integrity of human knowledge is preserved. From the point of view of the natural sciences, ancient views on the world are long-refuted myths, and the humanities see here the integrity of the approach to explanations, lost in the fragmentation of knowledge into scientific and religious, an integrity that retains its value even now.

Today, humanitarian knowledge is going through hard times: the term “science” is understood mainly as natural and technical sciences, and the humanities exist, as it were, on the margins of scientific progress. The opinion about the superiority of natural sciences over “unnatural” ones, which dominates today in the mass consciousness (and seems natural), is a consequence of two main factors: the dominance of utilitarian ideas about the purpose of science and the predominance in the public consciousness of positivist attitudes toward the complete objectivity and accuracy of scientific knowledge.

The utilitarian approach to science is expressed in the belief that scientific knowledge is needed only to benefit humans through its products - new materials for construction, roads, clothing, mechanical and electronic devices, methods of treating diseases, genetic improvement of living things (from plants to the person himself, etc.). This identification of all sciences with applied sciences is generated by the basic motivational attitude of consumer society - to get all the benefits and pleasures now and immediately, without effort, and immersion in the depths and heights of knowledge is unnecessary, useless, meaningless. In society, the spiritual awe of scientific knowledge disappears; it begins to seem that any knowledge is a set of recipes on how to act here and now, and the knowledge itself is almost identified with information stored in dictionaries and encyclopedias, and this information can simply be learned to carry out successful actions. Today, a humanist, as a person reflecting on moral and spiritual problems, a person who is concerned about the problems of the human soul and the destinies of mankind, seems like an eccentric and a “loser,” unsuccessful, vegetating on the margins of public life. A striking example of the utilitarian use of humanitarian knowledge is that it is put at the service of the most manipulative social practices: advertising, marketing, image making, political PR, etc. The humanities are being integrated into the market economy, certain aspects of humanitarian knowledge are being transformed into applied, morally and value-neutral goods and services.

An equally negative role is played by the predominance in the public consciousness of positivist attitudes that all scientific knowledge must be completely objective and accurate, which is directly related to the belief about the importance of knowledge about physical phenomena and the “unimportance” of human knowledge for “victory over nature.” It should be recalled that the opposite opinion has existed in European thought since the time of the Greek sages (“know thyself”). One can recall Aristotle with his conviction that metaphysics is more important and more complex than physics, Petrarch, who said: “He is not a wise man who does not know himself,” and the words of other great thinkers who understand the importance of humanitarian knowledge.

Are the humanities accurate? Representatives of the natural (“exact”) sciences often, reproaching the humanities for their “vagueness” and inaccuracy, recall the humorous judgment of L.D. Landau, expressed in an informal setting: “all sciences are divided into “supernatural” (physics, mathematics), “natural” (biology, chemistry) and “unnatural” (humanities).” Meanwhile, there is some truth in this statement: the humanities are “unnatural” because they do not place the material properties of phenomena, their nature, at the center of research. That is why the very concept of accuracy in its “natural” understanding is inapplicable in the humanities. MM. Bakhtin, referring to precision and depth in the humanities, noted: “The limit of precision in the natural sciences is identification (a = a). in the humanities, accuracy is overcoming the alienness of the alien without turning it into something purely one’s own (substitutions of all kinds, modernization, failure to recognize the alien, etc.).”

What is the role of humanities in modern society, and what is its possible future? The main goal of humanities today is to find ways to integrate all types of knowledge for the development of human spirituality, capable of self-improvement, systematically and intelligently solving problems facing man and humanity. Advances in the development of technology, supported by the natural sciences, have reached a level where humanity has come close to the boundaries of its existence. We need to look for solutions to problems that only the humanities can do: why does a person live? What is the essence and boundaries of human freedom? How to make your life meaningful? What is the future of man and humanity? Does wealth bring happiness? Everyone needs the humanities in order to organize their lives more meaningfully; society needs them in order to survive and develop. If humanity is destined to develop harmoniously, then it is humanitarian knowledge that is the basis for the transition from a consumer society to a society of spiritual people for whom honor, conscience, dignity are those life values ​​that cannot be violated, cannot be sold for money, fame, power.

