Variation in the interpretation of facts

An important issue that needs special attention is the problem of multiple interpretations of facts. This is understandable from the point of view of the incompleteness of scientific knowledge. Interpretation acts as one of the key points of scientific knowledge, as it represents the ratio of a certain amount of scientific knowledge and areas of objective reality.

There are two most important types of interpretation in science: semantic and empirical. Empirical interpretation means attributing (identification, identification) to the terms of the theory of certain empirical meanings, while semantic interpretation means attributing not necessarily empirical meanings to the terms.

Distinguish scientific theory and its interpretation, in particular, empirical. This distinction is necessary because the same theory may have several empirical interpretations, for which it receives empirical confirmation.

At the same time, it is important to keep in mind that what is tested, confirmed or refuted by experience is always not a theory in itself, but some system: a theory and its definite empirical interpretation. This means the fact that the theory has a relatively independent and independent existence in relation to the world of experience, is not completely reducible to the latter, has its own rules of construction and the logic of functional development.

Topic 7. Theory and hypothesis as the highest forms of scientific thinking.(4 hours)

1. Theory as a logical form: complexity and consistency. Structural elements of the theory and their relationship. Object and subject of theory. Types and types of scientific theories.

2. Verification, justification and truth of theories. Variety of functions of the theory. The main functions of the theory: description, explanation and prediction (forecasting).

3. The logical structure of the explanation and the conditions for its adequacy. Variety of types of scientific explanations. Deductive-nomological explanation. probabilistic explanation. Explanation as a demonstration of possibility - necessity. The relationship between understanding and explanation. Understanding as interpretation. Logical structure of prediction. The role of prediction in the development of scientific knowledge.

4. The problem of consistency and completeness of scientific theories. The logical nature of paradoxes and their role in the development of theories.

5. Hypothesis as a form of thought. Types of hypotheses. Induction, deduction and analogy as methods for constructing hypotheses. Heuristic role of hypotheses.

Logic studies not only the forms of thinking (logical forms), but also the forms and patterns of development of scientific knowledge. The forms of development of scientific knowledge are (1) the facts of science, (2) a scientific problem arising from the need to explain scientific facts, (3) a hypothesis containing the initial solution of a scientific problem, (4) confirmation or refutation of a hypothesis in the course of proof, and finally, (5) theory containing principles and laws. Between all these forms there is a deep inner connection. Each subsequent form includes the most important results of the previous one.

The theory is the basic unit of scientific knowledge. The term "theory" comes from the Greek Jewria, more precisely Jewrew (theoría, more precisely from theoréo - I consider, investigate). In a broad sense, a theory is a set of views, ideas, ideas aimed at interpreting and explaining any fragment of the world. In a narrower (i.e., in such a sphere of culture as science) and special sense, theory- the highest, most developed form of organization of scientific knowledge, containing a finite set of interrelated concepts and statements, and giving a holistic view and explanation of the natural relationships of a certain area of ​​reality; the latter forms the subject of this theory.

Taken as a specific form of scientific knowledge and in comparison with its other forms (hypothesis, law, etc.), theory appears as the most complex and developed form. As such, theory should be distinguished from other forms of scientific knowledge - the laws of science, classifications, typologies, primary explanatory schemes, etc. These forms can genetically precede the theory itself, forming the basis for its formation and development; on the other hand, they often coexist with the theory, interacting with it in the course of the progressive movement of scientific knowledge, and may even enter the theory as its elements (theoretical laws, typologies based on the theory, etc.).

Along with concepts and judgments, theory is one of the logical forms of mental reproduction of reality in thinking. However, unlike the former, scientific theory is not an elementary form of thought. From the point of view of logic, a theory is a system of propositions organized in a certain way, corresponding to a number of logical requirements.

These requirements are:

1) theoretical statements should fix the essential connections (laws), properties and relations of the reflected (displayed) area of ​​reality;

2) each sentence of the theory must affirm or deny something regarding the fragment of the world under consideration, i.e., must have a logical form of statement;

3) the sentences included in the theory must be elements of a logical inference (as a rule, deductive [reduction should also be considered as a kind of deductive inference]);

4) statements of the theory can take on a truth value from a fixed set of such values ​​from 1 to k (for example, in two-valued logic k=2, i.e. 1 is true, 0 is false).

Systematic theory lies in the fact that the logical connections between the statements of the theory are arranged in a certain order, which is determined by the nature of the logical conclusion through which these statements were obtained. The logical conclusion itself is subject to certain rules (= logical laws and rules, for example, Locke's rule or modus ponens). Thus, each statement of the theory at least once acts as a premise or conclusion within the framework of some kind of deductive reasoning. The exceptions are the initial sentences of the theory (axioms, initial definitions, postulates), which, being elements of a theoretical system, act only as premises, and some sets of descriptive (descriptive) sentences, which always act as conclusions (“final consequences”). At the same time, the statements of the theory must necessarily contain the basic and/or derivative terms of the own language of science, which ensures their correlation with the objects and objective subject area of ​​this science.

Complexity same theories is determined by the product of the number of its constituent elements (postulates and axioms, empirical statements, facts, laws, etc.), which forms the quantitative aspect of the complexity of scientific theories, by the variety of their qualitative characteristics (empirical and theoretical statements, initial statements and consequences and etc.).

In its structure, a theory is an internally differentiated and simultaneously integral system of knowledge, which is characterized by the logical dependence of some elements on others, the derivability of the content of this theory from a certain set of initial statements and concepts (the basis of the theory) according to certain logical and methodological principles and rules.

First of all, it should be pointed out that the theory, with a number of exceptions (for example, some mathematical theories), is based on a certain set of facts established using empirical methods. Such a set of statements, which are facts, is called empirical basis theories. Strictly speaking, the empirical basis is not included in the structure of the theory.

AT structure theories include concepts and statements, in a certain way (the logic of the theory) interconnected.

I. Theory concepts are divided into two main types:

1) concepts reflecting the main classes of objects considered in the theory (absolute and relative space, absolute and relative time, etc. in mechanics);

2) concepts in which the main characteristics of the phenomena under study are singled out and generalized (for example, mass, momentum, speed, etc.).

Using these concepts, a scientist can construct an object of study, which will be expressed in a derivative concept. So, in quantum theory, a certain quantum object can be represented in the case of a collection of n particles in the form of a y-wave in an N-dimensional space, the properties of which are associated with the quantum of action.

II. On the basis of the concepts of the theory, theoretical statements among which there are four types:

1) statements containing initial positions, which are called postulates, axioms or principles of this theory (for example, the axioms of Euclid's geometry, the principle of constancy of the speed of light of the theory of relativity, etc.)

2) statements containing the formulation of the laws of this theory (the laws of physics [Newton's second law], biology [the law of unity of phylogenesis and ontogenesis], logic [the law of sufficient grounds], etc.);

3) the set of statements derived in the theory with their proofs, which constitutes the main body of theoretical knowledge (for example, the consequences of the theory of relativity);

4) statements (they are also called correspondence sentences) in which links between empirical and theoretical terms are expressed (“Electric current is the movement of a stream of electrically charged particles”); with the help of such sentences, the essential side of the observed phenomena is revealed. From the point of view of the logical classification of definitions (definitions), the sentences of correspondence are real definitions (attributive, genetic, operational), the main function of which is to explain these phenomena.

Given the relationship between theory and its empirical basis, one should distinguish between the modality of theoretical and empirical statements. The first differ in the necessary character, the second - in the actual.

III. Logic theory is the set of admissible rules of logical inference and proof within the framework of the theory. The logic of a theory determines the mechanism of its construction, the internal deployment of theoretical content, embodies a certain research program. As a result, the integrity of the theory as a single system of knowledge is generated.

A mature science is distinguished by a variety of types and kinds of theories.

