Page 1

The scientific concept of wasteless technology is new. But its practical use in agriculture dates back to ancient times. Centuries of experience showed that the use of manure - animal waste for fertilizing fields, gardens and orchards is not only advisable, but also necessary. Utilized in the soil, manure maintains soil fertility.

The scientific concept of the purchase is still waiting for its developers.

Scientific development concept National economy, developed in the long term, is in turn the basis for the formation of five-year plans. The five-year plan provides for the solution of the most urgent socio-economic tasks of the development of the national economy, individual industries production and enterprises.

Majority scientific concepts born out of experiment, or to some extent connected with experiment. Other areas of scientific thinking are purely speculative. However, they can be useful and remain in force as long as we keep their statute in mind.

common feature Boyle's scientific concept is its inconsistent materialistic line. Lasswitz wrote about this: Boyle is an opponent of materialism; full of genuine piety, as well as strict church swarming, he strives for reconciliation (science with theology. And indeed Boyle opens the doors of theology wider than Descartes did.

According to existing scientific concepts, the nature of the explosion of explosive and explosive substances is the same, and the theoretical explanation of the phenomenon of the explosion of both substances is identical.

The monograph outlines the scientific concept, computing technologies and methods numerical simulation designed to solve the problems of improving the safety and efficiency of the main pipeline systems using modern achievements computational mechanics and mathematical optimization. The material presented in the monograph allows the reader to study in detail the proposed fundamentals of numerical modeling of main pipelines.

As a rule, a new scientific concept is formed in accordance with the methodology of cognition, which shows it the path of scientific research.

There are several hundred scientific concepts that interpret this concept.

LABOR THEORY OF COST, a scientific concept that determines the substance and value of goods by the labor expended on their production.

This book discusses a unified scientific concept of the use of various physical methods for the intensification of chemical engineering processes, based on known to the author research carried out in the Soviet Union and abroad.

At the same time, the value of their scientific concepts does not depend on political regime in the fatherland of the scientist.

So, within the framework of the scientific concept of the electronic image of the Earth, a new type of information retrieval based on MSM geodata can be proposed. The conceptual and architectural solutions of search services in this case may take into account the future implementation of searching for information about unnamed and uncataloged objects. environment, which will significantly expand the paradigm information retrieval for the electronic image of the Earth.

At the present stage, the dialectics of the development of scientific concepts from the particular to the general dictates the need to use universal, generalized mathematical and informational terms and concepts when manipulating mathematical objects. In empirical computational studies involving computers, almost every researcher in the same subject area introduces his own terminology, creating a false impression of the originality of the methodology. The generality of the schematically described technique is that it extends to different ranges and conditions of remote sensing. It is important that the scenario and the atmospheric channel be considered within the framework of the radiative transfer theory.

As we can see, the assessment of scientific concepts in terms of truth or error must be approached with strict observance of the requirement to correlate their content with a specific, or reflected, subject, its elements, connections, relations. If such a correspondence is present and is reproduced under fixed (and not any) conditions, then this means that we are dealing with reliable objectively true knowledge in its entirety or (as in the case of the atomistic concept of Democritus) with reliability, truth in the main its content.

Science develops in the course of human history. The question is "why" and "how" it develops.

According to the concept internalism the development of science is determined by internal scientific factors (accumulation of knowledge, curiosity of scientists, geniuses, etc.).

According to the concept externalism the development of science is determined by external, socio-economic factors.

According to the concept cumulative (lat. cumulatio- accumulation), the development of science goes through a gradual, continuous accumulation of new knowledge.

According to the concept non-cumulative, the development of science is spasmodic, catastrophic, because scientific revolutions take place here.

Scientific revolutions- a special kind of fundamental innovations, associated with the restructuring of fundamental scientific concepts. The essence of the scientific revolution includes: the creation of new research methods, new theoretical concepts and new research programs.

Modern theories scientific revolutions developed by I. Lakatos and T. Kuhn. The latter brought the concept of scientific revolutions as a change paradigms– scientific theories serving as a model scientific research at a certain stage in the development of science. I. Lakatos considered the concept of scientific revolutions as changes in research programs.

P. Feyerabend put forward an anarchist principle proliferation of ideas- "reproduction of theories", where the condition for the development of science is the desire for the maximum variety of mutually exclusive hypotheses and theories.

5. THE PROBLEM OF CONSCIOUSNESS

Consciousness is a manifestation of the human spirit; human the ability to purposefully and generally reproduce reality in an ideal form; the highest form of reflection of objective reality peculiar only to man in the course of social practice. Human consciousness is characterized by active creative activity. The subject of consciousness can be a human individual, a collective, society as a whole. The carrier, form and mode of existence of consciousness is language.

There are several interpretations of consciousness:

· idealism– consciousness is a realm of ideas, feelings, will, independent of material existence, capable of creating and constructing reality (Plato, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, etc.);

· vulgar materialism- consciousness has a material nature; thought is a product of the activity of the brain, i.e. the brain secretes the thought, “like the liver secretes bile” (Buchner, Focht, Moleschott, etc.);

· dialectical materialism– consciousness is a property of highly organized matter, the essence of consciousness is ideal;

Consciousness is highest form reflections of the world, i.e. the source of its content is the objective world;

Consciousness is a product of the evolution of nature, man and society;

· Necessary factors in the formation of human consciousness are labor, society and speech (Marx, Engels, Lenin).