The information and computer revolution, the globalization of all aspects of human life lead to contradictory results - on the one hand, the state of unity of humanity is increasing, on the other, national and territorial traditions are disappearing, and established types of interaction between different cultures are becoming a thing of the past. We can say that connections between people become both broad and narrow: you can communicate with a resident of another continent and at the same time not know who lives on the floor above or below (or even on the same staircase). Therefore, it is foolish to think that today in a consumer society, humanitarian problems will worry everyone: most people always think that everything in this world is clear and simple, that everyone knows what it means to live well and correctly. But there are always those who think on behalf of culture, who are concerned about these problems (no society can be such that all its members are concerned only with consumption), interest in man has always been, and will always be, as long as humanity exists.

Of course, science is one, and it is impossible to say which sciences are more important - natural or humanities. There is a constant exchange of knowledge between them: software for mathematical (primarily computerized) modeling of human behavior and thinking has largely become possible thanks to psychological research into intelligence; physiologists, when studying the activity of human organs and movements, are forced to always take psychological patterns into account.

And yet, so far the two types of sciences are developing relatively independently. The methodology of humanities research always has common features that distinguish it from the methodology of the natural sciences. A certain range of approaches has emerged in organizing empirical research, which use similar principles and methods. Within its framework, the question of the similarities or differences of methodologies in humanities research is not usually raised. For example, the Australian professor Kumar (Curtin University of Technology, Australia) in his textbook on research methodology proceeds from the fact that such methodology is taught as a discipline that supports applied research in all types of humanities: medicine, education, psychology, social work, nursing, healthcare, library science and marketing research. Any pedagogical and psychological theories, due to their humanitarian content, are always (although often not consciously) focused on a certain ideal of a person. In psychology, such an ideal is needed to determine “good” and “bad,” “higher” and “lower” in the psyche, progress and regression in personality development, to explain the genesis of mental processes and properties. Pedagogy also cannot exist if its knowledge is not based on guidelines indicating the ideal of a person, goals and the best, morally sound methods of a teacher.

So, the knowledge obtained and used in pedagogy and psychology is humanitarian knowledge, it is important for the development of humanity, society, every person. However, does each of these disciplines only belong to the humanities?

1.3.5. Methodological foundations of psychology and pedagogy: general and specific

General characteristics of sciences

Talking about general characteristics psychologists and pedagogy, it should first of all be noted that they are united by their object - man. Of course, on the “ladder” of sciences, pedagogy stands much “lower” than psychology: it does not solve the global problem of the origin and laws of existence of man and his consciousness, it seeks the answer to the question of what needs to be done so that a person develops in the direction of revealing all his capabilities, and so that society, through each person, is highly cultural and develops. However, pedagogy is more ambitious in raising the philosophical questions of the existence of man and society: by definition, it is associated with active interaction with the world, with “leading” a person to the meaning of his existence.

Pedagogy does not apply to all areas of human life, but deals with it only in relation to its purposeful development. This is the science of organizing activities that ensure, in the relationships between a person, society, and culture, the effective formation of knowledge, skills and abilities that ensure the socialization and individualization of a person. Of course, in its subject, pedagogy is already psychology, striving to embrace the understanding of a person in all his connections, relationships, in all his activities.

The connection between research in pedagogy and psychology is due to the need to study a person in conditions of changes in the very type of culture, including norms and values, people’s needs, ways of carrying out activities, its methods and means. For both sciences, it is important that the ideal of a person (and therefore), social values, stages of personality maturation change, which means that education and ideas about the individual as a bearer of the psyche must change.

Verily, when it is read to those who were previously given knowledge, they fall prostrate, touching the ground with their chins

Question 31. Legal consciousness: concept, structure, types. Legal awareness and legal behavior

Question 34. Professional legal consciousness. The problem of professional deformation

System of natural science knowledge

Natural science is one of the components of the system of modern scientific knowledge, which also includes complexes of technical and human sciences. Natural science is an evolving system of ordered information about the laws of motion of matter.

Modern natural science groups the basic natural sciences as follows:

physics, chemistry, physical chemistry;

biology, botany, zoology;

anatomy, physiology, genetics (the study of heredity);

geology, mineralogy, paleontology, meteorology, physical geography;

astronomy, cosmology, astrophysics, astrochemistry.

Of course, only the basic natural sciences are listed here; in fact, modern natural science is a false and branched complex that includes hundreds of scientific disciplines. Physics alone unites a whole family of sciences (mechanics, thermodynamics, optics, electrodynamics, etc.). As the volume of scientific knowledge grew, certain branches of science acquired the status of scientific disciplines with their own conceptual apparatus and specific research methods, which often makes them difficult to access for specialists involved in other branches of the same, say, physics.

