The cognitive attitude of a person to the world is carried out in various forms - in the form of everyday knowledge, artistic, religious knowledge, and finally, in the form of scientific knowledge. The first three areas of knowledge are considered, in contrast to science, as outside scientific forms. Scientific knowledge has grown out of ordinary knowledge, but at present these two forms of knowledge are quite far apart from each other.
There are two levels in the structure of scientific knowledge - empirical and theoretical. These levels should not be confused with aspects of cognition in general - sensory reflection and rational cognition. The fact is that in the first case, different types are meant cognitive activity scientists, and in the second - we are talking about the types of mental activity of the individual in the process of cognition in general, and both of these types are used both at the empirical and at the theoretical levels of scientific knowledge.
The levels of scientific knowledge themselves differ in a number of parameters: 1) in the subject of research. Empirical research is focused on phenomena, theoretical - on the essence; 2) by means and tools of knowledge; 3) by research methods. At the empirical level, this is observation, experiment, at the theoretical level - a systematic approach, idealization, etc.; 4) by the nature of the acquired knowledge. In one case, these are empirical facts, classifications, empirical laws, in the second - laws, disclosure of essential connections, theories.
In the XVII-XVIII and partly in the XIX centuries. science was still at the empirical stage, limiting its tasks to the generalization and classification of empirical facts, the formulation of empirical laws. In the future, above the empirical level, a theoretical level is built up, connected with a comprehensive study of reality in its essential connections and patterns. At the same time, both types of research are organically interconnected and presuppose each other in the integral structure of scientific knowledge.
Methods applicable at the empirical level of scientific knowledge: observation and experiment.
Observation is a deliberate and purposeful perception of phenomena and processes without direct intervention in their course, subject to tasks scientific research. The main requirements for scientific observation are as follows: 1) unambiguous purpose, design; 2) consistency in observation methods; 3) objectivity; 4) the possibility of control either by repeated observation or by experiment.
Observation is used, as a rule, where intervention in the process under study is undesirable or impossible. Observation in modern science is associated with the widespread use of instruments, which, firstly, enhance the senses, and secondly, remove the touch of subjectivity from the assessment of observed phenomena. An important place in the process of observation (as well as experiment) is occupied by the measurement operation. Measurement - is the definition of the ratio of one (measured) quantity to another, taken as a standard. Since the results of observation, as a rule, take the form of various signs, graphs, curves on an oscilloscope, cardiograms, etc., the interpretation of the data obtained is an important component of the study.
The theoretical level of scientific knowledge is characterized by the predominance of the rational moment - concepts, theories, laws and other forms of thinking and "mental operations". Living contemplation, sensory cognition is not eliminated here, but becomes a subordinate (but very important) aspect of the cognitive process. Theoretical knowledge reflects phenomena and processes from the side of their universal internal communications and regularities comprehended by rational processing of data of empirical knowledge.
characteristic feature theoretical knowledge is its focus on itself, intrascientific reflection, i.e., the study of the process of cognition itself, its forms, techniques, methods, conceptual apparatus, etc. On the basis of a theoretical explanation and learned laws, prediction, scientific prediction of the future is carried out.
1. Formalization - displaying meaningful knowledge in a sign-symbolic form (formalized language). When formalizing, reasoning about objects is transferred to the plane of operating with signs (formulas), which is associated with the construction of artificial languages (the language of mathematics, logic, chemistry, etc.).
It is the use of special symbols that makes it possible to eliminate the ambiguity of words in ordinary, natural language. In formalized reasoning, each symbol is strictly unambiguous.
Formalization, therefore, is a generalization of the forms of processes that differ in content, the abstraction of these forms from their content. It clarifies the content by identifying its form and can be carried out with varying degrees of completeness. But, as the Austrian logician and mathematician Godel showed, in a theory there always remains an unrevealed, non-formalizable remainder. The ever deeper formalization of the content of knowledge will never reach absolute completeness. This means that formalization is internally limited in its capabilities. It is proved that there is no general method that allows any reasoning to be replaced by a calculation. Gödel's theorems gave a fairly rigorous substantiation of the fundamental impossibility of complete formalization of scientific reasoning and scientific knowledge in general.
2. Axiomatic method - a method of constructing a scientific theory, in which it is based on some initial provisions - axioms (postulates), from which all other statements of this theory are derived from them in a purely logical way, through proof.
3. Hypothetical-deductive method - a method of scientific knowledge, the essence of which is to create a system of deductively interconnected hypotheses, from which statements about empirical facts are ultimately derived. The conclusion obtained on the basis of this method will inevitably have a probabilistic character.
The general structure of the hypothetical-deductive method:
a) familiarization with factual material that requires a theoretical explanation and an attempt to do so with the help of already existing theories and laws. If not, then:
b) putting forward guesses (hypotheses, assumptions) about the causes and patterns of these phenomena using a variety of logical techniques;
c) an assessment of the solidity and seriousness of the assumptions and the selection of the most probable from the set of them;
d) deduction from the hypothesis (usually by deductive means) of consequences with specification of its content;
e) experimental verification consequences derived from the hypothesis. Here the hypothesis either receives experimental confirmation or is refuted. However, the confirmation of individual consequences does not guarantee its truth (or falsity) as a whole. The hypothesis that is best based on the test results goes into theory.
4. Climbing from the abstract to the concrete - a method of theoretical research and presentation, consisting in the movement of scientific thought from the original abstraction through successive stages of deepening and expanding knowledge to the result - a holistic reproduction of the theory of the subject under study. As its prerequisite, this method includes the ascent from the sensory-concrete to the abstract, to the separation in thinking of individual aspects of the subject and their “fixing” in the corresponding abstract definitions. The movement of cognition from the sensory-concrete to the abstract is precisely the movement from the individual to the general; such logical methods as analysis and induction prevail here. The ascent from the abstract to the mentally concrete is the process of moving from individual general abstractions to their unity, the concrete-universal, here the methods of synthesis and deduction dominate.
The essence of theoretical knowledge is not only the description and explanation of the variety of facts and patterns identified in the process of empirical research in a particular subject area, based on a small number of laws and principles, it is also expressed in the desire of scientists to reveal the harmony of the universe.
Theories can be stated in a variety of ways. Not infrequently we encounter the tendency of scientists to build theories axiomatically, which imitates the pattern of organization of knowledge created in geometry by Euclid. However, most often theories are stated genetically, gradually introducing into the subject and revealing it sequentially from the simplest to more and more complex aspects.