According to the doctrine of dialectical materialism, the basis of consciousness is reflection - a universal property of matter, which consists in the reproduction in the course of interaction by one phenomenon of the features of another object. There are three levels of reflection: inanimate nature(physico-chemical interactions), on biological level(irritability, sensitivity, perception, representations, reflexes) and social reflection (consciousness).

Consciousness is the highest stage of development psyche – special property highly organized matter (living organisms), which consists in the active and selective reflection of reality in the form ideal images. The psyche of animals is conditioned biological patterns; the human psyche wears social character and aims to transform the world.

AT structure of consciousness includes: knowledge, attention, memory, imagination, emotions, will and other phenomena.

Knowledge- the result of the process of cognition, a reflection of reality in the form of sensual and rational images.

Emotions include feelings (pleasure, joy, grief, etc.), moods (emotional well-being), passions and affects.

Feelings- experiences by a person of his attitude to the surrounding reality, to other people, to any phenomena; may be short-term or long-term. special group- This higher feelings(sense of duty, honor, love, friendship, patriotism, aesthetic feelings and etc.).

Mood - a long emotional state (joyful, depressed, etc.), which gives a certain emotional tone, coloring to all other experiences, as well as thoughts and actions of a person.

Passion - a strong and deep feeling that captures a person for a long time.

Affect(emotion) – strong and turbulent emotional experience – rage, horror, numbness, crying, screaming, etc.

Memory - consolidation, preservation and subsequent reproduction by the individual of his previous experience.

Imagination - the ability to create new sensory or mental images in the human mind based on the impressions received

Will - the creative aspiration of a person to perform certain actions; overcoming external and internal difficulties on the way to achieving the desired action and goal; power over oneself, over one's feelings, actions.

intention(lat. intention- aspiration) - the orientation of consciousness, thinking on any subject (scholasticism, Brentano, Husserl, neo-Thomism).

Unconscious- beyond the control of human consciousness mental processes and phenomena. Consciousness and the unconscious are interconnected, are two relatively independent sides of the human psyche, interact with each other and are able to achieve unity.

self-awareness- this is a person's awareness and assessment of his activities, thoughts, feelings, interests, needs; a holistic assessment of oneself and one's place in life.

Important role in the formation of self-consciousness plays introspection observation by a person of his inner conscious mental life.

A developed form of self-consciousness is reflection – implementation by the subject of analysis own activities and manifestations of consciousness.

Ideal- subjective image objective reality, arising in the process of purposeful human activity, expressed in the forms of human consciousness and will (knowledge, moral and moral standards, reasoning, etc.). In German classical philosophy, the concept of the ideal was associated with the activity and creative activity of the subject (Fichte, Kant, Hegel). Two concepts have developed in Russian Marxist philosophy:

1) socio-historical (E.V. Ilyenkov, P.V. Kopnin, etc.) - the ideal is the ability of a person in his subject-practical activity spiritually, in thoughts, goals, will, needs to reproduce a thing;

2) naturalistic-biological (D.I. Dubrovsky, I.S. Narsky) - the ideal is associated with material brain processes; it cannot be carried beyond the limits of the human brain and the subject.

6. HUMAN COGNITIVE ABILITIES

Cognition- the process of comprehension by consciousness of the diverse aspects and connections of being; reflection in the human mind of the properties of objects of reality. In the process of cognition, the formation in consciousness takes place ideal models reality. Cognition is such an interaction of an object and a subject, the result of which is new knowledge about the world. Cognition as a process of interaction between subject and object is first considered in German classical philosophy. For modern philosophy characteristic is the desire to overcome the opposition of the subject and object of knowledge.

On the question of the cognizability of the world, positions of epistemological optimism, skepticism and agnosticism are distinguished.

Representatives epistemological optimism they believe in the power of the mind and argue that a person is able to receive reliable knowledge, the truth (as a rule, these are materialists and objective idealists).

Supporters skepticism express doubts about the possibility of reliable knowledge of objective reality; believe that the world is only partially cognizable, any truth is subjective (relative) in nature, there is no reliable criterion of truth (Pyrrho, Agrippa, Sextus-empiricist).

Representatives agnosticism deny the possibility of knowing the world; argue that it is impossible to unambiguously prove the correspondence of knowledge to reality (J. Berkeley, D. Hume, I. Kant, and others). objective premise agnosticism are real difficulties, problems in knowing the truth.

The structure of knowledge includes the subject of knowledge, the object of knowledge, knowledge, language, types of knowledge.

Subject of knowledge- a source of goal-setting activity in cognition; individual and collective carrier of subject-practical cognitive activity and assessment.

Object of knowledge- a part of reality (material and spiritual), to which the cognitive and transforming activity of the subject is directed.

Knowledge- the result of cognition, which appears as a set of reliable information about the object, which the society or the individual has.

Language- a universal means of communication between people; a system of signs that exists for receiving, storing, processing and transmitting information. In animals, language is a motor and sound form of signaling; in humans, language arose along with consciousness and denotes things, properties and relationships, acts as the basis for conscious and purposeful behavior.

There are three types of knowledge:

1. Sensory knowledge(or living contemplation) is a process of cognition carried out through the sense organs (sight, hearing, touch, etc.), through which information about the world around can penetrate into consciousness.