Such differentiation in the natural sciences (as, indeed, in science in general) is a natural and inevitable consequence of increasingly narrowing specialization.

At the same time, counter processes also naturally occur in the development of science, in particular, natural science disciplines are formed and formed, as they often say, “at the intersections” of sciences: chemical physics, biochemistry, biophysics, biogeochemistry and many others. As a result, the boundaries that were once defined between individual scientific disciplines and their sections become very conditional, flexible and, one might say, transparent.

These processes, leading, on the one hand, to a further increase in the number of scientific disciplines, but on the other hand, to their convergence and interpenetration, are one of the evidence of the integration of natural sciences, reflecting the general trend in modern science.

It is here, perhaps, that it is appropriate to turn to such a scientific discipline, which certainly occupies a special place, as mathematics, which is a research tool and a universal language not only of the natural sciences, but also of many others - those in which quantitative patterns can be discerned.

Depending on the methods underlying the research, we can talk about natural sciences:

descriptive (examining evidence and connections between them);

exact (building mathematical models to express established facts and connections, i.e. patterns);

applied (using systematics and models of descriptive and exact natural sciences to master and transform nature).

However, a common generic feature of all sciences that study nature and technology is the conscious activity of professional scientists aimed at describing, explaining and predicting the behavior of the objects under study and the nature of the phenomena being studied. The humanities differ in that the explanation and prediction of phenomena (events) is based, as a rule, not on an explanation, but on an understanding of reality.

This is the fundamental difference between sciences that have objects of research that allow systematic observation, repeated experimental testing and reproducible experiments, and sciences that study essentially unique, non-repeating situations that, as a rule, do not allow exact repetition of an experiment, or carrying out a particular experiment more than once. or experiment.

Modern culture strives to overcome the differentiation of knowledge into many independent directions and disciplines, primarily the split between the natural and human sciences, which clearly emerged at the end of the 19th century. After all, the world is one in all its infinite diversity, therefore relatively independent areas of a single system of human knowledge are organically interconnected; the difference here is transitory, the unity is absolute.

Nowadays, the integration of natural science knowledge has clearly emerged, which manifests itself in many forms and is becoming the most pronounced trend in its development. This trend is increasingly manifested in the interaction of the natural sciences with the humanities. Evidence of this is the promotion to the forefront of modern science of the principles of systematicity, self-organization and global evolutionism, which open up the possibility of combining a wide variety of scientific knowledge into an integral and consistent system, united by the general laws of the evolution of objects of various natures.

There is every reason to believe that we are witnessing an increasing rapprochement and mutual integration of the natural and human sciences. This is confirmed by the widespread use in humanitarian research not only of technical means and information technologies used in the natural and technical sciences, but also of general scientific research methods developed in the process of development of natural science.

The subject of this course is concepts related to the forms of existence and movement of living and inanimate matter, while the laws that determine the course of social phenomena are the subject of the humanities. It should, however, be borne in mind that, no matter how different the natural and human sciences are from each other, they have a general unity, which is the logic of science. It is the subordination of this logic that makes science a sphere of human activity aimed at identifying and theoretically systematizing objective knowledge about reality.

The natural scientific picture of the world is created and modified by scientists of different nationalities, including convinced atheists and believers of various faiths and denominations. However, in their professional activities, they all proceed from the fact that the world is material, that is, it exists objectively, regardless of the people who study it. Let us note, however, that the process of cognition itself can influence the objects of the material world being studied and how a person imagines them, depending on the level of development of research tools. In addition, every scientist proceeds from the fact that the world is fundamentally knowable.

The process of scientific knowledge is a search for truth. However, absolute truth in science is incomprehensible, and with every step along the path of knowledge it moves further and deeper. Thus, at each stage of knowledge, scientists establish relative truth, understanding that at the next stage more accurate knowledge will be achieved, more adequate to reality. And this is another evidence that the process of cognition is objective and inexhaustible.

Question 61. Specifics of natural scientific knowledge, its objects, language and methods

Questions

61. Specifics of natural science knowledge, its objects, language and methods.

62. The formation of natural science. The classical stage and the mechanistic picture of the world

63. Non-classical and post-non-classical natural science: basic paradigms and the search for new types of rationality.

64. Revolutionary changes in non-classical and post-non-classical natural sciences. Module 1. Genetic revolution in biology and synthetic theory of evolution / Module 2. General systems theory, cybernetics and other systems sciences; their role in the formation of the modern style of scientific thinking.