Regardless of the accepted form of presentation of the theory, its content, of course, is determined by the basic principles that underlie it.
There are two levels of scientific knowledge - empirical and theoretical.
Empirical level scientific knowledge is aimed at the study of phenomena (in other words, forms and ways of manifestation essence of objects, processes, relationships), it is formed using such methods of cognition as observation, measurement, experiment. The main forms of existence of empirical knowledge are grouping, classification, description, systematization and generalization of the results of observation and experiment.
Empirical knowledge has a rather complex structure, which includes four levels.
Primary level - single empirical statements, the content of which is the fixation of the results of single observations; while fixing exact time, place and conditions of observation.
The second level of empirical knowledge is scientific facts, more precisely, the description of the facts of reality by means of the language of science. With the help of such means, the absence or presence of certain events, properties, relations in the subject area under study, as well as their intensity (quantitative certainty), is affirmed. Their symbolic representations are graphs, diagrams, tables, classifications, mathematical models.
The third level of empirical knowledge is empirical patterns various types (functional, causal, structural, dynamic, statistical, etc.).
The fourth level of empirical scientific knowledge is phenomenological theories as a logically interconnected set of relevant empirical laws and facts (phenomenological thermodynamics, celestial mechanics by I. Kepler, periodic law chemical elements in the formulation of D. I. Mendeleev and others). Empirical theories differ from theories in the true sense of the word in that they do not penetrate into the essence of the objects under study, but represent empirical generalization visually perceptible things and processes.
Theoretical level scientific knowledge is aimed at research entities objects, processes, relationships and is based on the results of empirical knowledge. Theoretical knowledge is the result of the activity of such a constructive part of consciousness as intelligence. The leading logical operation of theoretical thinking is idealization, the purpose and result of which is the construction of a special type of objects - "ideal objects" of scientific theory ( material point and "absolutely black body" in physics, "ideal type" in sociology, etc.). An interconnected set of such objects forms its own basis of theoretical scientific knowledge.
This level of scientific knowledge includes the formulation of scientific problems; promotion and substantiation of scientific hypotheses and theories; revealing laws; derivation of logical consequences from laws; comparing various hypotheses and theories with each other, theoretical modeling, as well as procedures for explaining, understanding, predicting, generalizing.
In the structure of the theoretical level, a number of components are distinguished: laws, theories, models, concepts, teachings, principles, a set of methods. Let's briefly dwell on some of them.
V laws of science displays objective, regular, repetitive, essential and necessary connections and relationships between phenomena or processes real world. From the point of view of the scope, all laws can be conditionally divided into the following types.
1. Universal and private (existential) the laws. Universal laws reflect the universal, necessary, strictly recurring and stable nature of the regular connection between the phenomena and processes of the objective world. An example is the law of thermal expansion of bodies: "All bodies expand when heated."
Private laws are connections, either derived from universal laws, or reflecting the regularity of events that characterize a certain private sphere of being. Thus, the law of thermal expansion of metals is secondary, or derivative, in relation to the universal law of thermal expansion of all physical bodies and characterizes the property of a private group of chemical elements.
- 2. deterministic and stochastic (statistical) the laws. Deterministic laws give predictions that are quite reliable and accurate. In contrast, stochastic laws give only probabilistic predictions, they reflect a certain regularity that occurs as a result of the interaction of random massive or repetitive events.
- 3. empirical and theoretical laws. Empirical laws characterize the regularities found at the level of the phenomenon within the framework of empirical (experimental) knowledge. Theoretical laws reflect the recurring connections that operate at the level of essence. Among these laws, the most common are causal (causal) laws, which characterize the necessary relationship between two directly related phenomena.
At its core scientific theory is a single, integral system of knowledge, the elements of which: concepts, generalizations, axioms and laws - are connected by certain logical and meaningful relationships. Reflecting and expressing the essence of the objects under study, the theory acts as highest form organization of scientific knowledge.
In the structure of scientific theory, there are: a) initial fundamental principles; b) basic system-forming concepts; c) language thesaurus, i.e. norms for constructing correct language expressions characteristic of a given theory; d) an interpretive base that allows one to move from fundamental statements to a wide field of facts and observations.
In modern science, types of scientific theories are distinguished, which are classified according to various grounds.
First, according to the adequacy of the display of the studied area of phenomena, there are phenomenological and analytical theories. Theories of the first kind describe reality at the level of phenomena, or phenomena, without revealing their essence. Thus, geometric optics studied the phenomena of propagation, reflection, and refraction of light without revealing the nature of light itself. In turn, analytical theories reveal the essence of the studied phenomena. For example, the theory electromagnetic field reveals the essence of optical phenomena.
Secondly, according to the degree of accuracy of predictions, scientific theories, like laws, are divided into deterministic and stochastic. Deterministic theories give accurate and reliable predictions, but due to the complexity of many phenomena and processes, the presence of a significant amount of uncertainty and randomness in the world, such theories are rarely used. Stochastic theories give probabilistic predictions based on the study of the laws of chance. Such theories are used not only in physics or biology, but also in the social sciences and humanities, when predictions or forecasts are made about processes in which uncertainty plays a significant role, a combination of circumstances associated with the manifestation of randomness of mass events.
An important place in scientific knowledge at the theoretical level is occupied by a set of methods, among which are axiomatic, hypothetical-deductive, formalization method, idealization method, systematic approach, etc.
There are two levels in the structure of scientific knowledge: empirical and theoretical. These two levels should be distinguished from the two stages of the cognitive process as a whole - sensual and rational. Sensory knowledge is close, but not identical, to empirical, rational differs from theoretical.
Sensual and rational are forms of human knowledge in general, both scientific and everyday; empirical and theoretical knowledge is characteristic of science. Empirical knowledge is not limited to sensory knowledge, it includes moments of reflection, understanding, interpretation of observational data and the formation of a special type of knowledge - a scientific fact. The latter is the interaction of sensory and rational knowledge.
Theoretical knowledge is dominated by forms of rational knowledge (concepts, judgments, conclusions), but visual model representations such as an ideal ball, an absolutely rigid body are also used. A theory always contains sensory-visual components. Thus, at both levels of cognition, both feelings and reason function.