First of all, it is necessary to distinguish between two types of theories, distinguished on the basis of the relationship between form and content:

1) formal theories are characterized by the absence of any interpretation of the terms included in the formulation of the axioms (formal theory of Euclidean geometry, built by Hilbert); as a consequence, these axioms are not themselves meaningfully interpreted; such theories are consequences of limiting generalizations;

The types of theories are as follows.

First, theories are by subject, i.e., by the nature of the fragment of the world they reflect or the aspect of reality (= the nature of the objects under consideration). In this aspect, the fundamental dichotomy of the world defines two types of theories:

1) theories that display fragments and / or aspects of reality - material existence (such theories constitute the basic knowledge of specific sciences), for example, Newtonian mechanics, thermodynamics, social and humanitarian theories, etc.;

2) theories that display fragments and / or aspects of ideal being (in some cases we are talking about unobservable phenomena, such theories are typical for abstract sciences), for example, the theory of natural numbers in mathematics or the theory of natural inference in logic, etc.

Secondly, theories are divided into types according to the way they are built:

1) axiomatic theories have the most clear and formalized structure - the system-forming part (core) of these theories is a set of axioms (statements that are postulated as true) and a number of initial concepts that are necessary for a clear and precise formulation of axioms; as a rule, axioms are substantiated outside the theory itself, for example, in practical activities (Euclid's geometry); another important part of axiomatic theories is the set of derivatives (derived) from the axioms of the statements of the given theory;

2) hypothetical-deductive theories do not carry a clear division of statements into initial and derivative ones; as a rule, some initial positions are singled out in them, but these provisions are substantiated within the theory itself.

Thirdly, according to the degree of correlation with reality theories are:

1) fundamental, in which the core of the deployment of the entire theoretical system is an idealized object (material point in mechanics, absolutely elastic material points in molecular-kinetic theory, etc.); as a consequence, the laws formulated within the framework of such theories do not refer to an empirically given reality, but to reality as it is given by an idealized object, and are theoretical laws, which, unlike empirical laws, are not formulated directly on the basis of a study of experimental data, but by certain mental actions with an idealized object;

2) applied, in which the fundamental provisions contained in fundamental theories must be appropriately specified (applied) when they are applied to the study of reality, as well as its transformation (compare: ideal gas or computer and real gas or computer).

Fourth, by function theories are divided into:

1) descriptive (phenomenological or empirical), solving mainly the problems of describing and ordering vast empirical material, while the construction of an idealized object is actually reduced to isolating the original system of concepts (Copernican theory);

2) explanatory, in which the problem of isolating the essence of the area of ​​reality under consideration (Newton's mechanics in relation to the theory of Copernicus) is solved.

Testing, substantiation and truth of theories. Variety of functions of the theory. The main functions of the theory: description, explanation and prediction (forecasting)

The most important logical characteristics of a theory are the validity and truth of the theory. A theory acts as real knowledge only when it receives an empirical interpretation. . Empirical interpretation contributes to the experimental verification of the theory, to the identification of its explanatory and predictive capabilities.

Testing the theory is a complex and multi-stage process. The verification of a theory is not limited to its confirmation by individual empirical facts. However, the contradiction between the theory and individual facts is not its refutation; but at the same time, such a contradiction serves as a powerful stimulus for improving the theory up to the revision and refinement of its initial principles.

Truth of the theory- this is the correspondence of its constituent statements to the displayed area of ​​the world. The ultimate criterion for the truth of a theory, just as in the case of individual judgments, is the practical activity of people, including such a form as an experiment. However, one cannot speak of the absoluteness of this criterion. That is, the relativity of practice as a criterion of truth is determined by three factors: (1) the practice itself is limited; (2) practice can confirm individual false statements of the theory, or, conversely, confirm individual consequences of false theories (for example, this was the case with the “theories” of phlogiston and caloric); (3) practice gives only confirmation of the theory, but does not prove the truth of the statements of the theory. Thus, here we are talking about practical reliability [ à ] judgments of the theory, about the probability [ P] their truth.

The source of logical necessity [ L] the truth of the theory is its consistency, which is expressed in the logical sequence and mutual consistency (coherence) of the concepts and statements of this theory.

However, even if a theory has all the above characteristics, this does not mean that it is accurate. The history of science is a constant change of one theory by another. This means that not a single theory known from the history of science, even despite the statements of its creators, is a complete logical system.

To the number main functions theories include the following:

1) descriptive - fixing a set of data on the essential properties and relationships of objects, processes of reality;

2) synthetic - combining diverse elements of reliable scientific knowledge into a single and integral system;

3) explanatory - the identification of causal and other dependencies, the diversity of connections of a given fragment of reality, its essential properties and relationships, the laws of its origin and development, etc.;

4) methodological - the definition of diverse methods and techniques of research activities;

5) predictive - an indication of new properties and relationships of the object under study, to new levels of organization of the world and new types and classes of objects (for reference: a prediction about the future state of objects, unlike those that exist, but have not yet been identified, is called scientific prediction) ;

6) practical - establishing the possibility and determining ways to apply the knowledge gained in various areas of society (Austrian physicist L. Boltzmann: "There is nothing more practical than a good theory").

Term "theory" used quite widely. So, sometimes the theory is generally called mental activity. Often a theory means something that is actually a hypothesis. For example, Oparin's theory of the origin of life and other theories in this regard are hypotheses, not theories in the proper sense of the word. Often, a theory is called a concept, a set of views or opinions of an individual, or a point of view on a certain issue, in particular, Lysenko's theory, "theory of violence", "racial theory", etc.

In the philosophy of science, a theory is a system of objective knowledge. The scientific definition of theory is as follows: theory is a qualitatively unique form of scientific knowledge that exists as a certain system of logically interconnected sentences that reflect essential, i.e., regular, general and necessary internal connections of a particular subject area.

From the point of view of scientific methodology, theory should be understood as true knowledge, presented in the form of a system. What is a theory as a system of knowledge?

Like any system, theory is characterized by a certain composition, i.e., a set of elements that determine its ideological content, and building or structure , i.e., a set of relations and connections between its elements. The composition or content of the theory includes: basic and special concepts, principles and laws, ideas, language, mathematical apparatus, logical means . They constitute the epistemological structure of the theory.

All these elements of the content of the theory are not arranged in an arbitrary order or in a purely external way (as in a dictionary), but represent a consistent communication system in which concepts and statements are connected by the laws of logic so that from one sentence, with the help of laws and rules of logic, other sentences can be deduced. This is the logical structure of the theory . It does not follow from the subject area, but from logical patterns.

In accordance with the logical structure, there are three types of theories: 1) axiomatic, 2) genetic, 3) hypothetical-deductive.

Axiomatic theory is constructed as follows: the original sentences are accepted without proof, and all the rest are deductively derived from them.

genetic theory arises from the need to substantiate the original sentences, therefore they indicate the ways of obtaining these sentences, which, as a rule, are seen in induction.

Hypothetical-deductive theory is constructed from a hypothetically put forward general proposition, from which all other propositions are deduced.

Let us dwell in more detail on the epistemological structure of the theory.

The main and most important, as well as the initial element of the epistemological structure of the theory, is the principle that organically links other elements of the theory into a single whole, into a coherent system.

Under the principle(from Latin principium - beginning, basis) in the theory of knowledge they understand the fundamental principle, the starting point of a concept, that which underlies a certain body of knowledge.

In a scientific theory, the principle constitutes its fundamental basis, around which all its concepts, judgments, laws, etc. are synthesized, revealing, substantiating and developing this principle. Thus, the theory of materialistic dialectics is based on the principle of development. All its laws and categories are subject to the disclosure of the essence of development, its manifestation in all areas of reality, at different levels, under different conditions. Therefore, as long as there is no synthesizing principle, there is no theory.

This position is well illustrated by the history of the formation of classical mechanics. Even Galileo managed to formulate a number of laws related to classical mechanics, including the law of inertia. However, he failed to create a logically coherent, unified theory. There was only a simple sum of disparate provisions, not united by a single synthesizing principle, a single principle. I. Newton succeeded in completing the formation of the theory of classical mechanics later, who took the law of inertia as the main one and united around it all the concepts, laws and other provisions of mechanics (dynamics, statics, kinematics, Kepler's laws, etc.)

