See also...
Philosophy Cheat Sheets for PhD Minimum Part 1
Philosophy and natural science: concepts of relationships (metaphysical, transcendental, anti-metaphysical, dialectical).
Nature as an object of philosophizing. Features of the knowledge of nature.
Natural science: its subject, essence, structure. The place of natural science in the system of sciences
Scientific picture of the world and its historical forms. Natural science picture of nature
The problem of objectivity of knowledge in modern natural sciences
Modern science and changing the formation of the worldview attitudes of technogenic civilization
Interaction of natural sciences with each other. Inanimate sciences and wildlife sciences
Convergence of natural-science and social-humanitarian knowledge in non-classical science
Natural science methods and their classification.
Mathematics and natural science. Possibilities of application of mathematics and computer modeling
Evolution of the concepts of space and time in the history of natural science
Philosophy and physics. Heuristic possibilities of natural philosophy
The problem of the discreteness of matter
Ideas of determinism and indeterminism in natural science
The principle of complementarity and its philosophical interpretations. Dialectics and quantum mechanics
Anthropic principle. The Universe as an "ecological niche" of humanity.
The problem of the origin of the universe. models of the universe.
The problem of the search for extraterrestrial civilizations as an interdisciplinary direction of scientific research. Concepts of noocosmology (I. Shklovsky, F. Drake, K. Sagan).
. Philosophical problems of chemistry. Correlation between physics and chemistry.
. The Problem of the Laws of Biology
Evolutionary theory: its development and philosophical interpretations.
Philosophy of ecology: preconditions for formation.
Stages of development of the scientific theory of the biosphere.
Interaction between man and nature: ways of its harmonization.
Philosophy of medicine and medicine as a science. Philosophical categories and concepts of medicine
The problem of the origin and essence of life in modern science and philosophy
The concept of information. Information-theoretical approach in modern science.
Artificial intelligence and the problem of consciousness in modern science and philosophy
Cybernetics and general systems theory, their connection with natural science.
The role of the ideas of nonlinear dynamics and synergetics in the development of modern science.
The role of modern natural science in overcoming global crises.
Post-non-classical natural science and the search for a new type of rationality. Historically developing, human-sized objects, complex systems as objects of research in post-non-classical natural science
Ethical problems of modern natural science. The crisis of the ideal of value-neutral scientific research
Natural sciences, technical sciences and technology
All Pages

Natural science methods and their classification.

With the advent of the need for knowledge, there was a need to analyze and evaluate various methods - i.e. in methodology.

Specific scientific methods reflect the research tactics, while general scientific methods reflect the strategy.

The method of cognition is a way of organizing means, methods of theoretical and practical activities.

The method is the main theoretical tool for obtaining and streamlining scientific knowledge.

Types of natural science methods:

- general (concerning any science) - the unity of the logical and historical, the ascent from the abstract to the concrete;

- special (concerning only one side of the object under study) - analysis, synthesis, comparison, induction, deduction, etc.;

- private, which operate only in a certain area of ​​​​knowledge.

Natural science methods:

observation - the initial source of information, a purposeful process of perceiving objects or phenomena, is used where it is impossible to set up a direct experiment, for example, in cosmology (special cases of observation - comparison and measurement);

analysis - based on the mental or real division of an object into parts, when one passes from an integral description of an object to its structure, composition, features and properties;

synthesis - based on the combination of various elements of the subject into a single whole and the generalization of the selected and studied features of the object;

induction - consists in formulating a logical conclusion based on generalizations of experimental and observational data; logical reasoning goes from the particular to the general, providing a better understanding and transition to a more general level of consideration of the problem;

deduction - a method of cognition, consisting in the transition from some general provisions to particular results;

hypothesis - an assumption put forward to resolve an uncertain situation, it is designed to explain or systematize some facts related to a given field of knowledge or outside it, but at the same time not contradict existing ones. The hypothesis must be confirmed or refuted;

comparison method - used in the quantitative comparison of the studied properties, parameters of objects or phenomena;

experiment - experimental determination of the parameters of the objects or objects under study;

modeling - creating a model of an object or object of interest to the researcher and conducting an experiment on it, observing and then superimposing the results obtained on the object under study.

General methods of cognition relate to any discipline and make it possible to connect all stages of the cognition process. These methods are used in any field of research and allow you to identify relationships and features of the objects under study. In the history of science, researchers refer to such methods as metaphysical and dialectical methods. Private methods of scientific knowledge are methods that are used only in a particular branch of science. Various methods of natural science (physics, chemistry, biology, ecology, etc.) are particular in relation to the general dialectical method of cognition. Sometimes private methods can be used outside the branches of natural science in which they originated. For example, physical and chemical methods are used in astronomy, biology, and ecology. Often, researchers apply a set of interrelated particular methods to the study of one subject. For example, ecology simultaneously uses the methods of physics, mathematics, chemistry, and biology. Particular methods of cognition are associated with special methods. Special methods examine certain features of the object under study. They can manifest themselves at the empirical and theoretical levels of cognition and be universal.

Observation is a purposeful process of perception of objects of reality, a sensual reflection of objects and phenomena, during which a person receives primary information about the world around him. Therefore, the study most often begins with observation, and only then the researchers move on to other methods. Observations are not associated with any theory, but the purpose of the observation is always associated with some problem situation. Observation presupposes the existence of a certain research plan, an assumption subject to analysis and verification. Observations are used where direct experiment cannot be done (in volcanology, cosmology). The results of the observation are recorded in a description that indicates those features and properties of the object under study that are the subject of study. The description should be as complete, accurate and objective as possible. It is the descriptions of the results of observation that constitute the empirical basis of science; on their basis, empirical generalizations, systematization and classification are created.

Measurement is the determination of quantitative values ​​(characteristics) of the studied sides or properties of an object using special technical devices. The units of measurement with which the obtained data are compared play an important role in the study.

An experiment is a more complex method of empirical knowledge compared to observation. It is a purposeful and strictly controlled influence of a researcher on an object or phenomenon of interest in order to study its various aspects, connections and relationships. In the course of an experimental study, a scientist intervenes in the natural course of processes, transforms the object of study. The specificity of the experiment is also that it allows you to see the object or process in its purest form. This is due to the maximum exclusion of the influence of extraneous factors.