The difference between the empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge occurs for the following reasons (Table 2):
The level of reflection of reality,
The nature of the subject of study,
Applied methods of study,
Forms of knowledge
Language tools.
table 2
The difference between empirical and theoretical levels of knowledge
| Levels of scientific knowledge | Reflection level | Subject of study | Methods of scientific knowledge | Forms of scientific knowledge | Language |
| Empiric | Phenomenon | Empirical object | Observation, comparison, measurement, experiment | scientific fact | natural |
| Transition | - | - | Generalization, abstraction, analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction | scientific problem, scientific hypothesis, empirical law | - |
| Theoretical | Essence | Theoretical ideal object | Idealization, formalization, ascent from the abstract to the concrete, axiomatic, thought experiment | scientific theory | mathematical |
Empirical and theoretical research is aimed at understanding the same objective reality, but its vision, reflection in knowledge occurs in different ways. Empirical research is basically focused on the study of external relations and aspects of objects, phenomena and dependencies between them. As a result of this study, empirical dependencies are clarified. They are the result of an inductive generalization of experience and represent probabilistically true knowledge. This is, for example, the Boyle-Mariotte law, which describes the correlation between the pressure and volume of a gas: РV= сonst, where Р is the gas pressure, V is its volume. Initially, it was discovered by R. Boyle as an inductive generalization of experimental data, when a relationship was found in the experiment between the volume of gas compressed under pressure and the value of this pressure.
At the theoretical level of cognition, there is a selection of internal, essential connections of the object, which are fixed in the laws. No matter how many experiments we make and generalize their data, a simple inductive generalization does not lead to theoretical knowledge. Theory is not constructed by inductive generalization of facts. Einstein considered this conclusion to be one of the important epistemological lessons of the development of physics in the 20th century. Theoretical law is always reliable knowledge.
Empirical research is based on the direct practical interaction of the researcher with the object under study. And in this interaction, the nature of objects, their properties and features are known. The truth of empirical knowledge is verified by direct appeal to experience, to practice. At the same time, the objects of empirical knowledge should be distinguished from the objects of reality, which have an infinite number of features. Empirical objects are abstractions that have a fixed and limited set of features.
In a theoretical study, there is no direct practical interaction with objects. They are studied only indirectly, in a thought experiment, but not in a real one. Theoretical ideal objects are studied here, which are called idealized objects, abstract objects or constructs. Their examples are a material point, an ideal product, absolutely solid, ideal gas etc. For example, a material point is defined as a body devoid of size, but concentrating in itself the entire mass of the body. There are no such bodies in nature, they are constructed by thinking to reveal the essential aspects of the object under study. Verification of theoretical knowledge by referring to experience is impossible, and therefore it is associated with practice through empirical interpretation.
The levels of scientific knowledge also differ in functions: at the empirical level, a description of reality takes place, at the theoretical level, an explanation and prediction.
The empirical and theoretical levels differ in the methods and forms of knowledge used. The study of empirical objects is carried out with the help of observation, comparison, measurement and experiment. means empirical research are devices, installations and other means of real observation and experiment.
At the theoretical level, there are no means of material, practical interaction with the object under study. Special methods are used here: idealization, formalization, thought experiment, axiomatic, ascent from the abstract to the concrete.
The results of empirical research are expressed in natural language with the addition of special concepts in the form of scientific facts. They record objective, reliable information about the objects under study.
The results of theoretical research are expressed in the form of law and theory. For this, special language systems are created in which the concepts of science are formalized and mathematized.
The specificity of theoretical knowledge is its reflexivity, focus on itself, the study of the very process of knowledge, its methods, forms, conceptual apparatus. In empirical knowledge, this kind of research, as a rule, is not conducted.
In real cognition of reality, empirical and theoretical knowledge always interact as two opposites. The data of experience, arising independently of theory, are sooner or later covered by theory and become knowledge, conclusions from it.
On the other hand, scientific theories, arising on their own special theoretical basis, are built relatively independently, without a rigid and unambiguous dependence on empirical knowledge, but obey them, representing, in the final analysis, a generalization of experimental data.
Violation of the unity of empirical and theoretical knowledge, the absolutization of any of these levels leads to erroneous one-sided conclusions - empiricism or scholastic theorizing. Examples of the latter are the concept of building communism in the USSR in 1980, the theory of developed socialism, Lysenko's antigenetic doctrine. Empiricism absolutizes the role of facts and underestimates the role of thinking, denies its active role and relative independence. The only source of knowledge is experience, sensory knowledge.
Methods of scientific knowledge
Consider the essence of general scientific methods of cognition. These methods originate in the bosom of one science, and then are used in a number of others. These methods include mathematical methods, experiment, modeling. General scientific methods are divided into those applied at the empirical level of knowledge and at the theoretical level. The methods of empirical research include observation, comparison, measurement, experiment.
Observation- systematic purposeful perception of the phenomena of reality, during which we gain knowledge about the external aspects, properties and their relationships. Observation is an active cognitive process, based primarily on the work of the human senses and its objective material activity. This, of course, does not mean that human thinking is excluded from this process. The observer consciously searches for objects, guided by a certain idea, hypothesis or previous experience. Observation results always require a certain interpretation in the light of existing theoretical positions. The interpretation of observational data enables the scientist to separate essential facts from non-essential ones, to notice what a non-specialist can ignore. Therefore, nowadays in science it rarely happens that discoveries are made by non-specialists.
Einstein in a conversation with Heisenberg noted that the possibility of observing a given phenomenon or not depends on the theory. It is the theory that must establish what can be observed and what cannot.
The progress of observation as a method of scientific knowledge is inseparable from the progress of means of observation (for example, a telescope, microscope, spectroscope, radar). Devices not only increase the power of the sense organs, but also give us, as it were, additional organs of perception. So, devices allow you to "see" the electric field.
For surveillance to be effective, it must meet the following requirements:
Intention or intentionality
planning,
Activity,
Systematic.
Observation can be direct, when the object affects the senses of the researcher, and indirect, when the subject uses technical means, devices. In the latter case, scientists make a conclusion about the objects under study through the perception of the results of the interaction of unobserved objects with observed objects. Such a conclusion is based on a certain theory that establishes a certain relationship between observable and unobservable objects.