When a contradiction arose between classical mechanics and the data obtained as a result of the study of electromagnetic phenomena by Maxwell, Lorentz and Hertz, Einstein took up the solution to the problem. He wrote: “Gradually, I began to despair of the possibility of getting to the bottom of the true laws through constructive generalizations of well-known fats. The more and more desperately I tried, the more I came to the conclusion that only the discovery of a general formal principle could lead us to reliable results. Einstein managed to discover this principle only after ten years of reflection. This is the principle of relativity.

It can be seen from the examples that the principle is not given in finished form at the beginning of the formation of a theory. This is preceded by a long process of studying the phenomena of the corresponding area of ​​reality covered by the theory being created. The formation of the theory, in essence, occurs after the principle is found.

Usually, when creating a theory, a number of principles are used, which differ in the degree of generality. But at the same time, they must be compatible with each other and satisfy two conditions: first , they should not be in formal-logical contradiction with each other, and second, the principle of a lesser degree of generality should concretize the principle of a greater degree of generality. The latter, as a rule, is a philosophical position. These principles include the principle of development, the principle of interconnection, the principle of the unity of the world. Philosophical principles play a very important guiding, methodological role in the creation of any scientific theory.

The value of a principle is determined by the degree of its development and truth. It is clear that a scientific theory cannot be built on the basis of false, unscientific or anti-scientific principles. Theologians also create their theories, but on the basis of false principles, therefore their theories are not scientific.

In its synthesizing role, the principle resembles the idea discussed above. These concepts are quite close in their meaning and content, but still not identical. The idea is put forward before the hypothesis as an abstract-theoretical knowledge of the essence of the object of study in the most general approximation. The principle is already a specific theoretical knowledge that underlies a certain body of knowledge, thanks to which a system of knowledge arises.

Laws occupy an important place in the epistemological structure of theory. Law is a reflection of essential, stable, recurring and necessary connections between the phenomena investigated by this theory. A theory, as a rule, includes several laws of varying degrees of generality. The core of the theory is one or more relatively independent and equal laws. They are the most general and not deducible from other laws of this theory.

The second group of laws of this theory consists of those that are derived from the first group, but in their action retain relative independence in relation to each other. The third group of laws includes those that are deducible from the second group, and so on until the consequences of these laws that characterize a particular phenomenon are obtained. Consequences make it possible to discover new properties, aspects of these phenomena, as well as to discover previously unknown phenomena. So, Mendeleev purely theoretically discovered a number of elements, thanks to the consequences of the periodic law.

The principle of the theory and the laws that reveal it, which are at the top rung of the hierarchical ladder discussed above, constitute the core of scientific theory, its main essence.

The problem of recognizing the objective nature of laws is a key one in the methodology of science. Materialism recognizes the objective nature of the laws of science, while objective idealism considers laws to be an expression of the world mind embodied in nature and society. Such, in particular, is the position of Hegel. In a more general form, we can say that objective idealism understands by laws a certain metaphysical, i.e., above natural essence, standing on the other side of phenomena.

Subjective idealism in the person of J. Berkeley generally did not recognize the existence of any general concepts, let alone objective laws. A more refined position is taken by neopositivists. For them, the sign of a law is the repetition or regularity of phenomena found in systematic observations. So, R. Carnap believes that “the laws of science are nothing more than statements expressing these regularities as accurately as possible. If some regularity is observed at all times and in all places without exception, then it appears in the form of a universal law.

If regularities are established by comparing observations, then we get, according to Carnap, empirical laws . They do not have the validity of logical and mathematical laws, but they tell us something about the structure of the world. The laws of logic and mathematics tell us nothing about what would distinguish the real world from some other possible world. Carnap argues that empirical laws are laws that can be confirmed directly by empirical observation.

Unlike them theoretical laws are not observed values. They are laws about objects such as molecules, atoms, electrons, protons, electromagnetic fields and other unobservable objects that cannot be measured in a simple direct way. Theoretical laws are more general than empirical ones, but they are not formed by generalizing empirical ones. Theoretical laws, according to neopositivism, are formed by the subject of knowledge, the scientist. They are confirmed indirectly through empirical laws derived from the theory, which includes these theoretical laws.

Thus, we can conclude:

1) neopositivism does not consider the law to be a reflection of the essence, but only a fixation of repetition;

2) empirical laws do not go beyond sensory experience and do not reach the abstract level;

3) theoretical laws are subjective in nature and the results of the scientist's constructive activity.

If neo-positivism in its interpretation recognizes the existence of empirical laws, then the form of positivism that preceded it - empirio-criticism or Machism - considers law as a description of events in terms of law. Mach argued that science should not ask "why?", "How?" Carnap explains this position by the fact that earlier philosophers felt that the description of how the world functions was insufficient. They wanted a more complete comprehension of the essence by finding the metaphysical causes behind the phenomena and unattainable by the scientific method. To this the physicists, supporters of Machism, replied: "Don't ask us why?" There is no answer other than that given by empirical laws." Empiriocritics believed that the question "why?" touches on metaphysical aspects, and they are not the field of science. In this formulation, science was denied the right to penetrate into the essence of things. And this means that positivism and neo-positivism stand on the positions of agnosticism.

Concepts is also an epistemological element of the theory. A concept is such a form of thinking and a form of expression of scientific knowledge, in which the most general, essential properties of objects, phenomena of reality, their most important connections and relations are fixed. In scientific concepts, as it were, all our knowledge about the essential properties of objects and phenomena is accumulated, the most important connections and patterns are reflected and fixed. We can say that all the basic scientific data that make up the content of the theory are concentrated in scientific concepts expressed in the relevant laws.

Concepts as forms of thinking are of the following types: ordinary language, special-scientific concepts, general scientific and philosophical concepts and categories that differ in the greatest degree of generality. The last three special-scientific, general scientific and philosophical, are not only forms of thinking, but also forms of the theoretical level of knowledge as part of scientific theory.

Scientific picture of the world

It can be defined as a concept that expresses the evolution of everyday, scientific and philosophical ideas about nature, society, man and his knowledge, depending on the specific historical methods and forms of cognitive activity and social practice in general. NCM develops as an understanding of the images of the world that underlie the life, culture and practice of man; simplifies, schematizes and interprets reality as any cognitive image, at the same time highlighting the essential, basic connections from the infinite variety of relations.

The difficulties in analyzing NCM as a value-worldview form of knowledge are largely due to the fact that it exists in science mainly implicitly in texts and subtexts, in various unsystematized statements of scientists about the premises of the theory, and special methodological efforts are needed to identify it. NCM became the subject of special reflection in philosophical and scientific research in the second half of the 20th century; it is not always recognized the right to be an independent unit of knowledge, it is accepted as a metaphor, some kind of auxiliary illustrated image, etc. three terms included in the concept of NCM - "world", "picture", "scientific" - are very ambiguous and carry a significant philosophical and ideological load. In modern literature, it is realized that, although the term “world” is quite legitimate, its correct application involves clarifying this term and taking into account the fact that the concept of “world” does not exist outside the framework of certain philosophical and scientific ideas and concepts, which, with their change, is subject to change. - the semantic meaning and methodological role of this concept also change. "World" is a developing concept that fixes the evolution of scientific and philosophical ideas about nature, society and knowledge, changing its scope and content depending on the specific historical methods and forms of scientific activity and social practice in general.

Another component of the concept of NCM is “picture”. It was this often literally understood term that for a long time kept ideas about NCM at an intuitive level, gave this concept a metaphorical meaning, and emphasized its sensually visual character. Obviously, the term “picture” is a tribute to the early ideas about the synthesis of knowledge as a visual colorful picture of nature, into which each science brings colors and details.