Abstraction is a mental distraction from all the properties, connections and relationships of the object under study, which are considered insignificant. These are the models of a point, a straight line, a circle, a plane. The result of the abstraction process is called abstraction. Real objects in some tasks can be replaced by these abstractions (the Earth can be considered a material point when moving around the Sun, but not when moving along its surface).

Idealization is the operation of mentally highlighting one important property or relationship for a given theory, mentally constructing an object endowed with this property (relationship). As a result, the ideal object has only this property (relation). Science highlights in reality general patterns that are significant and repeat in various subjects, so we have to go to distractions from real objects. This is how such concepts as “atom”, “set”, “absolutely black body”, “ideal gas”, “continuous medium” are formed. The ideal objects obtained in this way do not actually exist, since in nature there cannot be objects and phenomena that have only one property or quality. When applying the theory, it is necessary to again compare the obtained and used ideal and abstract models with reality. Therefore, the choice of abstractions in accordance with their adequacy of the given theory and their subsequent exclusion are important.

Among the special universal research methods, analysis, synthesis, comparison, classification, analogy, modeling are distinguished.

Analysis is one of the initial stages of research, when one moves from an integral description of an object to its structure, composition, features and properties. Analysis is a method of scientific knowledge, which is based on the procedure of mental or real division of an object into its constituent parts and their separate study. It is impossible to know the essence of an object, only by highlighting in it the elements of which it consists. When the particulars of the object under study are studied by analysis, it is supplemented by synthesis.

Synthesis is a method of scientific knowledge, which is based on the combination of elements identified by analysis. Synthesis does not act as a method of constructing the whole, but as a method of representing the whole in the form of the only knowledge obtained through analysis. It shows the place and role of each element in the system, their relationship with other components. Analysis fixes mainly the specific that distinguishes the parts from each other, synthesis - generalizes the analytically identified and studied features of the object. Analysis and synthesis originate in the practical activity of man. A person has learned to mentally analyze and synthesize only on the basis of practical division, gradually comprehending what happens to an object when performing practical actions with it. Analysis and synthesis are components of the analytical-synthetic method of cognition.

Comparison is a method of scientific knowledge that allows you to establish the similarity and difference between the objects under study. Comparison underlies many natural science measurements that are an integral part of any experiment. Comparing objects with each other, a person gets the opportunity to correctly cognize them and thereby correctly orientate himself in the world around him, purposefully influence him. Comparison matters when objects that are really homogeneous and similar in essence are compared. The comparison method highlights the differences between the objects under study and forms the basis of any measurements, that is, the basis of experimental studies.

Classification is a method of scientific knowledge that combines into one class objects that are as similar as possible to each other in essential features. Classification makes it possible to reduce the accumulated diverse material to a relatively small number of classes, types, and forms and to reveal the initial units of analysis, to discover stable features and relationships. As a rule, classifications are expressed in the form of texts in natural languages, diagrams and tables.

Analogy is a method of cognition in which the transfer of knowledge obtained by considering an object to another, less studied, but similar to the first one in some essential properties. The analogy method is based on the similarity of objects according to a number of any signs, and the similarity is established as a result of comparing objects with each other. Thus, the analogy method is based on the comparison method.

The analogy method is closely related to the modeling method, which is the study of any objects using models with the subsequent transfer of the obtained data to the original. This method is based on the essential similarity of the original object and its model. In modern research, various types of modeling are used: subject, mental, symbolic, computer.

There are more important things in the world
wonderful discoveries is knowledge
the way they were made.
G. In Leibniz

What is a method? What is the difference between analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction?

Lesson-lecture

What is a method. Method in science they call a method of building knowledge, a form of practical and theoretical development of reality. Francis Bacon compared the method to a lamp that illuminates the way for a traveler in the dark: "Even the lame one walking on the road is ahead of the one who goes without a road." A correctly chosen method should be clear, logical, lead to a specific goal, and produce results. The doctrine of a system of methods is called methodology.

The methods of cognition that are used in scientific activity are empirical(practical, experimental) - observation, experiment and theoretical(logical, rational) - analysis, synthesis, comparison, classification, systematization, abstraction, generalization, modeling, induction, deduction. In real scientific knowledge, these methods are always used in unity. For example, when developing an experiment, a preliminary theoretical understanding of the problem is required, the formulation of a research hypothesis, and after the experiment, it is necessary to process the results using mathematical methods. Consider the features of some theoretical methods of cognition.

For example, all high school students can be divided into subclasses - "girls" and "boys". You can also choose another feature, such as height. In this case, the classification can be carried out in different ways: for example, select a height limit of 160 cm and classify students into subclasses “low” and “high” or break the growth scale into segments of 10 cm, then the classification will be more detailed. If we compare the results of such a classification over several years, this will allow us to empirically establish trends in the physical development of students.

CLASSIFICATION AND SYSTEMATIZATION. Classification allows you to organize the material under study, grouping the set (class) of the objects under study into subsets (subclasses) in accordance with the selected feature.

Classification as a method can be used to obtain new knowledge and even serve as a basis for building new scientific theories. In science, classifications of the same objects are usually used according to different criteria, depending on the goals. However, the sign (the basis for classification) is always chosen alone. For example, chemists subdivide the class "acids" into subclasses both by the degree of dissociation (strong and weak), and by the presence of oxygen (oxygen-containing and oxygen-free), and by physical properties (volatile - non-volatile; soluble - insoluble), and other features.

The classification may change in the course of the development of science. In the middle of the XX century. the study of various nuclear reactions led to the discovery of elementary (non-fissile) particles. Initially, they began to be classified by mass; this is how leptons (small), mesons (intermediate), baryons (large) and hyperons (superlarge) appeared. Further development of physics showed that classification by mass has little physical meaning, but the terms have been preserved, resulting in the appearance of leptons, much more massive than baryons.

Classification is conveniently reflected in the form of tables or diagrams (graphs). For example, the classification of the planets of the solar system, represented by a graph diagram, may look like this:

Please note that the planet Pluto in this classification represents a separate subclass, does not belong to either the terrestrial planets or the giant planets. This is a dwarf planet. Scientists note that Pluto is similar in properties to an asteroid, which can be many on the periphery of the solar system.