Forms of sensory cognition:

· feeling- display of a separate property of a material object that directly interacts with the senses;

· perception- a holistic image of the object (synthesis of sensations), directly given in living contemplation;

· performance- an indirectly sensory image of an object that acted on the senses in the past, but is not perceived at the moment; performance is associated with memory and creative imagination.

2. Rational knowledge- the process of abstract-logical thinking, rational and rational knowledge of the world.

concept- the original form of rational knowledge; unit (form) of thought, fixing general and significant properties of objects and phenomena that are fixed in their definitions (definitions). In the language, concepts are expressed by words and phrases, which are called the name of the concept.

Judgment- a form of thinking that reflects the presence or absence of certain features of things, phenomena, processes of reality, their properties, connections and relationships. A judgment is usually expressed in a declarative sentence and can be either true or false.

inference- a form of thinking by which new knowledge (usually in the form of a judgment) is derived from previously established knowledge (usually from one or more judgments).

Thinking– operating with concrete-sensory-
nymi and conceptual images; active process generalized and indirect reflection of reality, which ensures the disclosure of its regular connections on the basis of sensory data and their expression in a system of abstractions (concepts, categories, etc.). Thinking is conditioned as biological nature human (brain), and the social component (communication, speech, work). Thinking primitive man(according to L. Levy-Bruhl) was basically “pralogical” (because it did not seek to avoid contradictions) and mystical (collective belief in the existence of mysterious spirits and forces). The thinking of modern man is abstract-logical (strives to avoid contradictions) and naturalistic (search for causes in the laws of nature) character.

Abstract thinking - the ability to operate with concepts, judgments, conclusions.

Reason- the initial level of thinking, at which the operation of abstractions takes place within the framework of an unchanged scheme, template, rigid standard (formal logic).

Intelligence– highest level rational cognition, which is characterized by creative operation with abstractions and a conscious study of their own nature (self-reflection); the task of the mind is the unification of the manifold up to the synthesis of opposites (dialectical thinking).

3. Non-rational cognition- the process of obtaining knowledge based on the emotional and volitional abilities of a person, his subjective experiences (phenomena of faith, belief, intuition, creativity, understanding, etc.).

Experience- an emotionally colored state experienced by the subject and a phenomenon of reality, directly represented in his mind and acting for him as an event of his own life.

Faith- assessment or recognition of information as true in the face of a lack or absence of sufficient logical and factual justifications, evidence. Faith like special condition consciousness manifests itself in an uncritical attitude to this or that knowledge; associated with the value attitude to the subject of belief. The ineradicable presence of faith in life and knowledge is defended by representatives of pragmatism (J. Dewey, C. Pierce, and others).

Belief- knowledge combined with faith in it; expression of inner confidence in one's views, knowledge and assessments of reality.

Opinion- subjective position; a look, a person's point of view on something.

Intuition- the procedure for comprehending the truth without substantiation with the help of evidence; the ability of a person to solve problems without realizing the ways and conditions of the solution. Intuition belongs to the realm of the unconscious. Irrationalists consider intuition to be the highest cognitive procedure.

Understanding – cognitive procedure comprehending the meaning and meaning of an object on the basis of its experience, placing it in your mind. Philosophical doctrine about understanding is called hermeneutics.

Creation- independent-search activity to create a qualitatively new, original, previously non-existent. The result of creative activity is inventions with novelty and originality.

7. THE PROBLEM OF TRUTH

True- the central category of the theory of knowledge (epistemology), the goal of knowledge; ideal reproduction in the cognition of reality, since it exists outside and independently of the cognizing subject. The question of truth is the question of the relation of knowledge to objective reality.

There are several interpretations of truth:

truth as a property of ideal objects of being ( objective idealism);

truth as the correspondence of thinking to the sensory experience of the subject ( empiricism, sensationalism);

truth as agreement of thinking with itself ( rationalism);

Truth as a process of development of knowledge ( dialectics).

The main concepts of truth are distinguished:

1) classical (correspondent) concept- truth is the correspondence of knowledge to objective reality, a true, adequate reflection of objective reality; for the first time, the definition of truth as a judgment corresponding to reality was given by Aristotle - this is the most common concept of truth: both materialists and idealists adhere to it, and agnostics do not reject it; differences within are on questions about the nature of reality and the mechanisms of conformity;

2) relativistic concept(lat. relativus- relative) - the truth is mobile and changes under the influence of various factors (time, place, point of view, value system, etc.), therefore, objective truth, i.e. knowledge that is true regardless of anything does not exist;

3) pragmatic concept- truth is such knowledge that is useful, beneficial, i.e. enable success in specific situation to achieve the set goal; truth is what works best for us
(W. James, D. Dewey, C. Pierce);

4) conventional concept(lat. convention- contract, agreement) - truth is what is recognized as such by the majority, i.e. is a product of an agreement (for example, the truth of mathematical axioms, physical postulates, scientific theories is an agreement of scientists to choose the most appropriate and convenient to use);

5) coherent (logical-epistemological) concept(lat. cohaerentio- internal connection, linkage) - truth self-consistency, connectedness of knowledge, i.e. true knowledge is those that are consistent with each other in a certain consistent system of knowledge (K. Popper, R. Carnap).

objective truth- knowledge of the object in terms of its essential properties, relationships and development trends. This is a process in which two moments of knowledge are presented in unity - absolute (stable, unchanged in knowledge) and relative (changeable, transient; true in one respect, but false in another).

absolute truth- this is a complete, exhaustive knowledge about the objects and processes of reality (epistemological ideal); knowledge that cannot be refuted in the process of further knowledge.