Description is a necessary aspect of observation. It is a fixation of the results of observation with the help of concepts, signs, diagrams, graphs. The main requirements for scientific description are intended to be as complete, accurate and objective as possible. The description should give a reliable and adequate picture of the object itself, accurately reflect the phenomenon under study. It is important that the terms used for description have a clear and unambiguous meaning. Description is divided into two types: qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative description involves fixing the properties of the object under study, it gives the most general knowledge about it. A quantitative description involves the use of mathematics and a numerical description of the properties, aspects and relationships of the object under study.
In scientific research, observation performs two main functions: providing empirical information about an object and testing hypotheses and theories of science. Often, observation can also play an important heuristic role, contributing to the development of new ideas.
Comparison- this is the establishment of similarities and differences between objects and phenomena of reality. As a result of comparison, something common is established that is inherent in several objects, and this leads to the knowledge of the law. Only those objects between which an objective commonality can exist should be compared. In addition, the comparison should be carried out according to the most important, essential features. Comparison is the basis of inference by analogy, which plays a large role: the properties of phenomena known to us can be extended to unknown phenomena that have something in common with each other.
Comparison is not only an elementary operation applied in a certain field of knowledge. In some sciences, comparison has grown to the level of a basic method. For example comparative anatomy, comparative embryology. This indicates the ever-increasing role of comparison in the process of scientific knowledge.
Measurement historically, as a method, it developed from the comparison operation, but unlike it, it is a more powerful and universal cognitive tool.
Measurement - the procedure for determining the numerical value of a certain quantity by comparison with a value taken as a unit of measurement. In order to measure, it is necessary to have an object of measurement, a unit of measurement, a measuring instrument, a certain method of measurement, an observer.
Measurements are either direct or indirect. With direct measurement, the result is obtained directly from the process itself. With indirect measurement, the desired value is determined mathematically based on the knowledge of other quantities obtained by direct measurement. For example, the determination of the mass of stars, measurements in the microcosm. Measurement makes it possible to find and formulate empirical laws and, in some cases, serves as a source for the formulation of scientific theories. In particular, the measurement of the atomic weights of elements was one of the prerequisites for the creation periodic system DI. Mendeleev, which is a theory of the properties of chemical elements. Michelson's famous measurements of the speed of light subsequently led to a radical break in the ideas established in physics.
The most important indicator of the quality of measurement, its scientific value is accuracy. The latter depends on the quality and diligence of the scientist, on the methods used by him, but mainly on the available measuring instruments. Therefore, the main ways to improve the measurement accuracy are:
Improving the quality of measuring instruments operating
based on certain established principles,
Creation of devices operating on the basis of new principles.
Measurement is one of the most important prerequisites for the application of mathematical methods in science.
Most often, the measurement is an elementary method that is included as an integral part of the experiment.
Experiment- the most important and complex method of empirical knowledge. An experiment is understood as such a method of studying an object, when the researcher actively influences it by creating artificial conditions necessary to identify the relevant properties of this object.
The experiment involves the use of observation, comparison and measurement as more elementary research methods. The main feature of the experiment is the intervention of the experimenter during natural processes, which determines the active nature of this method of cognition.
What advantages follow from the specific features of the experiment in comparison with observation?
During the experiment, it becomes possible to study this
phenomena in a "pure form", i.e., various side factors are excluded,
obscuring the essence of the main process.
The experiment allows you to explore the properties of objects of reality in extreme conditions (at ultra-low or ultra-high
temperatures, high pressures). This can lead to unexpected effects, whereby new properties of objects are discovered. This method was used, for example, to discover the properties of superfluidity and
superconductivity.
The most important advantage of the experiment is its repeatability, and its conditions can be systematically changed.
Classification of experiments is carried out on various grounds.
Depending on the goals, several types of experiment can be distinguished:
- research– carried out in order to detect the object has no
previously known properties (a classic example is Rutherford's experiments on
scattering of a-particles, as a result of which the planetary
atom structure);
- verification- is carried out to test certain statements of science (an example of a testing experiment is testing the hypothesis of the existence of the planet Neptune);
- measuring- is carried out to obtain accurate values of certain properties of objects (for example, experimental melting of metals, alloys; experiments to study the strength of structures).
Physical, chemical, biological, psychological, social experiments are distinguished by the nature of the object under study.
According to the method and results of the study, experiments can be divided into qualitative and quantitative. The first of them are rather exploratory, exploratory in nature, the second provide an accurate measurement of all significant factors influencing the course of the process under study.
An experiment of any kind can be carried out both directly with the object of interest, and with its substitute - the model. Accordingly, experiments are natural and model. Models are used in cases where the experiment is impossible or impractical.
The experiment has received the greatest application in natural science. modern science began with the experiments of G. Galileo. However, at present, it is also receiving more and more development in the study of social processes. Such a spread of experiment in all more branches of scientific knowledge speaks of the growing importance of this research method. With its help, problems are solved to obtain the values of the properties of certain objects, experimental testing of hypotheses and theories is carried out, and the heuristic value of the experiment in finding new aspects of the studied phenomena is also great. The effectiveness of the experiment also increases in connection with the progress of experimental technology. There is also such a feature: the more experiment is used in science, the faster it develops. It is no coincidence that textbooks in experimental sciences age much faster than those in descriptive sciences.
Science is not limited to the empirical level of research, it goes further, revealing the essential connections and relationships in the object under study, which, taking shape in a law known by man, acquire a certain theoretical form.
At the theoretical level of cognition, other means and methods of cognition are used. The methods of theoretical research include: idealization, formalization, the method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete, axiomatic, thought experiment.
Method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete. The concept of "abstract" is used mainly to characterize human knowledge. Abstract is understood as one-sided, incomplete knowledge, when only those properties that are of interest to the researcher are highlighted.
The concept of "concrete" in philosophy can be used in two senses: a) "concrete" - reality itself, taken in all its variety of properties, connections and relationships; b) "concrete" - the designation of multifaceted, comprehensive knowledge about the object. The concrete in this sense acts as the opposite of abstract knowledge, i.e. knowledge, poor in content, one-sided.
What is the essence of the method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete? The ascent from the abstract to the concrete is the general form of the movement of knowledge. According to this method, the process of cognition is divided into two relatively independent stages. At the first stage, the transition from the sensory-concrete to its abstract definitions is carried out. The object itself in the process of this operation, as it were, “evaporates”, turning into a set of abstractions fixed by thinking, one-sided definitions.