In the 20th century, M. Heidegger, reflecting on the picture of the world, posed questions to himself: “...why, when interpreting a certain historical era, do we ask about the picture of the world? Does each era of history have its own picture of the world, and, moreover, in such a way that each time it is concerned with building its own picture of the world? Or is it just a new European way of presenting the question about the picture of the world? What is a picture of the world? Apparently, the image of the world. But what is the world here? What does picture mean? The world appears here as a designation of beings as a whole. This name is not limited to space, nature. History also belongs to the world. And yet, even nature, history, and both together in their latent and aggressive interpenetration do not exhaust the world. This word also means the basis of the world, regardless of how its relation to the world is thought ”(Heidegger M. The time of the picture of the world // He. Time and being. Articles and speeches. M., 1993. P. 49).

For Heidegger, “the world” acts “as a designation of beings as a whole”, is not limited to space and nature, history also belongs to the world. The picture of the world is not something copied, but what a person aims at as “set before himself”; it is not a depiction of the world, but "the world understood in the sense of such a picture"; it is not the picture that transforms from the medieval into the modern European, but the world, but the being, becomes the represented being. By compiling such a picture for himself, a person brings himself onto the stage. This means that the transformation of the world into a picture is the same process as the transformation of a person into a subject as a thinking-imagining being, possessing a “new freedom” and independently deciding what can be considered reliable and true. The more aggressively the subject behaves, the more irresistibly the science of the world turns into the science of man, anthropology, and therefore only where the world becomes a picture, “humanism rises for the first time”, the being as a whole is interpreted and evaluated by a person, which began to be denoted by the word “worldview”. ".

In modern knowledge, instead of “picture”, other terms are increasingly used: model, integral image, ontological scheme, picture of reality. These concepts, along with ideas about nature, its causality and patterns, space and time, increasingly include ideas about a person, his activity, cognition, and the social organization of the environment. This fact reflects two significant trends in the development of NCM as a form of knowledge. Firstly, the ways of synthesizing and integrating scientific knowledge are changing, there is a transition from NCM as an image, model, visual picture to NCM as a special complex structured logical form of scientific knowledge that represents the world in its entirety. The first modification of the concept - "picture" is presented mainly in everyday consciousness and in the early stages of the development of science, the second - "model", "integrality" - in a more developed, especially in modern science. Secondly, in the historically changing NCM, the “visibility function” was performed not only by images, models, but also by certain rather abstract constructions. It is known that Descartes’ picture of the world already lost its colors, became monochromatic, and as a result of Newton’s work, it became a drawing, a graph, a scheme of quantitative relationships between phenomena, unambiguously reflecting reality, which was, in principle, a huge step forward. What is happening is not a loss of visibility, but a change in the very nature of visibility and a change of objects that perform this function, in particular, objects with operational visibility receive the status of visual objects, since they began to denote a certain, fixed development of the conceptual apparatus, the correlation of principles, methodological stereotypes.

Today, NCM is understood as one of the foundations of scientific research, a picture of the reality under study, presented in a special form of systematization of knowledge, which makes it possible to identify and interpret the subject of science, its facts and theoretical schemes, new research problems and ways to solve them. It is through NCM that the transfer of fundamental ideas and principles from one science to another takes place, it begins to play an increasingly important role, and not so much as a model of the world or its image, but as a synthesizing logical form of knowledge, which is more of a theoretical concept than a picture of the world in the literal sense of the word. Thus, the most studied physical picture of the world characterizes the subject of physical research through the following ideas: about fundamental physical objects, about the typology of objects studied in physics, about the general features of the interaction of objects (causality and patterns of physical processes), about the spatio-temporal characteristics of the physical world. The change of these ideas in connection with the change in practice and knowledge leads to the restructuring and change of physical NCM. Three historical types are known: mechanical, electrodynamic and quantum-relativistic pictures of the world. The construction of the latter is not yet completed. In the case when special pictures are included in the content of the general scientific picture of the world, this occurs on the basis of philosophical ideas and principles and in close connection with the foundations of the theories of these sciences and the empirical layer of knowledge. It is important to note that one of the procedures for substantiating theoretical schemes consists in their correlation with the picture of the world, due to which they are objectified, as well as the interpretation of equations expressing theoretical laws. The construction of a theory, in turn, refines the picture of the world. In general, NCM performs several theoretical and methodological functions, combining knowledge into a single whole, carrying out the objectification of scientific knowledge and its inclusion in culture, and finally, methodologically determining the ways and directions of the research process.

a logically interconnected system of concepts and statements about the properties, relationships and laws of a certain set of idealized objects (point, number, material point, inertia, absolutely black body, ideal gas, actual infinity, socio-economic formation, consciousness, etc., etc.) P.). The purpose of scientific theory is the introduction of such basic ideal objects and statements about their properties and relationships (laws, principles), in order to then purely logically (i.e. mentally) deduce (construct) from them the largest possible number of consequences that, when choosing a certain empirical interpretation would most adequately correspond to the observed data on some real area of ​​objects (natural, social, experimentally created, mental, etc.). The main structural elements of any scientific theory: 1) initial objects and concepts; 2) derived objects and concepts (the connection between the derived and initial concepts of the theory is given by defining the former in the final analysis only through the initial ones); 3) initial statements (axioms); 4) derived statements (theorems; lemmas), their connection with the axioms is given with the help of certain inference rules; 5) metatheoretical foundations (picture of the world, ideals and norms of scientific research, general scientific principles, etc.). The first scientific theory in the history of knowledge was Euclidean geometry, which was built by ancient mathematicians for about three hundred years (VII - IV centuries BC) and ended with a brilliant generalization in Euclid's work "Beginnings". (See theory, science, idealization).

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

SCIENTIFIC THEORY

the most developed form of organization of scientific knowledge, which gives a holistic view of the patterns and essential connections of the studied area of ​​reality. Examples of so-called. are the classical mechanics of I. Newton, the corpuscular and wave theories of light, the theory of biological evolution of Ch. Darwin, the electromagnetic theory of J.K. Maxwell, special relativity, chromosome theory of heredity, etc.

Science includes descriptions of facts and experimental data, hypotheses and laws, classification schemes, etc., but only so-called. unites all the material of science into a holistic and observable knowledge of the world. It is clear that in order to construct a so-called. certain material about the objects and phenomena under study must first be accumulated, so theories appear at a fairly mature stage in the development of a scientific discipline. For thousands of years, mankind has been familiar with electrical phenomena, but the first so-called. electricity appeared only in the middle. 18th century At first, as a rule, descriptive theories are created that give only a systematic description and classification of the objects under study. For a long time, theories of biology, including the theories of evolution by Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and Darwin, have been descriptive: they describe and classify plant and animal species and their origins; D. Mendeleev's table of chemical elements was a systematic description and classification of elements. And this is quite natural. Starting to study a certain area of ​​phenomena, scientists must first describe these phenomena, highlight their features, and classify them into groups. Only after this becomes possible a deeper study to identify causal relationships and the discovery of laws.

The highest form of development of science is considered to be an explanatory theory, which gives not only a description, but also an explanation of the phenomena under study. It is to the construction of such theories that every scientific discipline strives. Sometimes the presence of such theories is seen as an essential sign of the maturity of science: a discipline can be considered truly scientific only when explanatory theories appear in it.

Explanatory theory has a hypothetical-deductive structure. The basis of the so-called. is a set of initial concepts (values) and fundamental principles (postulates, laws), including only initial concepts. It is this basis that fixes the angle of view from which reality is considered, sets the area that the theory covers. The initial concepts and principles express the main, most fundamental connections and relations of the studied area, which determine all other phenomena of it. So, the basis of classical mechanics are the concepts of a material point, force, speed and three laws of dynamics; Maxwell's electrodynamics is based on his equations, which relate by certain relations the basic quantities of this theory; the special theory of relativity is based on A. Einstein's equations, etc.