In the study of complex systems of nature, classification actually serves as the first step towards the construction of a natural scientific theory. The next, higher level is systematization (systematics). Systematization is carried out on the basis of the classification of a sufficiently large amount of material. At the same time, the most significant features are singled out, which allow presenting the accumulated material as a system that reflects all the various relationships between objects. It is necessary in cases where there is a variety of objects and the objects themselves are complex systems. The result of the systematization of scientific data is taxonomy, or, in other words, taxonomy. Systematics, as a field of science, developed in such fields of knowledge as biology, geology, linguistics, and ethnography.

A unit of taxonomy is called a taxon. In biology, taxa are, for example, a type, class, family, genus, order, etc. They are combined into a single system of taxa of various ranks according to a hierarchical principle. Such a system includes a description of all existing and extinct organisms, finds out the ways of their evolution. If scientists find a new species, then they must confirm its place in the overall system. Changes can be made to the system itself, which remains developing and dynamic. Systematics makes it easy to navigate the whole variety of organisms - about 1.5 million species of animals alone are known, and more than 500 thousand species of plants, not counting other groups of organisms. Modern biological systematics reflects Saint-Hilaire's law: "All the diversity of life forms forms a natural taxonomic system consisting of hierarchical groups of taxa of various ranks."

INDUCTION AND DEDUCTION. The path of knowledge, in which, on the basis of the systematization of accumulated information - from the particular to the general - they draw a conclusion about the existing pattern, is called by induction. This method as a method of studying nature was developed by the English philosopher Francis Bacon. He wrote: “It is necessary to take as many cases as possible - both those where the phenomenon under study is present, and those where it is absent, but where one would expect to meet it; then one must arrange them methodically ... and give the most probable explanation; finally, try to verify this explanation by further comparison with the facts.

Induction is not the only way to obtain scientific knowledge about the world. If experimental physics, chemistry and biology were built as sciences mainly due to induction, then theoretical physics, modern mathematics basically had a system of axioms - consistent, speculative, reliable statements from the point of view of common sense and the level of historical development of science. Then knowledge can be built on these axioms by deriving inferences from the general to the particular, by moving from the premise to the consequences. This method is called deduction. It was developed by Rene Descartes, a French philosopher and scientist.

A striking example of obtaining knowledge about one subject in different ways is the discovery of the laws of motion of celestial bodies. I. Kepler, based on a large amount of observational data on the movement of the planet Mars at the beginning of the 17th century. discovered by induction the empirical laws of planetary motion in the solar system. At the end of the same century, Newton deducted the generalized laws of motion of celestial bodies on the basis of the law of universal gravitation.

Portraits of F. Bacon and V. Livanov in the image of S. Holmes Why are the portraits of a scientist and a literary hero located side by side?

In real research activities, scientific research methods are interrelated.

• Using the reference literature, find and write down the definitions of the following theoretical research methods: analysis, synthesis, comparison, abstraction, generalization.
• Classify and draw up a diagram of the empirical and theoretical methods of scientific knowledge known to you.
• Do you agree with the point of view of the French writer Wownart: “Mind does not replace knowledge”? Justify the answer.

An imperturbable system in everything,

Consonance is complete in nature...

F.I. Tyutchev

In the most general and broad sense of the word, systematic research objects and phenomena of the world around us are understood in such a way that they are considered as parts and elements of a certain integral formation. These parts or elements, interacting with each other, determine new, integral properties of the system, which are absent from its individual elements. The main thing that defines the system is the interconnection and interaction of parts within the framework of the whole. Systemic research is characterized by a holistic consideration, the establishment of the interaction of the constituent parts or elements of the totality, the irreducibility of the properties of the whole to the properties of the parts.

The doctrine of systems arose in the middle of the 19th century, but became especially important in the 20th century. It is otherwise called the “system approach” to the objects under study, or “system analysis”.

A system is such a collection of elements or parts in which there is their mutual influence and mutual qualitative transformation. From this point of view, modern natural science has come close to becoming a real system, because all its parts are now in interaction. Everything in it is saturated with physics and chemistry, and at the same time there is no longer a single natural science in a refined, pure form.

A system is understood as a set of components and stable, recurring links between them. The process of systematic consideration of objects is widely used in various fields of social natural and technical sciences, in the practice of social planning and management in society, in solving complex social problems in the preparation and implementation of various targeted programs.

The main properties of the systems are as follows:

• - universal character, since all objects and phenomena of the surrounding world, without exception, can be considered as a system;
• - non-substantiality;
• - internal inconsistency (concreteness and abstractness, integrity and discreteness, continuity and discontinuity);
• - ability to interact;
• - orderliness and integrity;
• - stability and interdependence.

The ability of the processes and phenomena of the world to form systems, the presence of systems, the systemic structure of material reality and forms of cognition is called systemic. The concept of consistency reflects one of the characteristic features of reality - the ability to enter into such interactions, as a result of which new qualities are formed that are not inherent in the original objects of interaction.

Integrity, completeness, totality, wholeness and its own regularity of a thing - at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. they began to use these concepts in order to consider all things primarily in their original integral interconnection, in their structure and, thus, to do justice to the fact that an indication of the properties of the constituent parts can never explain the general state or general action of a thing; for a separate "part" can only be understood outside the whole, and the whole, as Aristotle taught, is greater than the sum of its parts. The whole is not "composed" of parts - not only the parts are different, in each of which the whole acts, for example, the organism is a dynamic integrity.

additive (lat. - subordinate; letters. - obtained by addition) and non-additive - concepts that reflect the types of relationships between the whole and its constituent parts (part and whole). The relation of additivity is often expressed as: "the whole is equal to the sum of the parts"; non-additivity relation: “the whole is greater than the sum of the parts” (superadditivity) “the whole is less than the sum of the parts” (subadditivity). Any material object has additive properties, in particular, the mass of a physical system is equal to the sum of the masses of the parts of the system. However, many properties of complex objects are non-additive, i.e. not reducible to the properties of the parts. In methodological terms, the principle of additivity implies the possibility of an exhaustive explanation of the properties of the whole from the properties of parts (or, conversely, the properties of parts from the properties of the whole), while the principles of non-additivity, excluding this possibility, require the use of other grounds to explain the properties of the whole (respectively, the properties of parts) .