The second stage of the process of cognition is actually the ascent from the abstract to the concrete. Its essence lies in the fact that thought moves from abstract definitions of an object to a comprehensive, multifaceted knowledge about an object, to concrete knowledge. It should be noted that these are two sides of the same process, which have only relative independence.
Idealization- the mental construction of objects that do not exist in reality. Such ideal objects include, for example, an absolutely black body, a material point, a point electric charge. The process of constructing an ideal object necessarily implies an abstracting activity of consciousness. So, speaking of a completely black body, we abstract from the fact that all real bodies have the ability to reflect the light falling on them. Other mental operations are also of great importance for the formation of ideal objects. This is due to the fact that when creating ideal objects, we must achieve the following goals:
Deprive real objects of some of their inherent properties;
- mentally endow these objects with certain unrealistic properties. This requires a mental transition to the limiting case in the development of some property and the rejection of some real properties of objects.
Ideal objects play an important role in science; they make it possible to significantly simplify complex systems, which makes it possible to apply mathematical methods of research to them. Moreover, science knows many examples when the study of ideal objects led to outstanding discoveries (Galileo's discovery of the principle of inertia). Any idealization is justified only within certain limits, it serves for the scientific solution of only certain problems. Otherwise, the use of idealization can lead to some misconceptions. Only with this in mind can one correctly assess the role of idealization in cognition.
Formalization- a method of studying a wide variety of objects by displaying their content and structure in a sign form and studying the logical structure of the theory. The advantage of formalization is the following:
Ensuring the completeness of the review of a certain area of problems, the generalization of the approach to solving them. A general algorithm for solving problems is being created, for example, calculating the areas of various figures using integral calculus;
The use of special symbols, the introduction of which ensures the brevity and clarity of fixing knowledge;
Attributing certain meanings to individual symbols or their systems, which avoids the ambiguity of terms that is characteristic of natural languages. Therefore, when operating with formalized systems, reasoning is distinguished by clarity and rigor, and conclusions by evidence;
The ability to form iconic models of objects and replace the study of real things and processes with the study of these models. This simplifies cognitive tasks. Artificial languages have a relatively large independence, independence of the sign form in relation to the content, therefore, in the process of formalization, it is possible to temporarily digress from the content of the model and explore only the formal side. Such a distraction from the content can lead to paradoxical, but truly ingenious discoveries. For example, with the help of formalization, the existence of the positron was predicted by P. Dirac.
Axiomatization found wide application in mathematics and mathematic sciences.
The axiomatic method of constructing theories is understood as their organization, when a number of statements are introduced without proof, and all the rest are derived from them according to certain logical rules. Propositions accepted without proof are called axioms or postulates. This method was first used to construct elementary geometry by Euclid, then it was used in various sciences.
A number of requirements are imposed on an axiomatically constructed system of knowledge. According to the requirement of consistency in the system of axioms, a proposition and its negation must not be deduced simultaneously. According to the requirement of completeness, any sentence that can be formulated in a given system of axioms can be proved or refuted in it. According to the requirement of independence of axioms, any of them must not be deducible from other axioms.
What are the advantages of the axiomatic method? First of all, the axiomatization of science requires a precise definition of the concepts used and adherence to the strictness of the conclusions. In empirical knowledge, both have not been achieved, which is why the application of the axiomatic method requires the progress of this field of knowledge in this respect. In addition, axiomatization streamlines knowledge, excludes unnecessary elements from it, eliminates ambiguities and contradictions. In other words, axiomatization rationalizes the organization of scientific knowledge.
At present, attempts are being made to apply this method in non-mathematized sciences: biology, linguistics, geology.
thought experiment is carried out not with material objects, but with ideal copies. A thought experiment acts as an ideal form of a real experiment and can lead to important discoveries. It was a thought experiment that allowed Galileo to discover the physical principle of inertia, which formed the basis of all classical mechanics. This principle could not be discovered in any experiment with real objects, in real environments.
The methods used both at the empirical and theoretical levels of research include generalization, abstraction, analogy, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, modeling, historical and logical methods, and mathematical methods.
abstraction has the most universal character in mental activity. The essence of this method is the mental abstraction from non-essential properties, connections and the simultaneous selection of one or more aspects of the subject being studied that are of interest to the researcher. The process of abstraction has a two-stage character: the separation of the essential, the identification of the most important; the realization of the possibility of abstraction, i.e., the actual act of abstraction or abstraction.
The result of abstraction is the formation of various kinds of abstractions - both individual concepts and their systems. It should be noted that this method is integral part to all other methods that are more complex in structure.
When we abstract some property or relations of a number of objects, we thereby create the basis for their unification into a single class. In relation to the individual features of each of the objects included in this class, the feature that unites them acts as a common feature.
Generalization- a method, a method of cognition, as a result of which the general properties and signs of objects are established. The generalization operation is carried out as a transition from a particular or less general concept and judgment to a more general concept or judgment. For example, concepts such as "pine", "larch", "spruce" are primary generalizations from which one can move on to the more general concept of "coniferous tree". Then you can move on to such concepts as "tree", "plant", "living organism".
Analysis- a method of cognition, the content of which is a set of methods for dividing an object into its constituent parts for the purpose of their comprehensive study.
Synthesis- a method of cognition, the content of which is a set of methods of connection separate parts object into a whole.
These methods complement, condition and accompany each other. To make it possible to analyze a thing, it must be fixed as a whole, for which its synthetic perception is necessary. Conversely, the latter presupposes its subsequent dismemberment.
Analysis and synthesis are the most elementary methods of cognition that lie at the very foundation of human thinking. At the same time, they are also the most universal techniques, characteristic of all its levels and forms.
The possibility of analyzing an object is, in principle, unlimited, which logically follows from the proposition of the inexhaustibility of matter. However, the choice of elementary components of the object is always carried out, determined by the purpose of the study.
Analysis and synthesis are closely interconnected with other methods of cognition: experiment, modeling, induction, deduction.
Induction and deduction. The division of these methods is based on the allocation of two types of reasoning: deductive and inductive. In deductive reasoning, a conclusion is made about a certain element of a set based on knowledge of the general properties of the entire set.
All fish breathe with gills.
perch - fish
__________________________
Therefore, the perch breathes with gills.