Since the time of Euclid, the deductive-axiomatic construction of knowledge has been considered exemplary. Explanatory theories follow this pattern. However, if Euclid and many scientists after him believed that the initial provisions of the theoretical system are self-evident truths, then modern scientists understand that such truths are not easy to find, and the postulates of their theories are no more than assumptions about the underlying causes of phenomena. The history of science has given a lot of evidence of our delusions, so the foundations of the explanatory theory are considered as hypotheses, the truth of which still needs to be proven. Less fundamental laws of the area under study are deductively derived from the foundations of the theory. That is why the explanatory theory is called "hypothetical-deductive".

Initial concepts and principles of so-called. relate directly not to real things and events, but to some abstract objects, which together form an idealized object of the theory. In classical mechanics, this is the system of material points; in molecular-kinetic theory - a set of randomly colliding molecules closed in a certain volume, represented as absolutely elastic balls, etc. These objects do not exist by themselves in reality, they are mental, imaginary objects. However, the idealized object of the theory has a certain relation to real things and phenomena: it reflects some properties of real things that are abstracted from them or idealized. These are absolutely solid or absolutely black body; perfect mirror; ideal gas, etc. Replacing real things with idealized objects, scientists are distracted from the secondary, non-essential properties and connections of the real world and single out in their pure form what seems to them the most important. The idealized object of a theory is much simpler than real objects, but this is precisely what makes it possible to give its exact mathematical description. When an astronomer studies the motion of the planets around the Sun, he is distracted from the fact that the planets are whole worlds with a rich chemical composition, atmosphere, core, etc., and considers them as simply material points, characterized only by mass, distance from the Sun and momentum, but precisely because of this simplification, he gets the opportunity to describe their movement in strict mathematical equations.

Idealized object serves for the theoretical interpretation of its initial concepts and principles. Concepts and statements of the so-called. have only the meaning given to them by the idealized object. This explains why they cannot be directly correlated with real things and processes.

In the original basis of the so-called. also include a certain logic - a set of inference rules and a mathematical apparatus. Of course, in most cases, as the logic of the so-called. the usual classical two-valued logic is used, however, in some theories, for example, in quantum mechanics, sometimes they turn to three-valued or probabilistic logic. so-called. They also differ in the mathematical means used in them. Thus, the basis of the hypothetical-deductive theory includes a set of initial concepts and principles, an idealized object that serves for their theoretical interpretation, and a logical-mathematical apparatus. From this foundation, all other statements of the so-called. - laws of a lesser degree of generality. It is clear that these statements also speak of an idealized object.

The question of whether the so-called. empirical data, the results of observations and experiments, the facts are still open. According to some researchers, the facts discovered thanks to the theory and explained by it should be included in the theory. According to others, the facts and experimental data lie outside the so-called. and the connection between theory and facts is carried out by special rules of empirical interpretation. With the help of such rules, the statements of the theory are translated into empirical language, which makes it possible to test them using empirical research methods.

To the main functions of the so-called. include description, explanation and prediction. so-called. gives a description of a certain area of ​​phenomena, certain objects, k.-l. aspects of reality. Because of this, the so-called. may turn out to be true or false, i.e. describe reality adequately or distortedly. so-called. should explain known facts, pointing out the essential connections that underlie them. Finally, T.n. predicts new, not yet known facts: phenomena, effects, properties of objects, etc. Detection of predicted so-called. facts serves as confirmation of its fruitfulness and truth. The discrepancy between theory and facts or the discovery of internal contradictions in the theory gives impetus to its change - to the refinement of its idealized object, to the revision, refinement, change of its individual provisions, auxiliary hypotheses, etc. In some cases, these discrepancies lead scientists to abandon the theory and replace it with a new theory. About Nikiforov A.L. Philosophy of Science: History and Methodology. M., 1998; Stepan B.C. theoretical knowledge. M., 2000. A.L. Nikiforov

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

Any theory is an integral developing system of true knowledge (including elements of delusion), which has a complex structure and performs a number of functions. In the modern methodology of science, the following are distinguished main components, elements theories: 1. Initial foundations - fundamental concepts, principles, laws, equations, axioms, etc. 2. Idealized objects - abstract models of the essential properties and relationships of the objects under study (for example, "absolutely black body", etc.). 3. The logic of the theory - a set of certain rules and methods of proof - aimed at clarifying the structure and changing knowledge. 4. Philosophical attitudes and value factors. 5. A set of laws and statements derived as consequences from the foundations of a given theory in accordance with specific principles.

For example, in physical theories, two main parts can be distinguished: formal calculus (mathematical equations, logical symbols, rules, etc.) and meaningful interpretation (categories, laws, principles). The unity of the substantive and formal aspects of the theory is one of the "" sources of its improvement and development.

A methodologically important role in the formation of the theory is played by abstract, idealized object(“ideal type”), the construction of which is a necessary stage in the creation of any theory, carried out in forms specific to different areas of knowledge. This object acts not only as a mental model of a certain fragment of reality, but also contains a specific research program, which is implemented in the construction of a theory.

B.C. Stepin considers it necessary to single out in the structure of a theory as its basis a special organization of abstract objects - a fundamental theoretical scheme associated with the mathematical formalism corresponding to it. In the content of the developed theory, in addition to its fundamental scheme, the author singles out one more layer of the organization of abstract objects - the level of private theoretical schemes. The fundamental theoretical scheme, together with its derivative formations, is presented as an “internal skeleton of theoretical knowledge”. The problem of the genesis of theoretical schemes is called the fundamental problem of the methodology of science. At the same time, it is noted that in the theory there is no linear chain of abstract objects, but their complex multi-level hierarchical system.

Speaking about the goals and ways of theoretical research in general, A. Einstein noted that “theory has two goals: 1. To cover, if possible, all phenomena in their interconnection (completeness). 2. To achieve this, taking as a basis as little as possible logically interconnected logical concepts and arbitrarily established relationships between them (basic laws and axioms). I will call this goal "logical uniqueness".

The variety of forms of idealization and, accordingly, types of idealized objects corresponds to I am a variety of types (types) of theories, which can be classified according to different bases (criteria). Depending on this, theories can be distinguished: descriptive, mathematical, deductive and inductive, fundamental and applied, formal and meaningful, "open" and "closed", explaining and describing (phenomenological), physical, chemical, sociological, psychological, etc. d.

So, mathematical theories characterized by a high degree of abstraction. Deduction plays a decisive role in all constructions of mathematics. The dominant role in the construction of mathematical theories is played by axiomatic and hypothetical-deductive methods, as well as formalization. Many mathematical theories arise through a combination, synthesis of several basic or generating abstract structures.

Theories of experimental (empirical) sciences- physics, chemistry, biology, sociology, history, etc. - according to the depth of penetration into the essence of the studied phenomena, they can be divided into two large classes: phenomenological and non-phenomenological.

Phenomenological (them. are also called empirical) describe the properties and magnitudes of objects and processes observed in experience, but do not delve deeply into their internal mechanisms (for example, geometric optics, thermodynamics, many pedagogical, psychological and sociological theories, etc.). Such theories do not analyze the nature of the phenomena under study and therefore do not use any complex abstract objects, although, of course, to a certain extent they schematize and construct some idealizations of the studied field of phenomena.

Phenomenological theories primarily solve the problem of ordering and primary generalization of the facts relating to them. They are formulated in ordinary natural languages ​​using the special terminology of the relevant field of knowledge and are predominantly of a qualitative nature. Researchers encounter phenomenological theories, as a rule, at the first stages of the development of a science, when there is an accumulation, systematization and generalization of factual empirical material. Such theories are quite a natural phenomenon in the process of scientific knowledge.

With the development of scientific knowledge, theories of the phenomenological type give way to non-phenomenological ones.(they are also called explanatory). They not only reflect the essential connections between phenomena and their properties, but also reveal the deep inner mechanism of the studied phenomena and processes, their necessary interconnections, essential relationships, i.e., their laws.