The term "integrativity" is often used as a synonym for integrity. Nevertheless, when using it, they usually emphasize interest not in external factors of manifestation of integrity, but in deeper reasons for the formation of this property and, most importantly, in its preservation. Therefore, system-forming, system-preserving factors are called integrative, the most important of which are the heterogeneity and inconsistency of their elements. .

The pattern, referred to as communicativeness, is manifested in the fact that any system is not isolated and is connected by many communications with the environment, which is not homogeneous, but is a complex formation, contains a supersystem or even supersystems that set the requirements and limitations of the system under study, subsystems and systems of the same level with considered.

A system is a set of objects together with relations between objects, between their properties, which interact with each other in such a way that they cause the emergence of new, integral, systemic properties. For a better understanding of the nature of systems, consider their structure, structure and classification.

The structure of the system is characterized by the components from which it is formed. Such components are: subsystems, parts or elements of the system. Subsystems make up the largest parts of the system that have a certain autonomy, but at the same time they are subordinate and controlled by the system. Elements called the smallest units of the system.

System structure called the totality of those specific relationships and interactions, due to which new integral properties arise that are inherent only in the system and are absent from its individual components.

Classification of systems can be carried out according to various bases of division. First of all, all systems can be divided into material and ideal. Material systems include the overwhelming majority of systems of inorganic, organic and social character. They are called material systems because their contents and properties do not depend on the cognizing subject. The content and properties of ideal systems depend on the subject. The simplest classification of systems is their division into static and dynamic. Among dynamical systems, one usually singles out deterministic and probabilistic systems. Such a classification is based on the nature of predicting the dynamics of the behavior of systems. By the nature of interaction with the environment, systems are distinguished open and closed. Usually, there are those systems with which the given system interacts directly and which are called the environment or the external environment of the system. All real systems in nature and society are, as we already know, open and, therefore, interacting with the environment through the exchange of matter, energy and information. Systems are also classified into simple and complex. Simple systems are called systems with a small number of variables, and the relationships between which are amenable to mathematical processing and the derivation of universal laws. A complex system consists of a large number of variables and a large number of connections between them. A complex system has properties that its parts do not have and which are a consequence of the effect of the integrity of the system.

Among all complex systems, systems with the so-called feedback are of the greatest interest. An example is the fall of a stone and a cat. The stone is indifferent to us, but the cat is not. In the systems "cat - man" there is a feedback - between the impact and its reaction, which is not in the system stone - man.

If the behavior of the system enhances external influences - this is called positive feedback , if it decreases, then negative feedback. A special case is homeostatic feedbacks , which act to reduce external influence to zero. Example: human body temperature, which remains constant due to homeostatic feedback.

The feedback mechanism is designed to make the system more stable, reliable and efficient. In a technical, functional sense, the concept of feedback means that part of the output energy of the apparatus or machine is returned to the input. The feedback mechanism makes the system fundamentally different, increasing the degree of its internal organization and enabling its self-organization in the given system.

The presence of a feedback mechanism allows us to conclude that the system pursues some goals, i.e. that her behavior is appropriate. All purposeful behavior requires negative feedback. The scientific understanding of expediency was based on the discovery of objective goal-setting mechanisms in the studied subjects.

The emergence and application of the systematic method in science marks a significantly increased maturity of the current stage of its development.

The advantages and prospects of the systematic research method are as follows:

• 1. The system method makes it possible to reveal deeper patterns inherent in a wide class of interrelated phenomena. The subject of this theory is the establishment and derivation of those principles that are valid for systems as a whole.
• 2. The fundamental role of the system method lies in the fact that with its help the most complete expression of the unity of scientific knowledge is achieved. This unity is manifested, on the one hand, in the interconnection of various scientific disciplines, which is expressed in the emergence of new disciplines at the "junction" of old ones (physical chemistry, chemical physics, biophysics, biochemistry, biogeochemistry, etc.), and on the other hand, in the emergence of interdisciplinary areas research (cybernetics, synergetics, ecology, etc.).
• 3. The unity that is revealed in a systematic approach to science lies primarily in the establishment of links and relationships between systems that are very different in complexity of organization, level of knowledge and integrity of coverage, with the help of which the growth and development of our knowledge of nature is displayed. The more extensive the system, the more complex it is in terms of the level of knowledge and structural organization, the greater the range of phenomena it is able to explain. Thus, the unity of knowledge is directly dependent on its consistency.
• 4. From the standpoint of consistency, unity and integrity of scientific knowledge, it becomes possible to correctly approach the solution of such problems as reduction, or reduction of some theories of natural science to others, synthesis, or unification of theories that seem far from each other, their confirmation and refutation by observational and experimental data .
• 5. The systems approach fundamentally undermines the previous ideas about the natural-scientific picture of the world, when nature was considered as a simple set of various processes and phenomena, and not closely interconnected and interacting systems, different both in terms of their level of organization and complexity.

The system approach proceeds from the fact that the system as a whole does not arise in some mystical and irrational way, but as a result of a specific, specific interaction of quite certain real parts. As a result of such interaction of parts, new integral properties of the system are formed.

So, the process of cognition of natural and social systems can be successful only when the parts and the whole in them are studied not in opposition, but in interaction with each other, analysis is accompanied by synthesis.

At the same time, the views of supporters of the philosophical doctrine of holism seem erroneous. (Greek. "boks" - the whole), who believe that the whole always precedes the parts and is always more important than the parts. When applied to social systems, such principles justify the suppression of the individual by society, ignoring his desire for freedom and independence. At first glance, it may seem that the concept of holism about the priority of the whole over the part is consistent with the principles of the system method, which also emphasizes the great importance of the ideas of integrity, integration and unity in the knowledge of the phenomena and processes of nature and society. But upon closer acquaintance, it turns out that holism overly exaggerates the role the whole versus the part, the meaning of synthesis versus analysis. Therefore, it is the same one-sided concept as atomism and reductionism. The system method avoids these extremes in the knowledge of the world. It is precisely because of the interaction that new integral properties of the system are often formed. But the newly arisen integrity, in turn, begins to influence the parts, subordinating their functioning to the tasks and goals of a single integral system.

DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE

The process of scientific knowledge in its most general form is the solution of various kinds of problems that arise in the course of practical activities. The solution of the problems that arise in this case is achieved by using special techniques (methods) that allow one to move from what is already known to new knowledge. Such a system of techniques is usually called a method. The method is a set of techniques and operations of practical and theoretical knowledge of reality.