One of the premises of deduction is necessarily a general judgment. Here there is a movement of thought from the general to the particular. This movement of thought is very often used in scientific research. Thus, Maxwell, from several equations expressing the most general laws of electrodynamics, successively developed the complete theory of the electromagnetic field.
Especially great cognitive significance of deduction is manifested in the case when a new scientific hypothesis acts as a general premise. In this case, deduction is the starting point for the birth of a new theoretical system. The knowledge created in this way determines the further course of empirical research and directs the construction of new inductive generalizations.
Consequently, the content of deduction as a method of cognition is the use of general scientific provisions in the study of specific phenomena.
Induction is a conclusion from the particular to the general, when, on the basis of knowledge about a part of the objects of a class, a conclusion is made about the class as a whole. Induction as a method of cognition is a set of cognitive operations, as a result of which the movement of thought from less general provisions to more general ones is carried out. Thus, induction and deduction are directly opposite directions of the train of thought. The immediate basis of inductive reasoning is the repetition of the phenomena of reality. Finding similar features in many objects of a certain class, we conclude that these features are inherent in all objects of this class.
There are the following types of induction:
-full induction, wherein general conclusion about the class of subjects is done on the basis of the study of all subjects of the class. Complete induction gives
reliable conclusions and can be used as evidence;
-incomplete induction, in which the general conclusion is obtained from the premises,
not covering all items of the class. There are three types of incomplete
induction:
Induction by simple enumeration or popular induction, in which a general conclusion about a class of objects is made on the basis that among the observed facts there was not one that contradicted the generalization;
Induction through the selection of facts is carried out by selecting them from total mass according to a certain principle that reduces the likelihood of random coincidences;
Scientific induction, in which the general conclusion about all items in the class
is done on the basis of knowledge of the necessary signs or causal
connections of a part of class objects. Scientific induction can give not only
probable, but also reliable conclusions.
Causal relationships can be established by methods of scientific induction. The following canons of induction are distinguished (Bacon-Mill rules of inductive research):
Single similarity method: if two or more cases of the phenomenon under study have only one circumstance in common, and all the others
circumstances are different, then this is the only similar circumstance and
there is a reason this phenomenon;
Single difference method: if the cases in which the phenomenon
occurs or does not occur, differ only in one previous circumstance, and all other circumstances are identical, then this circumstance is the cause of this phenomenon;
The combined method of similarity and difference, which is
a combination of the first two methods;
Concomitant change method: if a change in one circumstance always causes a change in another, then the first circumstance
there is a reason for the second;
Residual method: if it is known that the cause of the phenomenon under study
the circumstances necessary for it do not serve, except for one, then this one circumstance is the cause of this phenomenon.
The attractiveness of induction lies in its close connection with facts, with practice. It plays an important role in scientific research - in putting forward hypotheses, in discovering empirical laws, in the process of introducing new concepts into science. Noting the role of induction in science, Louis de Broglie wrote: "Induction, insofar as it seeks to avoid the paths already beaten, inasmuch as it inevitably tries to push the already existing boundaries of thought, is the true source of truly scientific progress" 1 .
But induction cannot lead to universal judgments in which regularities are expressed. Inductive generalizations cannot make the transition from empiricism to theory. Therefore, it would be wrong to absolutize the role of induction, as Bacon did, to the detriment of deduction. F. Engels wrote that deduction and induction are interconnected in the same necessary way as analysis and synthesis. Only in mutual connection each of them can fully show their merits. Deduction is the main method in mathematics, in the theoretically developed sciences, in the empirical sciences, inductive conclusions predominate.
Historical and logical methods are closely interconnected. They are used in the study of complex developing objects. Essence historical method consists in the fact that the history of the development of the object under study is reproduced in all its versatility, taking into account all laws and accidents. It is primarily used for research human history, but plays an important role in the knowledge of the development of inanimate and living nature.
The history of the object is reconstructed in a logical way based on the study of certain traces of the past, the remnants of past eras, imprinted in material formations (natural or man-made). Historical research is characterized by a chronological aftermath.
________________
1 Broglie L. On the paths of science. M., S. 178.
consistency of consideration of the material, analysis of the stages of development of the objects of study. With the help of the historical method, the entire evolution of an object is traced from its inception to state of the art, the genetic relations of the developing object are investigated, the driving forces and conditions for the development of the object are clarified.
The content of the historical method is revealed by the structure of the study: 1) the study of "traces of the past" as the results of historical processes; 2) comparing them with the results of modern processes; 3) reconstruction of past events in their spatio-temporal relations based on the interpretation of "traces of the past" with the help of knowledge about modern processes; 4) identification of the main stages of development and the reasons for the transition from one stage of development to another.
The logical method of research is the reproduction in thinking of a developing object in the form of a historical theory. In logical research, one abstracts from all historical accidents, reproducing history in a general form, freed from everything insignificant. The principle of the unity of the historical and the logical requires that the logic of thought should follow the historical process. This does not mean that thought is passive; on the contrary, its activity consists in isolating from history the essential, the very essence of the historical process. We can say that the historical and logical methods of cognition are not only different, but also largely coincide. It is no coincidence that F. Engels noted that the logical method is, in essence, the same historical method, but freed from the historical form. They complement each other.
Philosophy Cheat Sheet: Answers to exam tickets Zhavoronkova Alexandra Sergeevna
49. EMPIRICAL AND THEORETICAL KNOWLEDGE
Sense cognition- this is knowledge in the form of sensations and perceptions of the properties of things directly given to the senses.
empirical knowledge is a reflection of this indirectly. The empirical level of knowledge involves: observation; description of the observed; record keeping; use of documents.
Empirical knowledge is a higher level of knowledge than just sensory knowledge.
The starting point in sensory cognition is feeling - the simplest sensory image, a reflection, a copy, or a kind of snapshot of individual properties of objects.
Sensations have a wide range of modality:
visual;
auditory;
Vibrating;
Skin-tactile;
temperature;
pain;
Muscular-articular;
Feelings of balance and acceleration;
Olfactory;
Taste;
General organic.
The objective basis for the perception of the image as a whole is the unity and, at the same time, the multiplicity of various aspects and properties of the object.
A holistic image that reflects objects that directly affect the senses, their properties and relationships is called perception.