But these are no longer empirical, but theoretical laws, which are formulated not directly on the basis of the study of experimental data, but through certain mental actions with abstract, idealized objects. “At the basis of an established theory, one can always find a mutually consistent network of abstract objects that determines the specifics of this theory.”

One of the important criteria by which theories can be classified is the accuracy of predictions. According to this criterion, two large classes of theories can be distinguished. The first of these includes theories in which the prediction has a reliable character (for example, many theories of classical mechanics, classical physics and chemistry). In the theories of the second class, prediction has a probabilistic character, which is determined by the combined action of a large number of random factors. This kind of stochastic (from Greek - guess) theories are found not only in modern physics, but also in large numbers in biology and the social sciences and humanities due to the specificity and complexity of the objects of their study themselves.

A. Einstein distinguished two main types of theories in physics - constructive and fundamental. Most physical theories, in his opinion, are constructive, that is, their task is to construct a picture of complex phenomena on the basis of some relatively simple assumptions (such, for example, is the kinetic theory of gases). The starting point and basis of fundamental theories are not hypothetical positions, but empirically found general properties of phenomena, principles from which mathematically formulated criteria that have universal applicability (such is the theory of relativity) follow. Fundamental theories use not a synthetic, but an analytical method. Einstein attributed the advantages of constructive theories to their completeness, flexibility and clarity. He considered the merits of fundamental theories to be their logical perfection and the reliability of the initial propositions 1 .

Regardless of whatever type of theory it may be, whatever methods it may be constructed, “the most essential requirement for any scientific theory always remains unchanged - the theory must correspond to the facts ... Ultimately, only experience will make a decisive verdict” 2, - summarizes the great thinker.

It is no accident that Einstein uses the expression "in the long run" in this conclusion. The fact is that, as he himself explained, in the process of the development of science, our theories become more and more abstract, their connection with experience (facts, observations, experiments) becomes more complex and indirect, and the path from theory to observations becomes longer. , thinner and more complex. In order to realize our constant final goal - "a better and better understanding of reality", we must clearly understand the following objective circumstance. Namely, that “new links are added to the logical chain linking theory and observation. In order to clear the path leading from theory to experiment of unnecessary and artificial assumptions, in order to cover an ever wider area of ​​facts, we must make the chain longer and longer. longer." At the same time, Einstein adds, the simpler and more fundamental our assumptions become, the more complex the mathematical tool of our reasoning.

W. Heisenberg believed that a scientific theory should be consistent (in the formal mathematical sense), have simplicity, beauty, compactness, a certain (always limited) scope of its application, integrity and "final completeness". But the strongest argument in favor of the correctness of the theory is its "multiple experimental confirmation." “The decision on the correctness of a theory thus turns out to be a lengthy historical process, behind which stands not the evidence of a chain of mathematical deductions, but the persuasiveness of a historical fact. A complete theory, one way or another, is never an exact reflection of nature in the corresponding area, it is a kind of idealization of experience, carried out with the help of the conceptual foundations of the theory and ensuring a certain success.

have a specific and complex structure. theory of social and humanitarian sciences. So, based on the ideas of the American sociologist R. Merton, in modern sociology it is customary to distinguish the following levels of sociological knowledge and, accordingly, types of theories:

General sociological theory(“theoretical sociology”), which gives an abstract and generalized analysis of social reality in its integrity, essence and history of development; at this level of knowledge, the structure of the general patterns of functioning and development of social reality is fixed. At the same time, social philosophy is the theoretical and methodological basis of the general sociological theory.

Level of subject consideration - private (“middle-rank”) sociological theories, having a general sociology as their theoretical and methodological basis and giving a description and analysis of the socially special. Depending on the originality of their objects of study, private theories turn out to be represented by two relatively independent classes of private theories - special and branch theories:

a) Special theories explore the essence, structure, general patterns of functioning and development of objects (processes, communities, institutions) of the actual social sphere of public life, understanding the latter as a relatively independent area of ​​social activity responsible for the direct reproduction of man and personality. Such are the sociology of sex, age, ethnicity, family, city, education, etc. Each of them, exploring a special class of social phenomena, acts primarily as a general theory of this class of phenomena. In essence, P. A. Sorokin noted, these theories do the same thing as general sociology, “but with respect to a special class of socio-cultural phenomena.”

b) Industry theories explore the social (in the above sense of the term) aspects of the classes of phenomena belonging to other spheres of social life - economic, political, cultural. Such are the sociologists of labor, politics, culture, organization, management, etc. Unlike special theories, branch theories are not general theories of these classes of phenomena, because they study only one of the aspects of their manifestation - the social one.

However, some sociologists believe that "the building of sociological science consists of five floors." Others believe that Merton's scheme (general theory - middle-level theory - empirical research), having played a certain role in the development of sociology, "has exhausted its possibilities." Therefore, this scheme should not be improved, but "it should be abandoned."

Thus, theory (regardless of its type) has the following main features: 1. Theory is not separately taken reliable scientific provisions, but their totality, an integral organic developing system. The unification of knowledge into a theory is carried out primarily by the subject of research itself, its laws.

Not every set of provisions about the subject under study is a theory. In order to turn into a theory, knowledge must reach a certain degree of maturity in its development. Namely, when it not only describes a certain set of facts, but also explains them, that is, when knowledge reveals the causes and patterns of phenomena.

For a theory, justification, proof of the provisions included in it, is mandatory: if there are no justifications, there is no theory.

Theoretical knowledge should strive to explain the widest possible range of phenomena, to the continuous deepening of knowledge about them.

The nature of the theory is determined by the degree of validity of its defining beginning, which reflects the fundamental regularity of the given subject.

The structure of scientific theories is meaningfully “determined by the systemic organization of idealized (abstract) objects (theoretical constructs). The statements of theoretical language are directly formulated in relation to theoretical constructs and only indirectly, due to their relationship to extralinguistic reality, describe this reality.

Theory is not only ready-made knowledge that has become, but also the process of obtaining it; therefore, it is not a "bare result", but must be considered together with its emergence and development.

In modern philosophy of science (both Western and domestic), theory is no longer considered as an unchanging, “closed” static system with a rigid structure, but various models of the dynamics (growth, change, development) of knowledge are built (see Chapter IV, § 1 ). In this regard, it is emphasized that for all the fruitfulness of the formalization and axiomatization of theoretical knowledge, one cannot but take into account that the real process of the constructive development of the theory, oriented towards the tasks of covering new empirical material, does not fit into the framework of the formal deductive idea of ​​the deployment of theories.

However, the development of a theory is not only “the movement of thought within itself” (“ideas”), but the active processing by thought of diverse empirical material into its own internal content of theories, concretization and enrichment of its conceptual apparatus. The image of the actual deployment (development) of the theory given by Hegel - the "snowball" - has not lost its relevance to this day. That is why the most important method of constructing, deploying and presenting theories is the method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete.

To the number basic functions -theory can include the following:

The synthetic function is the unification of certain reliable knowledge into a single, integral system.

The explanatory function is the identification of causal and other dependencies, the diversity of relationships of a given phenomenon, its essential characteristics, the laws of its origin and development, etc.

Methodological function - on the basis of the theory, various methods, methods and techniques of research activity are formulated.