METHODS OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE

Each science uses different methods, which depend on the nature of the problems solved in it. However, the originality of scientific methods lies in the fact that they are relatively independent of the type of problems, but they are dependent on the level and depth of scientific research, which is manifested primarily in their role in research processes. In other words, in each research process, the combination of methods and their structure changes. Thanks to this, special forms (sides) of scientific knowledge arise, the most important of which are empirical, theoretical, and production-technical.

The empirical side implies the need to collect facts and information (establishing facts, registering them, accumulating), as well as describing them (stating the facts and their primary systematization).

The theoretical side is associated with explanation, generalization, creation of new theories, hypotheses, discovery of new laws, prediction of new facts within the framework of these theories. With their help, a scientific picture of the world is developed and thus the ideological function of science is carried out.

The production and technical side manifests itself as a direct production force of society, paving the way for the development of technology, but this already goes beyond the scope of proper scientific methods, since it is of an applied nature.

The means and methods of cognition correspond to the structure of science discussed above, the elements of which are at the same time stages in the development of scientific knowledge. So, empirical, experimental research involves a whole system of experimental and observational equipment (devices, including computers, measuring installations and tools), with the help of which new facts are established. Theoretical research involves the work of scientists aimed at explaining facts (presumably - with the help of hypotheses, verified and proven - with the help of theories and laws of science), at the formation of concepts that generalize experimental data. Both together carry out a test of what is known in practice.

The unity of its empirical and theoretical aspects underlies the methods of natural science. They are interconnected and condition each other. Their break, or the predominant development of one at the expense of the other, closes the way to the correct knowledge of nature - theory becomes pointless, experience -

Methods of natural science can be divided into the following groups:,

1. General methods concerning any subject, any science. These are various forms of a method that makes it possible to link together all aspects of the process of cognition, all its stages, for example, the method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete, the unity of the logical and historical. These are, rather, general philosophical methods of cognition.

2. Special methods concern only one side of the subject being studied or a certain method of research:

analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction. Special methods also include observation, measurement, comparison, and experiment.

In natural science, special methods of science are of utmost importance, therefore, within the framework of our course, it is necessary to consider their essence in more detail.

Observation is a purposeful strict process of perception of objects of reality that should not be changed. Historically, the method of observation develops as an integral part of the labor operation, which includes establishing the conformity of the product of labor with its planned model.

Observation as a method of cognizing reality is used either where an experiment is impossible or very difficult (in astronomy, volcanology, hydrology), or where the task is to study the natural functioning or behavior of an object (in ethology, social psychology, etc.). Observation as a method presupposes the presence of a research program, formed on the basis of past beliefs, established facts, accepted concepts. Measurement and comparison are special cases of the observation method.

Experiment - a method of cognition, with the help of which the phenomena of reality are investigated under controlled and controlled conditions. It differs from observation by intervention in the object under study, that is, by activity in relation to it. When conducting an experiment, the researcher is not limited to passive observation of phenomena, but consciously interferes in the natural course of their course by directly influencing the process under study or changing the conditions under which this process takes place.

The specificity of the experiment also lies in the fact that under normal conditions, the processes in nature are extremely complex and intricate, not amenable to complete control and management. Therefore, the task arises of organizing such a study in which it would be possible to trace the course of the process in a “pure” form. For these purposes, in the experiment, essential factors are separated from non-essential ones, and thereby greatly simplify the situation. As a result, such a simplification contributes to a deeper understanding of the phenomena and makes it possible to control the few factors and quantities that are essential for this process.

The development of natural science puts forward the problem of the rigor of observation and experiment. The fact is that they need special tools and devices, which have recently become so complex that they themselves begin to influence the object of observation and experiment, which, according to the conditions, should not be. This primarily applies to research in the field of microworld physics (quantum mechanics, quantum electrodynamics, etc.).

Analogy is a method of cognition in which there is a transfer of knowledge obtained during the consideration of any one object to another, less studied and currently being studied. The analogy method is based on the similarity of objects in a number of any signs, which allows you to get quite reliable knowledge about the subject being studied.

The use of the analogy method in scientific knowledge requires a certain amount of caution. Here it is extremely important to clearly identify the conditions under which it works most effectively. However, in those cases where it is possible to develop a system of clearly formulated rules for transferring knowledge from a model to a prototype, the results and conclusions by the analogy method become evidential.

Modeling is a method of scientific knowledge based on the study of any objects through their models. The appearance of this method is due to the fact that sometimes the object or phenomenon being studied is inaccessible to the direct intervention of the cognizing subject, or such intervention is inappropriate for a number of reasons. Modeling involves the transfer of research activities to another object, acting as a substitute for the object or phenomenon of interest to us. The substitute object is called the model, and the object of study is called the original, or prototype. In this case, the model acts as such a substitute for the prototype, which allows you to get certain knowledge about the latter.

Thus, the essence of modeling as a method of cognition is to replace the object of study with a model, and objects of both natural and artificial origin can be used as a model. The possibility of modeling is based on the fact that the model in a certain respect reflects some aspects of the prototype. When modeling, it is very important to have an appropriate theory or hypothesis that strictly indicates the limits and boundaries of permissible simplifications.

Modern science knows several types of modeling:

1) subject modeling, in which the study is carried out on a model that reproduces certain geometric, physical, dynamic or functional characteristics of the original object;

2) sign modeling, in which schemes, drawings, formulas act as models. The most important type of such modeling is mathematical modeling, produced by means of mathematics and logic;

3) mental modeling, in which mentally visual representations of these signs and operations with them are used instead of symbolic models.

Recently, a model experiment using computers, which are both a means and an object of experimental research, replacing the original, has become widespread. In this case, the algorithm (program) of the object functioning acts as a model.

Analysis is a method of scientific knowledge, which is based on the procedure of mental or real dismemberment of an object into its constituent parts. The dismemberment is aimed at the transition from the study of the whole to the study of its parts and is carried out by abstracting from the connection of the parts with each other.

Analysis is an organic component of any scientific research, which is usually its first stage, when the researcher moves from an undivided description of the object under study to revealing its structure, composition, as well as its properties and features.