Relative truth- this is incomplete, conditional, approximate, incomplete, limited knowledge about the object; knowledge dependent on the conditions, place and time of its receipt; true in one respect and false in another.

On the issue of correlation between the moments of absoluteness and relativity in knowledge, positions of dogmatism and relativism are distinguished.

Dogmatism- a way of thinking that exaggerates the importance of absolute truth (truth is knowledge that is always true, under any circumstances), turning any provisions into hardened, unchanging facts.

Relativism(lat. relativus- relative) - a way of thinking that exaggerates the significance of relative truth, based on the idea of ​​conditionality and subjectivity of the content of knowledge, which leads to a denial of the objectivity of knowledge (to skepticism and agnosticism).

Truth Criteria:

· clarity;

Self-evidence, distinctness of knowledge, logical constructions ( rationalism);

confirmation in experience ( empiricism) or feelings ( sensationalism);

general validity ( conventionalism);

utility, efficiency pragmatism);

· practice ( dialectical materialism).

Practice- the criterion of truth in dialectical materialism; socio-historical expedient activity aimed at transforming the surrounding reality.

Practice Forms:

social production;

· scientific and experimental activity;

social and political activity;

Game practice

communication practice, etc.

The meaning of truth is different from delusions, lies and errors.

Delusion- unintentional distortion by the subject of knowledge about reality; a distorted reflection of reality, i.e. knowledge that does not correspond to its subject, does not coincide with it. Misconceptions can help create problem situations and thereby lead to the truth.

Hegel considered the problem of true and false. They refer to those definite thoughts which are invariably considered independent ( eigene) entities, of which one stands isolated and firmly on one side, and the other on the other, having nothing in common with each other. Contrary to this, it should be pointed out that truth is not a minted coin that can be given in ready-made (gegeben werden) and in the same form is hidden in a pocket. Not given ( gibt es) is neither false nor evil. True, the evil and the false are not as bad as the devil, for to regard them as the devil is to turn them into a special subject; as false and evil, they only universal, although they have their own essentiality in relation to each other. it would be false "other", would "negative" substance, which, as the content of knowledge, is true. But substance itself is essentially negative, on the one hand, as the difference and determination of content, on the other, as simple distinction, i.e. as self and knowledge in general. It is possible to have false knowledge. False knowledge about something means the inequality of knowledge with its substance, but it is precisely this inequality that is the difference, which is the essential moment. From this difference arises their equality, which is the truth. But it is truth, not as though inequality were cast aside, as the slag of pure metal is cast aside, but as a negative, as a self that is in the true as such. However, on this basis it cannot be said that the false forms some moment or some constituent part true. In the expression "in every lie there is some truth," both are like oil and water, which, without mixing, are only externally connected. Precisely because it is important to mark the moment perfect otherness, their expressions should no longer be used where their otherness has been removed. Just like the expressions unity subject and object, finite and infinite, being and thinking, etc., are incoherent because the object and subject, etc. mean what they represent yourself outside of your unity, and, consequently, in unity, they do not mean what is said in their expression, just as the false constitutes the moment of truth no longer as false.

Lie- deliberate, conscious distortion by the subject of knowledge about reality; in socially- the transmission of misinformation.

Mistake- the result of the wrong actions of a person in any area of ​​\u200b\u200bhis activity: errors in calculations, in politics, in business, etc.

8. MAN AND CULTURE

culture(lat. culture- cultivation, tillage) - part of the human environment, created by the people themselves; the form of people's activity in the reproduction and renewal of social life; a set of suprabiological programs of human life, ensuring the reproduction and change social life, as well as its products and results included in this activity (artifacts, "second nature").

Culture becomes the subject of study in the Enlightenment, when culture and civilization are opposed (J.-J. Rousseau).

The culture of each nation is unique and unrepeatable; associated value different cultures. Modern stage in the development of culture (XX-XXI centuries) is characterized by the development of global communication technologies which leads to a postmodern understanding of culture.

E. Cassirer believed that culture is the sphere of symbolic forms (language, myth, religion, art, etc.).
J. Huizinga considered the game to be the principle of the formation of human culture. Z. Freud substantiated the repressive nature of culture in relation to human nature.

Culture Functions:

· creative(creativity artifacts);

· educational, informational(carrier social information);

· axiological(produces and transmits values);

· communicative(transfers experience to generations);

· integrative(brings people together)

· adaptive(provides a person's adaptation to the world);

· regulating.

Cultural universalism- a concept based on the idea of ​​creating a world culture based on universal, universal values ​​(J.-J. Rousseau, I. Kant, I. Goethe, V.S. Solovyov, etc.).

Cultural relativism- a concept that emphasizes the originality and uniqueness of different cultures and critically assesses the possibility of creating a world culture (M. Montaigne, I. Herder, K. Levi-Strauss, O. Spengler, A. Toynbee, N.Ya. Danilevsky, L. Gumilyov and etc.).