Question 61. Specifics of natural scientific knowledge, its objects, language and methods

Natural science- This a set of sciences about nature as a single integrity that studies natural objects and the processes occurring in them. Currently, natural science includes in the subject of its knowledge both relatively autonomous objects, not related to human activity, and objects created by man. It includes an analysis of concepts and provisions relating to their subject and processes, substantiation of theories of their functioning and development. Because of this, in natural science there are empirical And theoretical levels of scientific research and knowledge that have their own cognitive methods(see section 2 “Scientific research methods” ). Using these methods, natural sciences provide objective knowledge about nature that can be tested and does not depend on the subjective desires and values ​​of humans.

The natural world is represented alive And inanimate objects. Because of this, natural science, from the moment of its inception, developed along the path differentiation various subject areas of research. Each of them was focused on the study of relatively isolated natural phenomena. This feature of natural science is characteristic, first of all, of the stage of classical science, the development of which led to the formation of individual natural science disciplines. So, the subject of study physicists is…; chemistry – …; biology – …

Features of objects natural sciences, which are not reducible to objects of everyday experience, make them insufficient for their development facilities , used in everyday knowledge. The specificity of special means of natural science knowledge is manifested in the peculiarities of its language, tools, methods and forms.

Although science uses natural language, it cannot describe and study its objects only on its basis. To describe the phenomena being studied, she needs to record her concepts and definitions as clearly as possible. Therefore, the development of natural science special language , suitable for describing objects that are unusual from the point of view of common sense, is a necessary condition for natural scientific research. The language of natural science is constantly evolving as it penetrates into ever new areas of the objective world. Moreover, it has the opposite effect on everyday, natural language. For example, the terms “electricity” and “refrigerator” - once specifically scientific concepts - have now entered everyday language.

Along with an artificial, specialized language, natural science research requires a special system special tools , which, by directly influencing the object being studied, make it possible to identify its possible states under conditions controlled by the subject. Tools used in production and everyday life are, as a rule, unsuitable for this purpose, since objects studied by science and objects transformed in production and everyday practice most often differ in nature. Hence the need special scientific equipment(measuring instruments, instrument installations), which allow science to experimentally study new types of objects. Scientific equipment and the language of science act not only as an expression of already acquired knowledge, but also become a means of further scientific research.

The specificity of natural science research also determines such a distinctive feature as the feature methods of scientific cognitive activity . Targeted objects ordinary cognition, are formed in everyday practice; the techniques by which each such object is isolated and fixed as an object of knowledge are woven into everyday experience. The set of such techniques, as a rule, is not recognized by the subject as a method of cognition. IN natural science research The very discovery of an object whose properties are subject to further study is a very labor-intensive task. To record an object, identify its properties and connections, a scientist must master methods, through which the object will be examined. And the further science moves away from the familiar things of everyday experience, the clearer and more distinctly the need for creation and development appears. special methods , in the system of which science can study objects. Therefore, along with knowledge about objects science creates knowledge about methods. Moreover, each of the sciences, in addition to using general scientific methods, develops its own - private scientific And specifically scientific methods and techniques (which ones?).

The desire of science to study objects, relatively independently of their development, presupposes specific characteristics subject natural science activities. Science requires special preparation of the knowing subject, during which he masters the historically established means of scientific research, learns the techniques and methods of operating with these means. For ordinary knowledge such preparation is not necessary or it is carried out automatically, in the process of socialization of the individual, his education and inclusion in various fields of activity. Studying science involves, along with mastery of means and methods, also the assimilation of a certain system value orientations and goals, specific to scientific knowledge. These orientations should stimulate natural scientific research aimed at studying more and more new objects, regardless of the current practical effect of the knowledge obtained.

The specificity of the objects of natural science research also explains the main differences between the product of scientific activity - acquired scientific knowledge – from knowledge obtained in the field ordinary, spontaneous-empirical knowledge. They are most often not systematized and are a set of information, instructions, recipes for activity and behavior, accumulated through everyday experience and confirmed in situations of production and everyday practice. Reliability of natural science knowledge cannot be justified only in this way, since science primarily studies objects that have not yet been mastered in production. Therefore we need specific ways to substantiate the truth of knowledge – experimental control over the acquired knowledge and the deducibility of some knowledge from others, the truth of which has already been proven. In turn, deducibility procedures ensure the transfer of truth from one fragment of knowledge to another, due to which they become interconnected and organized into a system. Thus we get characteristics of consistency and validity of natural science knowledge, distinguishing it from the products of ordinary cognitive activity of people.