Synthesis is a method of scientific knowledge, which is based on the procedure for combining various elements of an object into a single whole, a system, without which it is impossible to truly scientific knowledge of this subject. Synthesis acts not as a method of constructing the whole, but as a method of representing the whole in the form of a unity of knowledge obtained through analysis. In synthesis, not just a union occurs, but a generalization of the analytically distinguished and studied features of an object. The provisions obtained as a result of the synthesis are included in the theory of the object, which, being enriched and refined, determines the paths of a new scientific search.

Induction is a method of scientific knowledge, which is the formulation of a logical conclusion by summarizing the data of observation and experiment.

The immediate basis of inductive reasoning is the repetition of features in a number of objects of a certain class. A conclusion by induction is a conclusion about the general properties of all objects belonging to a given class, based on the observation of a fairly wide set of single facts. Usually inductive generalizations are considered as empirical truths, or empirical laws.

Distinguish between complete and incomplete induction. Complete induction builds a general conclusion based on the study of all objects or phenomena of a given class. As a result of complete induction, the resulting conclusion has the character of a reliable conclusion. The essence of incomplete induction is that it builds a general conclusion based on the observation of a limited number of facts, if among the latter there are no such that contradict the inductive reasoning. Therefore, it is natural that the truth obtained in this way is incomplete; here we obtain probabilistic knowledge that requires additional confirmation.

Deduction is a method of scientific knowledge, which consists in the transition from certain general premises to particular results-consequences.

Inference by deduction is built according to the following scheme;

all objects of class "A" have the property "B"; item "a" belongs to class "A"; so "a" has the property "B". In general, deduction as a method of cognition proceeds from already known laws and principles. Therefore, the deduction method does not allow | | acquire meaningful new knowledge. Deduction is - ^ is only a way of logical deployment of the system on - | assumptions based on initial knowledge, a way to identify the specific content of generally accepted premises.

The solution of any scientific problem includes the advancement of various conjectures, assumptions, and most often more or less substantiated hypotheses, with the help of which the researcher tries to explain facts that do not fit into the old theories. Hypotheses arise in uncertain situations, the explanation of which becomes relevant for science. In addition, at the level of empirical knowledge (as well as at the level of their explanation) there are often conflicting judgments. To solve these problems, hypotheses are required.

A hypothesis is any assumption, conjecture, or prediction put forward to eliminate a situation of uncertainty in scientific research. Therefore, a hypothesis is not reliable knowledge, but probable knowledge, the truth or falsity of which has not yet been established.

Any hypothesis must necessarily be substantiated either by the achieved knowledge of a given science or by new facts (uncertain knowledge is not used to substantiate a hypothesis). It should have the property of explaining all the facts that relate to a given field of knowledge, systematizing them, as well as facts outside this field, predicting the emergence of new facts (for example, the quantum hypothesis of M. Planck, put forward at the beginning of the 20th century, led to the creation of a quantum mechanics, quantum electrodynamics, and other theories). In this case, the hypothesis should not contradict the already existing facts.

The hypothesis must be either confirmed or refuted. To do this, it must have the properties of falsification and verifiability. Falsification is a procedure that establishes the falsity of a hypothesis as a result of experimental or theoretical verification. The requirement of falsifiability of hypotheses means that the subject of science can only be fundamentally refuted knowledge. Irrefutable knowledge (for example, the truth of religion) has nothing to do with science. At the same time, the results of the experiment by themselves cannot disprove the hypothesis. This requires an alternative hypothesis or theory that ensures the further development of knowledge. Otherwise, the first hypothesis is not rejected. Verification is the process of establishing the truth of a hypothesis or theory as a result of their empirical verification. Indirect verifiability is also possible, based on logical conclusions from directly verified facts.

3. Private methods are special methods that operate either only within a particular branch of science, or outside the branch where they originated. This is the method of ringing birds used in zoology. And the methods of physics used in other branches of natural science led to the creation of astrophysics, geophysics, crystal physics, etc. Often, a complex of interrelated particular methods is applied to the study of one subject. For example, molecular biology simultaneously uses the methods of physics, mathematics, chemistry, and cybernetics.

Our understanding of the essence of science will not be complete if we do not consider the question of the causes that gave rise to it. Here we immediately encounter a discussion about the time of the emergence of science.

When and why did science emerge? There are two extreme points of view on this issue. Supporters of one declare any generalized abstract knowledge to be scientific and attribute the emergence of science to that hoary antiquity, when man began to make the first tools of labor. The other extreme is the assignment of the genesis (origin) of science to that relatively late stage of history (XV-XVII centuries), when experimental natural science appears.

Modern science of science does not yet give an unequivocal answer to this question, since it considers science itself in several aspects. According to the main points of view, science is a body of knowledge and activities for the production of this knowledge; form of social consciousness; social institution;

direct productive force of society; system of professional (academic) training and reproduction of personnel. We have already named and talked in some detail about these aspects of science. Depending on which aspect we take into account, we will get different points of reference for the development of science:

Science as a system of personnel training has existed since the middle of the 19th century;

As a direct productive force - from the second half of the 20th century;

As a social institution - in modern times; /Y^>

As a form of social consciousness - in Ancient Greece;

As knowledge and activities for the production of this knowledge - since the beginning of human culture.

Different specific sciences also have different birth times. So, antiquity gave the world mathematics, modern times - modern natural science, in the XIX century. knowledge society emerges.

In order to understand this process, we must turn to history.

Science is a complex multifaceted social phenomenon: science cannot arise or develop outside of society. But science appears when special objective conditions are created for this: a more or less clear social demand for objective knowledge; the social possibility of singling out a special group of people whose main task is to answer this request; the beginning of the division of labor within this group; the accumulation of knowledge, skills, cognitive techniques, ways of symbolic expression and transmission of information (the presence of writing), which prepare the revolutionary process of the emergence and dissemination of a new type of knowledge - objective universally valid truths of science.

The totality of such conditions, as well as the emergence in the culture of human society of an independent sphere that meets the criteria of scientific character, takes shape in Ancient Greece in the 7th-6th centuries. BC.

To prove this, it is necessary to correlate the criteria of scientific character with the course of a real historical process and find out from what moment their correspondence begins. Recall the criteria of scientific character: science is not just a collection of knowledge, but also an activity to obtain new knowledge, which implies the existence of a special group of people specializing in this, relevant organizations coordinating research, as well as the availability of the necessary materials, technologies, means of fixing information (1 ); theoreticality - comprehension of truth for the sake of truth itself (2); rationality (3), consistency (4).