O. Spengler interpreted culture as an “organism with a soul”, which is isolated from other “organisms”, singled out stages in the development of culture of the early mytho-symbolic, metaphysical-religious and late stages, turning into civilization. According to A. Toynbee, reality poses the tasks of self-fulfillment (“challenge”) for cultures, to which the correct “answer” must be given.

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Novosibirsk State Technical University

in the discipline "Philosophy"

"The role of the concept

in the development of human knowledge"

Faculty: AVTF

Group: AM-711

Student: Malakhov S.A.

Introduction 3

1. Concept concept 3

2. Conceptualization as a way to create concepts 4

3. Features of the concept in various disciplines 5

3.1. Features of Religious Concepts 5

3.1.1. Main features of theology 5

3.1.2. Causes of the dogmatism of religious concepts 6

3.1.3. Ways to protect religious concepts from destruction 6

4. Features of scientific concepts 8

4.1. Science concept concept 8

4.2. The role of concepts in the development of science 9

4.3. The struggle of scientific concepts in the development of science 10

4.4. Interaction of scientific concepts 10

5. Features philosophical concepts 11

Conclusion 12

Introduction

In modern scientific literature concept concept has become very popular. New concepts appear in almost all areas of human knowledge - modern concepts of economics, pedagogy, psychology can be an example.

However, in order to better understand the limits of applicability of concepts in different areas, it is necessary to understand the very concept of a concept more deeply. The study of the features of the concept in various disciplines, such as science, religion, philosophy, allows us to more accurately determine its role and place in the structure of human knowledge.

This essay is devoted to the role of concepts in the development of knowledge about nature and society.

1. Concept concept

Considering the role of the concept, first of all, it is necessary to dwell on the very concept of the term "concept".

"The Newest Philosophical Dictionary", ed. A.A. Gritsanova gives the following definition of the concept:

“CONCEPT (lat. conceptio - understanding, single idea, leading thought) is a system of views that expresses a certain way of seeing (“point of view”), understanding, interpreting any objects, phenomena, processes and presenting a leading idea and (and) constructive principle, realizing a certain idea in one or another theoretical knowledge practice. The concept is the basic way of designing, organizing and deploying disciplinary knowledge, uniting in this respect science, theology and philosophy as the main disciplines that have developed in the European cultural tradition.

The conceptual aspect of theoretical knowledge expresses, first of all, the paradigm "section" of the latter, sets its topic and rhetoric, i.e. determines the relevant areas of application and ways of expressing systems of concepts (basic concepts) constituted on the basis of the deployment of the "generating" idea. The concept proceeds from the attitudes towards fixing the limiting values ​​for any area (“fragment” of reality) and the implementation of the widest possible “worldview” (on the basis of “reference” to the value basis of cognition).

It has, as a rule, a pronounced personal beginning, marked by the figure of the founder (or founders, who are not necessarily real historical personalities, since mythical characters and cultural heroes, a transcendent divine principle, etc., can act as such), only knowing (knowing) the original plan.

The concept introduces into disciplinary discourses ontological, epistemological, methodological and (especially) epistemological assumptions (the method of disciplinary vision and the horizons of cognition available within it) that are not necessarily explicated in them, without which the subsequent more detailed study (“unwinding”) of the presented idea is impossible. In addition, it “ontologizes” and “disguises” within the original (basic) theoretical structure the components of personal knowledge, non-rationalized, but necessary representations within it, “joining” components of different linguistic design and genesis (origin) to each other, introducing for this purpose a series of disciplinary metaphors.

Thus, concepts first of all introduce into the theoretical discourses of disciplines their initial principles and premises (“absolute premises”, according to Collingwood), which determine the basic concepts-concepts and reasoning schemes, forming “fundamental questions” (“ideas”), in relation to which special statements built within these discourses receive their meaning and justification. Collingwood believed that a change in conceptual foundations is the most radical of all that a person can experience, since it leads to the rejection of previously justified beliefs and standards of thinking and action, to a change in the initial concepts, concepts that provide a holistic perception of the world" [ http://slovari.yandex.ru/dict/phil_dict/article/filo/filo-362.htm?].

As a result of this analysis, a very stable idea of ​​the structure of scientific knowledge gradually developed, which in the philosophy of science is called the standard concept of science. Apparently, it is shared by most scientists, at least representatives of natural sciences. In the 1920s - 1930s. a significant contribution to the detailed development of this concept was made by the philosophers of the Vienna Circle.

The Vienna Circle is a group of philosophers and scientists who united around a philosophical seminar organized in 1922 by M. Schlick, head of the Department of Philosophy of Inductive Sciences at the University of Vienna. The problems of the philosophy of science were at the center of the circle's members' interests. It included such well-known philosophers, physicists, mathematicians as R. Carnap, O. Neurath, K. Gödel, G. Hahn, F. Weissmann, G. Feigl, regularly participated in discussions G. Reichenbach, A. Ayer, K. Popper, E. Nagel and many other prominent intellectuals. The ideas of the greatest philosopher of the 20th century had a significant influence on the views of the members of the circle. L. Wittgenstein. In the vague spiritual atmosphere of that time, the Vienna Circle defended the "scientific understanding of the world" (that was the name of the circle's manifesto published in 1929) and was the ideological and organizational center of logical positivism. In 1936, Schlick was killed by a student on his way to the university. After this, and also after the forcible annexation of Austria to Germany in 1938, the members of the Vienna Circle emigrated to England and the USA, where they greatly contributed to the development of research in the field of the philosophy of science.