Memory, ideas and imagination. Sensations and perceptions are the source of all human knowledge, but knowledge is not limited to them. Any object affects the human senses for a certain time, after which the effect stops. But the image of the object does not immediately disappear without a trace, but is imprinted and stored in memory. No knowledge is inconceivable without the phenomenon of memory.
Memory is very important in cognition, it unites the past and the present into one organic whole, where there is their mutual penetration.
Representation - these are images of objects that once acted on the human senses and then are restored according to the connections preserved in the brain.
In the process of representation, consciousness for the first time breaks away from its immediate source and begins to exist as a relatively independent subjective phenomenon. Representation is an intermediate link between perception and theoretical thinking.
Imagination is a property of the human spirit of the greatest value, it makes up for the lack of visibility in the stream of abstract thought. Knowledge is impossible without imagination.
The main research methods in science, especially in natural science, are observation and experiment.
Observation- this is a deliberate, planned perception, which is carried out in order to reveal the essential properties and relations of the object of knowledge.
experiment called a research method by which an object is either reproduced artificially, or placed in certain conditions that meet the objectives of the study.
scientific fact. Fact-finding is necessary condition scientific research.
Fact - this is a phenomenon of the material or spiritual world, which has become a certified property of our knowledge, it is a fixation of some phenomenon, property and relationship.
Facts acquire scientific value provided that there is a theory that interprets them, there is a method for classifying them, they are comprehended in connection with other facts.
From the book Philosophical Fiction, or Instructions for the User of the Universe author Reiter MichaelTHEORETICAL MODELING Model-based thinking is nothing new. Each author of the psychotherapeutic method builds his own model of the mind, but few are ready to admit to what they have done. Therapists in their writings mostly pay tribute to the genre
From the book Philosophy of Science and Technology author Stepin Vyacheslav SemenovichEmpirical and Theoretical in Technical Theory
From the book Words and Things [Archaeology of the Humanities] author Foucault Michel4. EMPIRICAL AND TRANSCENDENTAL Man for the analytics of finite being appears as a bizarre duality of the empirical and transcendental, for this is a being that by itself can cognize what makes all cognition possible. However, isn't that
From the book Me and the World of Objects author Berdyaev Nikolai3. Knowledge and freedom. The activity of thought and the creative nature of cognition. Cognition is active and passive. Theoretical and practical cognition It is impossible to admit the complete passivity of the subject in cognition. The subject cannot be a mirror reflecting the object. Object not
From the book Dialectics of the Abstract and the Concrete in Scientific and Theoretical Thinking author Ilyenkov Evald Vasilievich2. DIALECTICAL AND ECLECTICAL-EMPIRIC UNDERSTANDING OF "COMPLETE CONSIDERATION"
From the book Monism as a principle of dialectical logic the author Naumenko L K1. Absolute border. Categorical definitions. Logic and theoretical knowledge. Eleatics Thought is an active act, action of judgment, determination of an object. The thinking comprehension of reality is the comprehension of it as a world of certain forms, entities endowed
From the book Early Buddhism: Religion and Philosophy author Lysenko Victoria Georgievna1. The unity of the manifold. Empirical and Theoretical Scientific and theoretical knowledge is not reduced to a simple registration of what is given in direct contemplation. It is an active activity, consisting in processing the data of sensory contemplation.
From the book Social Philosophy author Krapivensky Solomon EliazarovichAtman is not an empirical "ego" Brahminists, supporters of the doctrine of the higher Atman, would also willingly subscribe to the arguments of the Buddha against the identification of atta with feelings, body, mind, consciousness. Michel Yulin believes that the Buddhists did not distinguish between the idea of the eternal,
From the book Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion author Murray MichaelScience and Empirical Knowledge The functions of science cannot be correctly and deeply understood without clarifying its roots, its genetic links with empirical knowledge obtained by society in the process of everyday human practice. When evaluating empirical knowledge, when comparing
From the book Human knowledge of its scope and boundaries by Russell Bertrand6.1.6. Probabilistic-Empirical Proof, Part 2: "The Argument from Distribution" As discussed above, Probabilistic-Empirical Proof from Evil can be formulated in many ways. Direct evidence came from the fact of the existence of individual
From the book Theory of Knowledge the author Eternus From the book Dialectics of Abstract and Concrete in "Capital" by K. Marx author Ilyenkov Evald VasilievichEmpirical and theoretical knowledge The following methods of knowledge are presented as two main components, first of all, scientific knowledge: The empirical method of knowledge is the setting up of experiments, making observations, making measurements, i.e., in general -
From the book Philosophical Orientation in the World author Jaspers Karl TheodorDialectical and Eclectic-Empirical Understanding of the Comprehensiveness of Consideration
From the book Philosophy author Spirkin Alexander Georgievich1. Being-I as an empirical existence, as consciousness in general, as a possible existence. - If I ask what I mean when I say "I", then the first answer is: If I think about myself, then I have made myself an object; I am this body as this individual, with indefinite
From the book Fundamentals of the Theory of Argumentation [Textbook] author Ivin Alexander Arkhipovich9. Sensory, empirical and theoretical knowledge Sensory and empirical knowledge are not the same thing. Sensory knowledge is knowledge in the form of sensations and perceptions of the properties of things directly given to the senses. I see, for example, a flying plane and I know that
From the author's book5. Theoretical justification for evaluations The theoretical reasoning in support of value statements, including norms, is in many ways parallel to the theoretical justification for descriptive statements: almost all modes of argumentation applicable to descriptions can be used.
Empirical and theoretical levels, criteria for their distinction (here - the structure of scientific knowledge or knowledge).
The methods of scientific knowledge include those that are used in empirical and theoretical research. To understand the place and role of various methods in scientific research, one should consider the structure of scientific knowledge, which consists of two levels - empirical and theoretical. On the empirical, facts and information about the objects under study are accumulated, on the theoretical, the obtained knowledge is synthesized in the form of hypotheses, theories, ideas. Depending on the levels of knowledge, methods are divided into two groups:
Methods of empirical research - observation, experiment, comparison.
Methods of theoretical knowledge - analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, idealization, axiomatic, etc.
Empirical and theoretical studies are closely related - the former are based on the collection of empirical material that accumulates in the course of observations and experiments, and the latter are carried out in order to confirm or test a hypothesis.
Empirical and theoretical studies differ in the depth of penetration into the essence of the subject. If the former are associated with the study of the external side of the subject, then the latter - with the study of its internal properties and connections. We can say that if at the empirical level the essence of the first order is comprehended, then at the theoretical level - the essence of the second, third, etc. order.