Development of scientific knowledge of nature passes a series stages :

1. Formation of the first scientific programs in classical natural science during first scientific revolution(XVII – XVIII centuries); stage mechanistic natural science(XVII – 30s of the XIX century)

2. Stage of origin and formation evolutionary ideas during second revolution in natural science(30s of the 19th century – end of the 19th century);

3. Non-classical stage And third scientific revolution(end of the 19th – first half of the 20th century);

4. Post-non-classical natural science within fourth global scientific revolution(mid-twentieth century - up to the present time).

Question 62. The formation of natural science.

Classic stage and a mechanistic picture of the world

Formation of the first scientific programs in classical natural science during first scientific revolution dates back to the 17th – 18th centuries. The leading position in this process belonged to physics, first of all - classical mechanics , in line with which the formation and deployment of not only the conceptual apparatus and methodological tools of special research took place, but also classical scientific rationality, which has become one of the most important values ​​of human life. Classic type of scientific rationality characterized by the exclusion of the subject of cognition from the cognitive process itself and the exclusion of its impact on the object. The phenomena being studied are considered as unrelated, unchanging and non-developing objects moving in space under the influence of mechanical forces. The cause-and-effect description of an object is of an unambiguous linear nature (Laplacian mechanistic determinism). Are being formed ideals of rationalism, the dominance of reason is proclaimed, ideas about the goals and methods of natural scientific knowledge change. The task of natural science is to determine quantitatively measurable parameters of natural phenomena and establish a functional relationship between them using mathematics. Classical mechanics takes first place among the natural sciences due to the introduction of the experimental method into natural science and the emergence of mathematical science.

The successes of mechanics, which was the only mathematized field of natural science, greatly contributed to the establishment of its methods and principles of cognition as standards of scientific research of nature. The dominance of mechanics in the system of scientific knowledge of this era led to a number of features thinking style of classical science. So, ideals and norms scientific research implied the exclusion from the procedures of description and explanation of everything that relates to the subject and the specifics of his cognitive activity. Explanation came down to searching mechanical reasons, determining the phenomena under study, and justification assumed the reduction of knowledge from any field of natural science to the fundamental principles and ideas of classical mechanics. Ideal the construction of scientific knowledge on the basis of Laplace determinism was served by laws of a dynamic type.

As a result of the synthesis of knowledge based on the above installations, a the first physical picture of the world , which was mechanical picture of nature . Until the middle of the 19th century. she acted as general scientific picture of the world, influencing research strategies in other branches of natural science, primarily in chemistry and biology. The research programs of classical natural science, set by the mechanical picture of the world, and the methodological tools of classical science allowed it to master as objects of knowledge only small systems– a relatively small number of elements, the relationships between which were not considered, thereby ignoring the systemic characteristics of the subjects being studied. The most important method special scientific research performed analysis: mathematical analysis in physics, quantitative analysis in chemistry, analytical concepts in other branches of classical natural science.

In his everyday and familiar life, a person does not always realize what clear and well-developed structures lie behind the data and information that form the information field of human society. Even the chaotic flow of everyday everyday information and data has its roots, processing space and scope.

And the scope and specifics of obtaining knowledge about the nature of the world in which a person lives simply must have strict regulation. One of these regulations is the structure of natural science knowledge.

Natural scientific knowledge is possible only within the framework of the natural sciences. Research that goes beyond the subjects and methods of these sciences can be used as the basis for scientific hypotheses. But they will not receive the status of independent developments recognized by the scientific community.

In order to streamline the acquired knowledge, since the beginning of the 17th century there has been a division of all sciences into natural and humanities. These levels of natural science knowledge differ both in the subject of study and in the methods and scope of application of the acquired knowledge. The division is based on the relationship of the knower (science) to the object (nature) and to the subject (man).

Natural science knowledge studies phenomena, objects and things of nature, and the humanities study events associated with the subject (person).

Structure of modern science

As you know, the main task of science is to develop and systematize human knowledge about reality. This knowledge is tested for accuracy through empirical testing and mathematical proof.