According to the standard concept, the world of phenomena studied by science is considered as existing in reality and in its characteristics independent of the person who knows it.

In cognition, a person begins by discovering - on the basis of observations and experiments - facts. Facts are considered as something pre-found in nature - they exist in it and are waiting for their discovery, just as America existed and was waiting for its Columbus.

Although the world is very diverse and constantly changing, the standard concept holds that it is permeated by unchanging uniformities that bind facts. Science expresses these uniformities in the form of laws varying degrees community. There are two main classes of laws: empirical and theoretical.

Empirical laws are established by generalizing the data of observations and experiments; they express such regular relations between things that are observed directly or with the help of fairly simple instruments. In other words, these laws describe the behavior of observed objects.

Along with the empirical, there are more abstract - theoretical laws. The objects they describe include those that cannot be directly observed, such as atoms, genetic code etc. Theoretical laws cannot be deduced by inductive generalization of observed facts. It is believed that this is where creative imagination scientist - for a while he must break away from factuality and try to put forward some speculative assumption - theoretical hypothesis. The question arises: how can one be convinced of the correctness of these hypotheses, how can one choose from among the many possible one that should be considered as an objective law of nature? Verification of scientific hypotheses for reliability occurs by logical derivation (deduction) from them of more specific provisions that can explain the observed regularities, i.e. empirical laws. Theoretical laws are related to empirical laws in much the same way that empirical laws are related to facts. This standard model can be represented using the following diagram.

From facts and empirical laws there is no direct path to theoretical laws, from the latter one can deduce empirical laws, but the theoretical laws themselves are obtained by conjecture. This form of knowledge is also called the hypothetical-deductive model of theory.

The standard concept of scientific knowledge reflects well the views of the scientists themselves. To confirm this, we will cite an excerpt from the work of the outstanding naturalist and thinker V.I. Vernadsky "Scientific thought as a planetary phenomenon" (1937 - 1938).

"There is one fundamental phenomenon that defines scientific thought and distinguishes scientific results and scientific conclusions clearly and simply from the statements of philosophy and religion - this is the universal validity and indisputability of correctly made scientific findings, scientific statements, concepts, conclusions. Scientific, logically correct actions have such power only because science has its own specific structure and that there is a realm of facts and generalizations, scientific, empirically established facts and empirically obtained generalizations, which in their essence cannot be really challenged. Such facts and such generalizations, if they are created at times by philosophy, religion, life experience or social common sense and tradition, cannot be proved by them as such. Neither philosophy, nor religion, nor common sense can establish them with the degree of certainty that science gives ... The close connection between philosophy and science in the discussion of general questions of natural science ("philosophy of science") is a fact that, as such, must be reckoned with and which is connected with the fact that the naturalist in his scientific work often goes beyond the limits of exact, scientifically established facts and empirical generalizations, without specifying or even realizing it. Obviously, in a science constructed in this way, only a part of its statements can be considered universally binding and immutable.

But this part embraces and penetrates a huge area of ​​scientific knowledge, since scientific facts belong to it - millions of millions of facts. Their number is steadily growing, they are brought into systems and classifications. These scientific facts constitute the main content of scientific knowledge and scientific work.

They, if properly established, are indisputable and universally binding. Along with them, systems of certain scientific facts can be singled out, the main form of which is empirical generalizations.

This is the main fund of science, scientific facts, their classifications and empirical generalizations, which, in its reliability, cannot cause doubts and sharply distinguishes science from philosophy and religion. Neither philosophy nor religion creates such facts and generalizations.

Along with it, we have in science numerous logical constructions that connect scientific facts with each other and constitute the historically transient, changing content of science - scientific theories, scientific hypotheses, working scientific hypotheses, the reliability of which is usually small, fluctuates to a large extent; but the duration of their existence in science can sometimes be very long, can last for centuries. They are ever-changing and essentially differ from religious and philosophical ideas only in that individual character them, the manifestation of personality is so characteristic and vivid for philosophical, religious and artistic constructions, fades sharply into the background, perhaps due to the fact that they are nevertheless based, connected and reduced to objective scientific facts, limited and determined in their origin by this feature.

1 Vernadsky V.I. Philosophical thoughts of a naturalist. M., 1988. S. 99, 111 - 112.

Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky (1863 - 1945), one of the founders of biogeochemistry, after graduating from St. Petersburg University in 1885, studied geological collections in European museums and universities. From 1890 to 1911 he taught at Moscow University, then worked at the Academy of Sciences. Throughout its scientific activity Vernadsky was deeply interested in the problems of philosophy and the history of science. In the development of science, he saw decisive factor the formation of the noosphere - such a stage of civilization at which reasonable activity man acquires planetary significance. His works Philosophical Thoughts of a Naturalist (Moscow, 1988), Selected Works on the History of Science (Moscow, 1981), and Works on world history science" (M., 1988).

In the above fragment, Vernadsky emphasizes the idea that, due to the special structure and connection with empiricism, scientific knowledge differs significantly from philosophy, religion, and, one might add, other forms. human thinking. It relies on facts, carefully analyzes and generalizes them. This gives scientific knowledge a special certainty, which is not found in other forms of knowledge. Vernadsky was not, like the members of the Vienna Circle, a positivist. He highly valued philosophical, religious and humanitarian thought and recognized them big influence to science.