Before talking about the great upheaval in the spiritual life of society - the emergence of science that took place in Ancient Greece, it is necessary to study the situation in the Ancient East, traditionally considered the historical center of the birth of civilization and culture.

Some of / positions in the system of proper foundations of classical physics were considered true only due to those epistemological premises that were admitted as natural in physics of the 17th - 18th centuries. in relation to the planets, when describing their rotation around the Sun, the concept of an absolutely rigid, non-deformable body was widely used, which turned out to be suitable for solving certain problems. In Newtonian physics, space and time were considered as absolute entities, independent of matter, as an external background against which all processes In understanding the structure of matter, the atomistic hypothesis was widely used, but atoms were considered as indivisible, structureless particles endowed with mass, similar to material points.

Although all these assumptions were the result of strong idealizations of reality, they made it possible to abstract from many other properties of objects that were not essential for solving a certain kind of problems, and therefore were fully justified in physics at that stage of its development. But when these idealizations extended beyond the scope of their possible application, this led to a contradiction in the existing picture of the world, which did not fit many facts and laws of wave optics, theories of electromagnetic phenomena, thermodynamics, chemistry, biology, etc.

Therefore, it is very important to understand that it is impossible to absolutize epistemological premises. In the usual, smooth development of science, their absolutization is not very noticeable and does not interfere too much. But when the stage of revolution in science comes, new theories appear that require completely new epistemological premises, often incompatible with the epistemological premises of old theories. Thus, the above principles of classical mechanics were the result of acceptance of extremely strong epistemological presuppositions that seemed obvious at that level of development of science. All these principles were and remain true, of course, under quite specific epistemological prerequisites, under certain conditions for verifying their truth. In other words, under certain epistemological premises and a certain level of practice, these principles were, are and will always be true. This also suggests that there is no absolute truth. Truth always depends on epistemological prerequisites, which are not once and for all given and unchanged.

As an example, let's take modern physics, for which new principles are true, which are fundamentally different from the classical ones: the principle of the finite speed of propagation of physical interactions, which does not exceed the speed of light in vacuum, the principle of the relationship of the most general physical properties (space, time, gravity, etc.). ), the principles of relativity of the logical foundations of theories These principles are based on qualitatively different epistemological premises than the old principles, they are logically incompatible In this case, it cannot be argued that if the new principles are true, then the old ones are false, and vice versa , and new principles at the same time, but the scope of these principles will be different. Such a situation actually takes place in natural science, due to which both old theories (for example, classical mechanics) and new ones (for example, relativistic mechanics, quantum mechanics, etc.) are true.

THE LATEST REVOLUTION IN SCIENCE

The impetus, the beginning of the latest revolution in natural science, which led to the emergence of modern science, was a series of stunning discoveries in physics that destroyed the entire Cartesian-Newtonian cosmology. These include the discovery of electromagnetic waves by G. Hertz, short-wave electromagnetic radiation by K. Roentgen, radioactivity by A. Becquerel, electron by J. Thomson, light pressure by P.N. Lebedev, the introduction of the idea of ​​a quantum by M. Planck, the creation of the theory of relativity by A. Einstein, description of the process of radioactive decay by E. Rutherford. In 1913 - 1921 Based on the ideas about the atomic nucleus, electrons and quanta, N. Bohr creates a model of the atom, the development of which is carried out in accordance with the periodic system of elements of D.I. Mendeleev. This is the first stage of the newest revolution in physics and in all natural sciences. It is accompanied by the collapse of previous ideas about matter and its structure, properties, forms of motion and types of regularities, about space and time. This led to a crisis in physics and all natural science, which was a symptom of a deeper crisis in the metaphysical philosophical foundations of classical science.

The second stage of the revolution began in the mid-1920s. XX century and is associated with the creation of quantum mechanics and its combination with the theory of relativity in a new quantum-relativistic physical picture of the world.

At the end of the third decade of the 20th century, almost all the main postulates previously put forward by science turned out to be refuted. These included ideas about atoms as solid, indivisible and separate "bricks" of matter, about time and space as independent absolutes, about the strict causality of all phenomena, about the possibility of objective observation of nature.

Previous scientific ideas have been challenged literally from all sides. Newtonian solid atoms, as it has now become clear, are almost entirely filled with emptiness. Solid matter is no longer the most important natural substance. Three-dimensional space and one-dimensional time have become relative manifestations of the four-dimensional space-time continuum. Time flows differently for those who move at different speeds. Near heavy objects, time slows down, and under certain circumstances it can even stop completely. The laws of Euclidean geometry are no longer mandatory for nature management on the scale of the Universe. The planets move in their orbits not because they are attracted to the Sun by some force acting at a distance, but because the very space in which they move is curved. Subatomic phenomena reveal themselves as both particles and waves, demonstrating their dual nature. It became impossible to simultaneously calculate the location of a particle and measure its acceleration. The principle of uncertainty fundamentally undermined and replaced the old Laplacian determinism. Scientific observations and explanations could not move on without affecting the nature of the observed object. The physical world, seen through the eyes of a 20th-century physicist, resembled not so much a huge machine as an immense thought.

The beginning of the third stage of the revolution was the mastery of atomic energy in the 40s of our century and subsequent research, which is associated with the emergence of electronic computers and cybernetics. Also during this period, along with physics, chemistry, biology and the cycle of earth sciences began to lead. It should also be noted that since the middle of the 20th century, science has finally merged with technology, leading to the modern scientific and technological revolution.

The quantum-relativistic scientific picture of the world was the first result of the newest revolution in natural science.

Another result of the scientific revolution was the establishment of a non-classical style of thinking. The style of scientific thinking is a method of posing scientific problems, reasoning, presenting scientific results, conducting scientific discussions, etc., accepted in the scientific community. It regulates the entry of new ideas into the arsenal of general knowledge, forms the appropriate type of researcher. The latest revolution in science has led to the replacement of the contemplative style of thinking with activity. This style has the following features:

1. The understanding of the subject of knowledge has changed: now it is not reality in its pure form, fixed by living contemplation, but some of its slice, obtained as a result of certain theoretical and empirical methods of mastering this reality.