The concept of systematization presupposes the presence of a certain system, structure, on the basis of which the entire array of human cognition is formed.

All science is divided into two main categories:

• fundamental;
• applied.

Presentation: "Concepts of modern natural science"

Applied Science

They are engaged in introducing knowledge obtained as a result of the development of other areas of science into practical human activities. The main areas of applied sciences are medical, technological and social.

Basic Sciences

These are areas of science that develop theoretical concepts and search for patterns. These patterns are responsible for such basic characteristics of the universe as its structure, composition, form and conditions for the processes occurring in it. Basic sciences are very diverse. To simplify a person’s orientation in the subjects of study of certain studies, fundamental sciences are divided into three main subcategories:

• Humanities;
• natural;
• mathematical.

The humanities are also divided into two types: about society and about man. Whereas mathematical and natural sciences each completely cover their own range of subjects.

One of the main tasks of science is to develop mathematical proofs of a particular process that is the subject of scientific research. In this regard, mathematical sciences themselves do not study the surrounding reality. They are developing mathematical tools that allow all other sciences to use the work of mathematicians to confirm the scientific validity of hypotheses and theories.

Basic features of natural science knowledge

How can a person distinguish science from non-science, what is the specificity of natural science knowledge? It is easy to answer these questions if it is possible to inspect the existing body of knowledge for the presence of the main features that natural science knowledge should have:

Availability of the system

It is quite difficult to check the existing body of knowledge for consistency. However, the internal structure always becomes obvious as soon as you try to understand the basic principles on which the information presented by these developments is based. The entire structure should be based on a system of objects of study. That is, the presence of parts that are components of something whole. Biology studies organisms as a whole, chemistry studies the processes of interaction of chemical elements as a whole, etc.

Criticality

Testing theories for doubt. Each, even the most fundamental concept of a theory, can be questioned by a person for compliance with other provisions of other theories.

Continuity

Regardless of what level new knowledge reaches, its structure must always maintain a connection with the knowledge that was previously acquired by a person. Yes, new knowledge can reject, change or expand old ones, but new knowledge cannot be outside the old knowledge.

Ability to make predictions

Scientific knowledge must contain an element of foresight. Each scientific study has a forecast of how events related to scientific developments will occur. For example, every chemist can predict what products will be obtained as a result of a chemical oxidation reaction; physicists know at what pressure water boils when heated to 50 degrees Celsius. And all these predictions come true with high reliability.

If a person does not receive the predicted results, then talk begins about going into unexplored areas or about violating the experimental procedure.

Determinism

This feature has the underlying reason that all manifestations of objective reality are connected by reasons. The connection of some objects under study with others can be characterized exclusively by a cause-and-effect relationship (even its absence, and not just its presence). Modern science believes that now, when it has reached a dead end on many issues, a rejection of determinism is required. At least in the form in which it exists today in the field of scientific research. The development of new approaches to cause-and-effect relationships is the main problem of modern epistemology.

Versatility

The knowledge acquired by a person within the framework of one science can be used by another science in terms of studying its subject.

None of the provisions of various sciences can cause confusion or give unpredictable consequences to scientific research of fundamental or applied developments.

Algebraic techniques operate according to the same laws in physics, mathematics, biology, and sociology. Likewise, the laws of chemical interaction have the same characteristics when applied both in chemistry and physics, and in biology, and in medicine, and in technological developments.

There are a number of other signs, such as:

• sensuality (a person’s acquisition of knowledge based on information received from the senses),
• impersonality (regardless of the personality of the scientist who became the discoverer of this or that knowledge, the derived laws work in the same predictable way),
• incompleteness (scientists do not assume that somewhere there are principles, theories or laws, the successful study of which will end cognitive activity, since there will be nothing more to know).

Structure and composition of cognition

So what is the structure of natural science knowledge? A person’s acquisition of knowledge in the field of natural sciences is possible in two directions, which are closely related to each other:

• theoretical knowledge;

Each of these areas of natural science works to obtain a scientific fact. The difference between them lies solely in the methods by which these scientific facts are obtained.

The method of natural scientific knowledge consists of several techniques. Depending on which direction – theoretical or empirical – a person plans to obtain a scientific fact, he uses fundamentally different methods of natural science knowledge.

Methods for human knowledge of truth are defined as scientific methods - tools for obtaining new knowledge and solving problems in any of the sciences.