Predictive - the function of foresight. Based on theoretical ideas about the “present” state of known phenomena, conclusions are drawn about the existence of previously unknown facts, objects or their properties, relationships between phenomena, etc. Prediction about the future state of phenomena (in contrast to those that exist, but have not yet been identified ) is called scientific foresight.

practical function. The ultimate purpose of any theory is to be put into practice, to be a "guide to action" to change reality. Therefore, it is quite true to say that there is nothing more practical than a good theory. But how to choose a good one among the many competing theories? According to K. Popper, an important role in the choice of theories is played by the degree of their testability: the higher it is, the more chances to choose a good and reliable theory. The so-called "criterion of relative acceptability", according to Popper, gives preference to the theory that: a) provides the greatest amount of information, i.e., has a deeper content; b) is logically more strict; h) has greater explanatory and predictive power; d) can be more accurately verified by comparing predicted facts with observations. In other words, Popper concludes, we choose the theory that best withstands competition with other theories and, in the course of natural selection, turns out to be the most suitable for survival. In the course of the development of the science of communication with new fundamental discoveries (especially during periods of scientific revolutions), there are "cardinal changes in the understanding of the mechanism of the emergence of scientific theories. As A. Einstein noted, the most important methodological lesson that quantum physics has presented is the rejection of a simplified understanding of the emergence theory as a simple inductive generalization of experience. Theory, he emphasized, can be inspired by experience, but is created as if from above in relation to it, and only then is tested by experience. What Einstein said does not mean that he rejected the role of experience as a source of knowledge. In this connection he wrote that "purely logical thinking in itself cannot give any knowledge about the world of facts; all knowledge of the real world comes from experience and is completed by it. Provisions obtained by a purely logical way do not say anything about reality" 1. However, Einstein believed that " is not always harmful" in science such use of concepts in which they are considered exist independently of the empirical basis to which they owe their existence. The human mind must, in his opinion, "freely build forms" before their actual existence would be confirmed: "knowledge cannot flourish from bare empiricism." Einstein compared the evolution of experimental science “as a continuous process of induction” with compiling a catalog and considered such a development of science to be a purely empirical matter, since such an approach, from his point of view, does not cover the entire actual process of cognition as a whole. Namely - “is silent about the important role of intuition and deductive thinking in the development of exact science. As soon as any science leaves the initial stage of its development, the progress of the theory is not achieved simply in the process of ordering. The researcher, starting from experimental facts, tries to develop a system of concepts that, generally speaking, would be logically based on a small number of basic assumptions, the so-called axioms. We call this system of concepts theory... For the same complex of experimental facts, there may exist several theories that differ significantly from each other.

In other words, the theories of modern science are created not simply by inductive generalization of experience (although such a path is not excluded), but due to the initial movement in the field of previously created idealized objects, which are used as a means of constructing hypothetical models of a new field of interactions. The substantiation of such models by experience turns them into the core of a future theory. “It is theoretical research, based on a relatively independent operation of idealized objects, that is capable of discovering new subject areas before they begin to be mastered by practice. Theorizing acts as a kind of indicator of the development of science.

An idealized object thus acts not only as a theoretical model of reality, but it implicitly contains a certain program of research, which is realized in the construction of a theory. The ratios of the elements of an idealized object, both initial and output, are theoretical laws that (unlike empirical laws) are formulated not directly on the basis of the study of experimental data, but through certain mental actions with an idealized object.

It follows from this, in particular, that the laws formulated within the framework of a theory and essentially related not to an empirically given reality, but to reality as it is represented by an idealized object, must be specified in an appropriate way when they are applied to the study of reality. With this circumstance in mind, A. Einstein introduced the term "physical reality" and singled out two aspects of this term. Its first meaning was used by him to characterize the objective world that exists outside and independently of consciousness. “Belief in the existence of an external world,” Einstein noted, “independent of the perceiving subject, underlies all natural science.”

In its second meaning, the term "physical reality" is used to consider the theorized world as a set of idealized objects representing the properties of the real world within the framework of a given physical theory. “The reality studied by science is nothing but a construction of our mind, and not just a given” 2 . In this regard, the physical reality is given through the language of science, and the same reality can be described using different languages.

When characterizing science, scientific knowledge as a whole, it is necessary to single out its main task, its main function - the discovery of the laws of the studied area of ​​reality. Without establishing the laws of reality, without expressing them in a system of concepts, there is no science, there can be no scientific theory. Paraphrasing the words of a famous poet, we can say: we say science - we mean law, we say law - we mean science.

The very concept of scientificity (which has already been discussed above) presupposes the discovery of laws, a deepening into the essence of the phenomena being studied, and the determination of diverse conditions for the practical applicability of laws.

The study of the laws of reality finds its expression in the creation of a scientific theory that adequately reflects the subject area under study in the integrity of its laws and regularities. Therefore the law key element of the theory, which is nothing more than a system of laws expressing the essence, deep connections of the object under study (and not just empirical dependencies) in all its integrity and concreteness, as the unity of the manifold.

In its most general form, a law can be defined as a connection (relationship) between phenomena, processes, which is:

a) objective, since it is inherent primarily in the real world, the sensual-objective activity of people, expresses the real relations of things;

b) essential, concrete-universal. Being a reflection of the universe that is essential in the movement, any law is inherent in all processes of a given class, of a certain type (kind), without exception, and acts always and everywhere where the corresponding processes and conditions are deployed;

c) necessary, because, being closely connected with the essence, the law acts and is implemented with "iron necessity" in the appropriate conditions;

d) internal, as it reflects the deepest connections and dependencies of a given subject area in the unity of all its moments and relations within a certain integral system;

e) repetitive, stable, since “the law is strong (remaining) in the phenomenon”, “identical in the phenomenon”, their “calm reflection” (Hegel). It is an expression of a certain constancy of a certain process, the regularity of its course, the sameness of its action under similar conditions.

The stability, invariance of laws always correlates with the specific conditions of their action, the change of which removes this invariance and gives rise to a new one, which means changing the laws, deepening them, expanding or narrowing the scope of their action, modifying them, etc. Any law is not something immutable , but is a concrete historical phenomenon. With a change in the relevant conditions, with the development of practice and knowledge, some laws disappear from the scene, others reappear, the forms of action of laws change, the methods of their use, etc.

The most important, key task of scientific research is to “raise experience to the universal”, to find the laws of a given subject area, a certain sphere (fragment) of reality, to express them in appropriate concepts, abstractions, theories, ideas, principles, etc. The solution of this problem can be successful if the scientist proceeds from two basic assumptions: the reality of the world in its integrity and development, and the lawfulness of this world, i.e., that it is “permeated” with a set of objective laws. The latter regulate the entire world process, provide in it a certain order, necessity, the principle of self-movement, and are fully cognizable. The outstanding mathematician A. Poincaré rightly argued that laws, as the "best expression" of the inner harmony of the world, are the basic principles, prescriptions that reflect the relationship between things. “However, are these prescriptions arbitrary? Not; otherwise they would be fruitless. Experience gives us free choice, but it also guides us.”

It must be borne in mind that the thinking of people and the objective world are subject to the same laws, and that therefore they must agree with each other in their results. The necessary correspondence between the laws of objective reality and the laws of thought is achieved when they are properly known.

Cognition of laws is a complex, difficult and deeply contradictory process of reflecting reality. But the cognizing subject cannot display the whole real world, especially at once, completely and entirely. He can only forever approach this, creating various concepts and other abstractions, formulating certain laws, applying a whole range of techniques and methods in their totality (experiment, observation, idealization, modeling, etc.). Describing the features of the laws of science, the famous American physicist R. Feynman wrote that, in particular, “the laws of physics often do not have an obvious direct relation to our experience, but represent its more or less abstract expression ... Very often between elementary laws and basic aspects of real phenomena, a distance of enormous size.

W. Heisenberg, believing that the discovery of laws is the most important task of science, noted that, firstly, when the great all-encompassing laws of nature are formulated - and this became possible for the first time in Newtonian mechanics - “we are talking about the idealization of reality, and not about reality itself ". Idealization arises from the fact that we investigate reality with the help of concepts. Secondly, each law has a limited scope, outside of which it is unable to reflect phenomena, because its conceptual apparatus does not cover new phenomena (for example, all natural phenomena cannot be described in terms of Newtonian mechanics). Thirdly, the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics are "very general idealizations of a very wide field of experience and their laws will be valid in any place and at any time - but only with respect to that field of experience in which the concepts of these theories are applicable."