The main goal of empirical knowledge is to obtain facts.
The distinction between these two levels of scientific knowledge did not occur immediately. This division appeared more clearly in positivism, which recognized the status of science associated only with knowledge that is empirically verified. It can be noted that even before positivism, the empirical philosophy of F. Bacon appeared (the main idea: knowledge begins with experience, in experimental experiments, a scientific researcher obtains knowledge, then knowledge is generalized, generalized knowledge is obtained).
The separation of the empirical and theoretical levels can be made on the basis of the peculiarities of human cognition: the sensual and rational levels (however, the empirical level cannot be associated with the sensual, and the theoretical - with the rational, since these are different concepts). The main methods of empirical knowledge are observation and experiment. There are a number of methods of theoretical knowledge, such as: abstraction, idealization, formalization, etc. There are methods of empirical and theoretical knowledge, such as: analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction.
The main type of knowledge obtained at the empirical level of scientific research is a fact and an experimental law. The knowledge of the theoretical level primarily refers to theory. At the empirical level, scientific knowledge deals with the individual properties of an object, given in experience. The inductive generalization of the collected data is presented in the form of experimentally established regularities. The theoretical level of scientific knowledge is distinguished by its focus on the discovery of general regular characteristics of an object, which are revealed using rational procedures. At the theoretical level, theoretical laws are formulated.
In scientific knowledge, a fact is understood as either reliable knowledge or knowledge expressed in the language of empirical data description. Science never deals with "pure" facts. Information collected by empirical research methods needs interpretation, which always comes from certain theoretical premises. Any fact makes sense only within the framework of a certain theory. Thus, the distinction between the empirical and theoretical level is not absolute. Scientific knowledge necessarily includes both empirical and theoretical levels of research. At the empirical level, the connection of scientific knowledge with reality and with the practical activity of a person is provided. The theoretical level is the development of a conceptual model of the subject of knowledge.
Conclusion. The difference between the empirical and the theoretical level:
1) a different ratio of the sensual and the rational (at the empirical level, the element of the sensual prevails over the rational, at the theoretical - vice versa);
2) different research methods;
3) the main form of the obtained scientific knowledge (at the empirical level - a scientific fact; at the theoretical level - theory).
Empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge, criteria for their difference
There are two levels of scientific knowledge - empirical and theoretical. (You can also say - empirical and theoretical research.)
Empirical the level of scientific knowledge includes observation, experiment, grouping, classification and description of the results of observation and experiment, modeling.
Theoretical the level of scientific knowledge includes the promotion, construction and development of scientific hypotheses and theories; formulation of laws; derivation of logical consequences from laws; comparing various hypotheses and theories with each other, theoretical modeling, as well as procedures for explaining, predicting and generalizing.
Correlation of the empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge with sensory and rational knowledge
The assertion that the role and significance of empirical cognition is determined by its connection with the sensory stage of cognition has become almost trivial. However, empirical knowledge is not only sensory. If we simply fix the readings of the device and get the statement “the arrow is on the division of the scale 744”, then this will not yet be scientific knowledge. Such a statement becomes scientific knowledge (fact) only when we correlate it with the corresponding concepts, for example, with pressure, force or mass (and the corresponding units of measurement: mm mercury column, kg masses).
Similarly, it cannot be said of the theoretical level of scientific knowledge that the knowledge it delivers is "pure rationality". In putting forward a hypothesis, in developing a theory, in formulating laws and comparing theories with each other, visual (“model”) representations are used that belong to the sensory level of cognition.
In general, it can be said that at the lower levels of empirical research, forms of sensory cognition predominate, and at higher levels theoretical research - forms of rational knowledge.
Differences between empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge
1. The Levels Considered Are Different on subject. A researcher at both levels can study the same object, but the "vision" of this object and its representation in the knowledge of one of these levels and the other will not be the same.
empirical research is fundamentally concerned with the study of phenomena and the (empirical) relationships between them. Here, deeper, essential connections are not yet singled out in their pure form: they are presented in the connections between phenomena recorded in the empirical act of cognition.
At the same level theoretical there is a selection of essential links that determine the main features and trends in the development of the subject. We imagine the essence of the object under study as the interaction of a certain set of laws discovered and formulated by us. Purpose theories it consists in first dissecting this set of laws and studying them separately, then recreating their interaction through synthesis and thereby revealing the (supposed) essence of the subject under study.
2. Empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge differ on means of knowledge. Empirical research is based on direct the interaction of the researcher with the object under study. Theoretical research, generally speaking, does not imply such a direct interaction of the researcher with the object: here it can be studied indirectly to one degree or another, and if we are talking about an experiment, then this is a “thought experiment”, i.e. ideal modeling.
The levels of scientific knowledge also differ conceptual means and language . The content of empirical terms is a special kind of abstraction - "empirical objects". They are not objects of the reality under study (or "givenness"): real objects appear as ideal, endowed with a fixed and limited set of properties (features). Each feature that is presented in the content of a term denoting an empirical object is also present in the content of a term denoting a real object, although not vice versa. Sentences of the language of empirical description - they can be called empirical statements - lend themselves to concrete, direct verification in the following sense. A statement like "the dynamometer needle is set at a scale division of 100" is true if the reading of the named device is really like that. Concerning theoretical statements , i.e., the propositions that we use in theoretical calculations, they are, as a rule, not directly verified in the above-described way. They are compared with the results of observations and experiments not in isolation, but together - within the framework of a certain theory. In the language of theoretical research, terms are used, the content of which is the features of "theoretical ideal objects". For example: "material point", "absolutely rigid body", "ideal gas", "point charge" (in physics), "idealized population" (in biology), "ideal product" (in economic theory in the formula "commodity - money - product"). These idealized theoretical objects are endowed not only with properties that we actually find in experience, but also with properties that no real object has.
3. Empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge differ on the nature of the methods used. Methods of empirical knowledge are aimed at the objective characteristic of the object under study, as free from subjective layers as possible. And in a theoretical study of the fantasy and imagination of the subject, his special abilities and the “profile” of his personal knowledge, freedom is given, albeit quite concrete, that is, limited.
- In contact with 0
- Google Plus 0
- OK 0
- Facebook 0