Since the beginning and development of the scientific and technological revolution, society has always been critical of scientific methods. This interest is connected with the problem that, according to some popular philosophers, it is the constraint and conservatism of methods of cognition that hinders the development of science. If we analyze the way a person uses the scientific method, then its very use does not guarantee the development of new scientific knowledge. Only by encountering anomalies and unexplained phenomena can scientists move forward.

Methods of empirical knowledge

Methods of empirical cognition include ways for a person to obtain knowledge from phenomena directly observed and processed by human senses. There are only two main ways to obtain such knowledge:

• observation (obtaining information by perceiving objects of study through the senses, while objects are observed in their natural conditions, without any intervention from a natural scientist);
• experiment (reproduction of experiments under controlled conditions).

Separate scientific methods also include two ways for humans to process information obtained during the preparation, conduct and study of observations and experiments:

• study;
• measurement.

Construction of a scientific experiment

Experimenting is one of the most exciting activities for a person. Conducting experiments aimed at obtaining certain results - this activity in itself carries a progressive cognitive charge.

In order for experiments to be called scientific, a person must build them according to a certain principle:

• To begin with, a natural scientist collects information about a particular phenomenon, the study of which was required to consider a specific scientific problem.
• Having received information about a phenomenon available in the system of scientific knowledge (its characteristics, conditions of occurrence, possible results, etc.), a person must organize the observation of the phenomena of interest in their natural conditions of reproduction. If a scientist wants to grow a modified plant under experimental conditions, he must observe, more than once, how similar plants grow and develop under normal conditions.
• Analysis of received information and data. Having gained empirical experience through observation and having information about the phenomenon that is already in the scientific knowledge base, a person is able to analyze what premise judgments can form the basis of a future experiment to obtain the necessary conclusions about certain phenomena under study.

• Constructing a hypothesis. In this part of the experimental plan, theoretical methods of cognition are included, since epistemology relates the construction of hypotheses specifically to the theoretical method. The hypothesis being developed makes assumptions that explain the necessary aspects of the phenomenon under study.
• Development of theory. Another method used in experimental research. Theories are built after the direct implementation of the experiment, when the data obtained at all previous stages are compared and the phenomenon that underlies this or that phenomenon is explained. For example, the phenomenon of photosynthesis that underlies the phenomenon of plants consuming carbon dioxide. And a person can confirm this experimentally.

Theoretical methods

The theoretical scientific method underlies all scientific research. Without it, it is impossible to obtain at least some knowledge from information obtained empirically.

Without theoretical processing, empirical data is only a set of statistical information about properties and processes.

The theoretical method contains the rational component of natural science knowledge. The theoretical method is a way of constructing reasoning about the subject of research.

The main theoretical methods of scientific knowledge used by man are:

1. Formalization (transmission of thoughts concerning the phenomenon under study in terms and concepts defined and recognized by the scientific community). As a result of formalization, it is not the subjective experience of a person that is reflected, but a certain abstract model of the phenomenon under study is built.
2. Axiomatization. Application in the construction of hypotheses and theories of statements that are considered a priori truths. Those that do not require additional evidence within the framework of ongoing research. For example, when conducting scientific experiments, a person does not prove that the boiling point of water depends on pressure, even if these two phenomena are used in the research being conducted.
3. Abstraction. The need in research to discard all those properties of an object or phenomenon that are unimportant in a given study and cannot affect its results. A person always approaches this scientific method very carefully, since with modern research in very subtle areas, every unaccepted deviation can cause a major scientific omission.
4. Analysis. Splitting the subject of research into smaller components (signs, forms, properties, connections, etc.). By studying each individual aspect of one phenomenon, a person receives detailed information about the phenomenon under study and, combining the knowledge acquired during the study, comes to useful conclusions. This combination actually flows into the next scientific method - synthesis.
5. Induction, deduction, analogy are three methods of constructing conclusions, taken by science from logic. Each of these methods characterizes the relationship between reasoning premises to obtain the necessary conclusions. Thus, deduction is characterized by the fact that from reasoning premises related to general scientific knowledge, a person produces certain conclusions for particular cases. Induction, on the contrary, derives general patterns from particular cases. Analogy involves drawing conclusions from the study of the similarities and differences of certain phenomena. So, if some signs of the phenomenon being studied have certain similarities, then these phenomena can be checked for the presence of other similarities.