Structure scientific explanation

Scientists not only establish facts and generalize them, but also try to answer the questions: "Why did these facts take place?", "What caused this particular event?". In doing so, they use the method of science, which is called explanation. AT broad sense explanation usually means that we explain something incomprehensible through understandable or well-known. In the philosophy of science, explanation is interpreted as the most important procedure of scientific knowledge, for which more rigorous schemes have been developed.

Most famous model explanations were developed by K. Popper and K. Hempel. She received the name explanation through "covering laws".

Karl Popper (1902 - 1994) - the most famous philosopher of science of the 20th century, was born in Vienna. At the University of Vienna, he studied first physics and mathematics, and then philosophy. Until 1937 he worked in Vienna, participated in the discussions of the Vienna Circle, criticizing its program provisions. In 1934, Popper's main work on the philosophy of science, The Logic of Scientific Research, was published. During the war years, in exile, Popper wrote famous book"Open Society and Its Enemies" (published in Russian in 1992), directed against totalitarianism and defending liberal values. Since 1946 professor London School economy and political science, together with his students and followers, developed an influential trend in the philosophy of science - critical rationalism. Criticism Popper considered the main method of science and the most rational strategy for the behavior of a scientist. Among others, his famous works - "Objective knowledge(1972), Realism and the Purpose of Science (1983).

Karl Hempel (1905 - 1997) studied mathematics, physics and philosophy at various universities in Germany, and since the 1930s has become one of the leaders of neo-positivism. In 1937 he emigrated to the USA, where he greatly contributed to the development of the philosophy of science. Hempel is best known for his work on logic and the methodology of explanation. His book "The Logic of Explanation" (1998) was published in Russian, which includes his most important articles on the methodology of science.

According to Popper and Hempel, in all sciences, explanation is used general methodology. In order to explain facts and events, one must use laws and logical deduction.

The basis, the basis of the explanation is one or more general laws, as well as a description of the specific conditions in which the phenomenon being explained takes place. From this basis, you need to use deduction (logical or mathematical inference) to obtain a judgment that explains this phenomenon. In other words: in order to explain any phenomenon, it must be brought under one or more general laws, applying them in certain specific conditions.

Here is one example that allows you to explain the logic of this method. Suppose you left the car in the yard overnight and in the morning saw that its radiator had burst. How to explain why this happened? The explanation is based on two general law: water at a negative temperature turns into ice; The volume of ice is greater than the volume of water. The specific conditions here are as follows: at night the temperature dropped below zero; you left the car on the street without draining the water from the radiator. From all this we can conclude: at night the water in the radiator froze, and the ice tore the radiator tubes.

Popper and Hempel argued that such a model is suitable not only for explaining, but also for predicting facts (and scientists often predict events that have not yet been observed in order to then discover them in observation or experiment). So, in our example, we could not wait until the morning, but, remembering the laws of physics known from school, anticipate a radiator breakdown and drain water from it in time.

It is believed that the explanation through "covering laws" is the main one in the sciences of nature. However, scientists also use other methods, and in some sciences, primarily in history and those close to it humanitarian disciplines, the applicability of this scheme of explanation in general raises a question, since in these sciences there are no general laws.

Criteria for the demarcation of science and non-science

In the above excerpt from the work of V.I. Vernadsky, attention should be paid to the fact that the scientist emphasizes the significant differences between scientific knowledge and the constructions of philosophy, religious thought, everyday knowledge. In the philosophy of science, the problem of distinguishing between science and non-science is called the problem of demarcation (from the English demarcation - delimitation) and is one of the central ones.

Why is she important? Science enjoys well-deserved prestige in society, and people trust knowledge that is recognized as "scientific". They consider it reliable and reasonable. But it is likely that not everything that is called scientific or claims to be scientific actually meets the criteria of being scientific. These can be, for example, precocious, "low-quality" hypotheses, which their authors pass off as a completely benign product. These may be the "theories" of people who are so engrossed in their ideas that they do not heed any critical arguments. These are outwardly scientific constructions, with the help of which their authors explain the structure of the "world as a whole" or "the entire history of mankind." There are also ideological doctrines that are created not to explain the objective state of affairs, but to unite people around certain socio-political goals and ideals. Finally, these are the numerous teachings of parapsychologists, astrologers, "non-traditional healers", researchers of unidentified flying objects, spirits Egyptian pyramids, bermuda triangle etc. - what ordinary scientists call parascience or pseudoscience.

Can all this be separated from science? Most scientists consider it important, but not too much difficult question. Usually they say: this is not in accordance with the facts and laws modern science, does not fit into scientific picture peace. And, as a rule, they are right. But supporters of the above teachings can bring counter arguments, for example, they can recall that Kepler, who discovered the laws of planetary motion, was at the same time an astrologer, that great Newton seriously engaged in alchemy, that the famous Russian chemist, academician A.M. Butlerov ardently supported parapsychology, which French Academy sat in a puddle when in the XVIII century. declared unfeasible projects for the movement of steam engines on rails and unscientific evidence of meteorites falling to the ground. After all, these people say: "Prove that our theories are wrong, that they do not agree with the facts, that the evidence we have collected is wrong!"