Laws are first discovered in the form of assumptions, hypotheses. Further experimental material, new facts lead to the "purification of these hypotheses", eliminate some of them, correct others, until, finally, a law is established in its pure form. One of the most important requirements that a scientific hypothesis must satisfy is, as noted earlier, in its fundamental verifiability in practice (in experience, experiment, etc.), which distinguishes a hypothesis from all kinds of speculative constructions, groundless fictions, unfounded fantasies, etc.

Since laws belong to the sphere of essence, the deepest knowledge about them is achieved not at the level of direct perception, but at the stage of theoretical research. It is precisely here that the reduction of the accidental, visible only in phenomena, to actual internal movement takes place in the final analysis. The result of this process is the discovery of a law, more precisely, a set of laws inherent in a given area, which in their interconnection form the “core” of a certain scientific theory.

Revealing the mechanism of discovery of new laws, R. Feynman noted that “... the search for a new law is carried out as follows. First of all, they guess about it. Then they calculate the consequences of this conjecture and find out what this law will entail if it turns out that it is true. Then the results of the calculations are compared with what is observed in nature, with the results of special experiments or with our experience, and according to the results of such observations, it is found out whether this is so or not. If the calculations disagree with the experimental data, then the law is wrong.”

At the same time, Feynman draws attention to the fact that at all stages of the movement of knowledge, an important role is played by the philosophical attitudes that guide the researcher. Already at the beginning of the path to the law, it is philosophy that helps to speculate; here it is difficult to make a final choice.

The discovery and formulation of the law is the most important, but not the last task of science, which still has to show how the law discovered by it paves the way. To do this, it is necessary to use the law, relying on it, to explain all the phenomena of a given subject area (even those that seem to contradict it), to derive them all from the corresponding law through a number of intermediate links.

It should be borne in mind that each specific law almost never manifests itself in a “pure form”, but always in interconnection with other laws of different levels and orders. In addition, we must not forget that although objective laws operate with "iron necessity", in themselves they are by no means "iron", but very "soft", elastic in the sense that, depending on specific conditions, the one who that's another law. The elasticity of laws (especially social ones) is also manifested in the fact that they often act like laws - tendencies, are carried out in a very intricate and approximate way, like some never firmly established average of constant fluctuations.

The conditions under which each given law is implemented can stimulate and deepen, or vice versa - “suppress” and remove its effect. Thus, any law in its implementation is always modified by specific historical circumstances, which either allow the law to gain full force, or slow down, weaken its action, expressing the law in the form of a breaking through trend. In addition, the effect of one law or another is inevitably modified by the concomitant effect of other laws.

Each law is “narrow, incomplete, approximate” (Hegel), since it has the limits of its action, a certain sphere of its implementation (for example, the limits of a given form of motion of matter, a specific stage of development, etc.). As if echoing Hegel, R. Feynman noted that even the law of universal gravitation is not exact - “the same applies to our other laws - they are inexact. Somewhere on the edge of them there is always a secret, there is always something to puzzle over.

On the basis of laws, not only the explanation of the phenomena of a given class (group) is carried out, but also the prediction, foresight of new phenomena, events, processes, etc., possible ways, forms and tendencies of people's cognitive and practical activities.

The discovered laws, the known regularities, can - if they are skillfully and correctly applied - be used by people so that they can change nature and their own social relations. Since the laws of the external world are the foundations of purposeful human activity, people must consciously be guided by the requirements arising from objective laws as regulators of their activity. Otherwise, the latter will not become effective and efficient, but will be carried out at best by trial and error. On the basis of the known laws, people can really scientifically control both natural and social processes, regulate them optimally.

Relying in his activity on the "realm of laws", a person at the same time can, to a certain extent, influence the mechanism for the implementation of a particular law. He can promote its action in a purer form, create conditions for the development of the law to its qualitative completeness, or, on the contrary, restrain this action, localize it or even transform it.

Let us emphasize two important methods that should not be missed when “working” with scientific laws. First, the formulations of the latter are directly related to the system of theoretical constructs (abstract objects), i.e., they are associated with the introduction of idealized objects that simplify and schematize empirically necessary situations.

Secondly, in every science (if it is such), “ideal theoretical models (schemes) are an essential characteristic of the structure of any scientific theory”, the key element of which is the law.

The variety of types of relations and interactions in reality serves as an objective basis for the existence many forms (kinds) of laws, which are classified according to one or another criterion (base). According to the forms of motion of matter, laws can be distinguished: mechanical, physical, chemical, biological, social (public); in the main spheres of reality - the laws of nature, the laws of society, the laws of thinking; according to the degree of their generality, more precisely, according to the breadth of their scope - universal (dialectical), general (special), particular (specific); according to the mechanism of determination - dynamic and statistical, causal and non-causal; according to their importance and role - main and non-main; according to the depth of fundamentality - empirical (formulated directly on the basis of experimental data) and theoretical (formed by certain mental actions with idealized objects), etc.

One-sided (and therefore erroneous) interpretations of the law can be expressed as follows.

The concept of law is absolutized, simplified, fetishized. Here, the circumstance (noted by Hegel) is overlooked that this concept - undoubtedly important in itself - is only one of the steps in man's cognition of the unity of interdependence and the integrity of the world process. The law is only one of the forms of reflection of reality in cognition, one of the facets, moments of the scientific picture of the world in interconnection with others (reason, contradiction, etc.).

The objective nature of laws, their material source, is ignored. Reality does not have to conform to principles and laws, but vice versa - the latter are true only insofar as they correspond to the objective world.

It denies the possibility of people using the system of objective laws as the basis of their activity in its diverse forms - primarily in the sensual-objective. However, ignoring the requirements of objective laws still sooner or later makes itself felt, “avenges itself” (for example, pre-crisis and crisis phenomena in society).

Theory- an internally consistent system of knowledge about a part of reality, this is the highest form of scientific knowledge. According to K. Popper, "theories are networks designed to capture what we call the "world" in order to understand, explain and master it. We strive to make the cells of these networks ever smaller.

• Each theory includes the following components:
• initial empirical basis;
• a set of assumptions (postulates, hypotheses);
• logic - the rules of logical inference;
• theoretical statements, which are the basic theoretical knowledge.

There are qualitative theories that are built without a mathematical apparatus (psychoanalysis by Z. Freud, the theory of self-actualization by A. Maslow) and formalized theories in which the main conclusions are based on mathematical analysis of data (field theory by K. Levin, theory cognitive development of J. Piaget).
A theory is created not only to describe, but also to explain and predict reality. It is considered scientific if it is likely to be rejected (recognized as false) in the process of empirical verification. Such a check is carried out not on the entire volume of the objects under study - the general population, but on a part or subset of this population, which has all its properties. This part of the population is called the sample.

• The main rules for sampling are:
• 1) substantive criterion (criterion of operational validity), according to which the selection of subjects is determined by the subject and hypothesis of the study;
• 2) the criterion of equivalence (the criterion of internal validity), according to which the subjects must be equalized according to other (in contrast to the independent variable) characteristics;
• 3) the criterion of representativeness (the criterion of external validity), which determines the compliance of the subjects with that part of the population, to which the results of the study will then be transferred.

The theory, according to S.L. Rubinstein, "this is a circle of phenomena that develop and function according to their own internal laws. Each discipline that rises to the level of science must reveal the specific laws of determination of the studied phenomena." The main task of any science, including psychological science, is to reveal the main specific patterns of the phenomena being studied.
The theoretical foundation of psychological theory is the principle of determinism, i.e. the principle of causation of mental phenomena, aimed at explaining and revealing these causes. The functions of psychological theory are: 1) explanation of the occurrence of certain phenomena (for example, anxiety), or retrotelling; 2) prediction of their occurrence; 3) discovery and proof of links between several determinants and mental phenomena.
Features of the psychological theory are - the explanation of the causation of mental phenomena, the substantiation of the diversity of factors affecting the mental phenomenon, the differentiation of everyday and scientific ideas.