If scientists undertook to prove it, they would not have had the strength, patience, or time. And here philosophers of science can come to the rescue, who offer a significantly different strategy for solving the problem of demarcation. They may say, “Your theories and evidence cannot be said to be true or false. Although they look like scientific theories on the surface, they are actually not constructed. They are neither false nor true, they are meaningless, or ", to put it mildly, are devoid of cognitive significance. A scientific theory may be erroneous, but at the same time it remains scientific. Your "theories" lie on a different plane, they can play the role of modern mythology or folklore, they can positively influence the mental state of people, inspire they have some hope, but they have nothing to do with scientific knowledge."

The first criterion by which one can judge the meaningfulness of a particular concept or judgment is the requirement, already known to Hume and Kant, to correlate this concept with experience. If in sensory experience, in empiricism, it is impossible to indicate any objects that this concept means, then it is meaningless, it is an empty sound. In the 20th century, the positivists of the Vienna Circle called this requirement the principle of verifiability: a concept or proposition has meaning only when it is empirically verifiable.

When a parapsychologist, astrologer or "healer" with an intelligent air speaks about "biofields", "powers of the Cosmos", "energetics", "auras" and other mysterious phenomena, one can ask him: is there, in fact, something empirically fixed, somehow observable, what is behind these words? And it turns out that there is nothing of the kind, and therefore, all these words are meaningless, they are meaningless. They behave in this pseudo-scientific language like perfectly meaningful words, in fact, they are empty words, a set of sounds devoid of meaning. As such, they should not enter the language of rationally thinking people who recognize the importance of science. An analogy can be drawn here. Imagine that someone got himself a military uniform, learned to wear it smartly, salute and turn around. He behaves everywhere like a military man, rides a tram for free, gets acquainted with girls, introduces himself as a cadet. But an experienced foreman will drive this swindler out of action, despite the fact that his behavior outwardly resembles that of a military man. In the same way, in order to maintain the purity of the series of scientific knowledge, it is necessary to “expel” from them all concepts that do not satisfy the mentioned criterion of scientificity.

AT contemporary literature in the philosophy of science, one can come across assertions that the criterion of verifiability is crude and imprecise, that it too narrows the scope of science. This is true, but with the caveat that in very many situations this criterion allows, as a first approximation, to separate scientific judgments from speculative constructions, pseudo-scientific teachings and charlatan appeals to the mysterious forces of nature.

The verification criterion starts to fail in more subtle cases. Take, for example, such influential teachings as Marxism and psychoanalysis. Both Marx and Freud considered their theories to be scientific, and so did their numerous followers. It cannot be denied that many of the conclusions of these teachings were confirmed - verified - by empirical facts: by the actually observed course of socio-economic processes in one case, by clinical practice - in another. Nevertheless, there were many scientists and philosophers who intuitively felt that these theories could not, without reservations, be included in the category of scientific ones. K. Popper tried to prove this most consistently.

While still a student, he was deeply interested in Marxism and psychoanalysis, collaborated with the creator of one of the variants of psychoanalysis, A. Adler. But soon Popper began to have doubts about the scientific nature of these teachings. “I found,” he writes, “that those of my friends who were admirers of Marx, Freud, and Adler were under the impression of some points common to these theories, in particular, under the impression of their apparent explanatory power. These theories seemed capable of explain almost everything that happened in the field they described.The study of any of them seemed to lead to a complete spiritual rebirth or revelation, opening our eyes to new truths hidden from the uninitiated.Once your eyes were once opened, you will see confirming examples everywhere: the world is full of verifications of a theory. Everything that happens confirms it. Therefore, the truth of a theory seems obvious, and those who doubt it look like people who refuse to accept the obvious truth, either because it is incompatible with their class interests, or because of the inherent them depression, not understood until now and in need of treatment ".

1 Popper K. Logic and the growth of scientific knowledge. M., 1983. S. 242.

Reflecting on this situation, Popper came to the conclusion that it is not difficult to obtain verifications, empirical confirmations of almost any skillfully crafted theory. But genuinely scientific theories must withstand more serious scrutiny. They must allow risky predictions, i.e. such facts and consequences must be deduced from them, which, if they are not observed in reality, could disprove the theory. The verifiability put forward by the members of the Vienna Circle cannot, according to Popper, be considered a criterion of scientificity. The criterion for demarcation of science and non-science is falsifiability - the fundamental refutation of any statement related to science. If a theory is constructed in such a way that it cannot be refuted, then it stands outside science. It is the irrefutability of Marxism, psychoanalysis, astrology, associated with the vagueness of their concepts and the ability of their supporters to interpret any facts as confirming their views, that makes these teachings unscientific.

True science should not be afraid of refutation: rational criticism and constant correction with facts is the essence of scientific knowledge. Based on these ideas, Popper proposed a very dynamic concept of scientific knowledge as a continuous stream of assumptions (hypotheses) and their refutation. He likened the development of science to the Darwinian scheme of biological evolution. Constantly put forward new hypotheses and theories must undergo strict selection in the process of rational criticism and attempts at refutation, which corresponds to the mechanism natural selection in the biological world. Only the "strongest theories" should survive, but they cannot be regarded as absolute truths either. All human knowledge is conjectural in nature, any fragment of it can be doubted, and any provisions should be open to criticism.