2. Science moved from the study of things, which were considered as immutable and capable of entering into certain relations, to the study of conditions, falling into which a thing not only behaves in a certain way, but only in them can be or not be something. Therefore, modern scientific theory begins with the identification of methods and conditions for studying an object.

3. The dependence of knowledge about an object on the means of cognition and the organization of knowledge corresponding to them determines the special role of the device, the experimental setup in modern scientific knowledge. Without a device, there is often no possibility of separating the subject of science (theory), since it is distinguished as a result of the interaction of the object with the device.

4. Analysis of only specific manifestations of the sides and properties of the object at different times, in different situations leads to an objective "scatter" of the final results of the study. The properties of an object also depend on its interaction with the device. This implies the legitimacy and equality of various types of description of the object, its various images. If classical science dealt with a single object, displayed in the only possible true way, then modern science deals with many projections of this object, but these projections cannot claim to be a complete comprehensive description of it.

5. The rejection of the contemplative and naive realism of the installations of classical science has led to an increase in the mathematization of modern science, the merging of fundamental and applied research, the study of extremely abstract, previously completely unknown to science types of realities - potential realities (quantum mechanics) and virtual realities (high-energy physics), which led to the interpenetration of fact and theory, to the impossibility of separating the empirical from the theoretical.

Modern science is distinguished by an increase in the level of its abstractness, the loss of visibility, which is a consequence of the mathematization of science, the possibility of operating with highly abstract structures that lack visual prototypes.

The logical foundations of science have also changed. Science began to use such a logical apparatus, which is most suitable for fixing a new activity approach to the analysis of the phenomena of reality. This is connected with the use of non-classical (non-Aristotelian) multi-valued logics, restrictions and refusals to use such classical logical techniques as the law of the excluded middle.

Finally, another result of the revolution in science was the development of the biospheric class of sciences and a new attitude towards the phenomenon of life. Life ceased to seem like a random phenomenon in the Universe, but began to be considered as a natural result of the self-development of matter, which also naturally led to the emergence of mind. The sciences of the biospheric class, which include soil science, biogeochemistry, biocenology, biogeography, study natural systems where there is an interpenetration of animate and inanimate nature, that is, there is an interconnection of different-quality natural phenomena. The biospheric sciences are based on the concept of natural history, the idea of ​​universal connection in nature. Life and the living are understood in them as an essential element of the world, effectively shaping this world, creating it in its present form.

MAIN FEATURES OF MODERN SCIENCE

Modern science is a science associated with the quantum-relativistic picture of the world. In almost all of its characteristics, it differs from classical science, so modern science is otherwise called non-classical science. As a qualitatively new state of science, it has its own characteristics.

1. Rejection of the recognition of classical mechanics as the leading science, its replacement by quantum-relativistic theories led to the destruction of the classical model of the world-mechanism. It was replaced by a model of the world-thought, based on the ideas of universal connection, variability and development.

The mechanistic and metaphysical nature of classical science: have been replaced by new dialectical attitudes:

: - classical mechanical determinism, which absolutely excludes the random element from the picture of the world, has been replaced by modern probabilistic determinism, which implies a variability of the picture of the world;

The passive role of the observer and experimenter in classical science has been replaced by a new activity approach, recognizing the indispensable influence of the researcher himself, instruments and conditions on the experiment and the results obtained in the course of it;

The desire to find the ultimate material fundamental principle of the world was replaced by the belief in the fundamental impossibility of doing this, the idea of ​​the inexhaustibility of matter in depth;

A new approach to understanding the nature of cognitive activity is based on the recognition of the activity of the researcher, who is not just a mirror of reality, but effectively forms its image;

Scientific knowledge is no longer understood as absolutely reliable, but only as relatively true, existing in a variety of theories containing elements of objectively true knowledge, which destroys the classical ideal of accurate and rigorous (quantitatively unlimitedly detailed) knowledge, causing the inaccuracy and laxity of modern science.

2. The picture of constantly changing nature is refracted in new research facilities:

Refusal to isolate the subject from environmental influences, which was characteristic of classical science;

Recognition of the dependence of the properties of an object on the specific situation in which it is located;

A system-holistic assessment of the behavior of an object, which is recognized as due to both the logic of internal change and the forms of interaction with other objects;

Dynamism - the transition from the study of equilibrium structural organizations to the analysis of non-equilibrium, non-stationary structures, open systems with feedback;

Anti-elementarism is a rejection of the desire to single out the elementary components of complex structures, a systematic analysis of dynamically operating open non-equilibrium systems.

3. The development of the biospheric class of sciences, as well as the concept of self-organization of matter, prove the non-random appearance of Life and Reason in the Universe; this takes us back to the problem of the purpose and meaning of the universe on a new level, speaks of the planned appearance of the mind, which will fully manifest itself in the future.

4. The confrontation between science and religion has reached its logical end. It is no exaggeration to say that science has become the religion of the 20th century. The combination of science with production, the scientific and technological revolution that began in the middle of the century, seemed to provide tangible evidence of the leading role of science in society. The paradox was that it was this tangible evidence that was destined to be decisive in achieving the opposite effect.

Interpretation of the received data. Observation is always carried out within the framework of some scientific theory in order to confirm or refute it. The same universal method of scientific knowledge is an experiment, when natural conditions are reproduced under artificial conditions. The indisputable advantage of the experiment is that it can be repeated many times, each time introducing new and new ...

But, as Gödel showed, there will always be an unformalizable remainder in a theory, i.e., no theory can be completely formalized. The formal method - even if it is carried out consistently - does not cover all the problems of the logic of scientific knowledge (which the logical positivists hoped for). 2. The axiomatic method is a method of constructing a scientific theory, in which it is based on some similarities ...

2. Structural levels of matter organization and the structure of natural science

The most important properties of matter are structural and systematic. Matter is structured in a certain way at all scale-time levels: from elementary particles to the Universe as a whole. Consistency means the orderliness of a set of interconnected elements that have integrity in relation to other objects or external conditions. Thus, the system is characterized by internal connections stronger than connections with the environment.

This implies the need not only to systematize, classify various objects of nature, but also to study the connections between them, or interactions. The most interesting from a fundamental point of view are the so-called fundamental interactions that underlie the whole variety of visible and known to science forces of action of one body on another. Each of them has its own physical field. Their number is small (currently three: gravitational, electroweak and strong), and there is hope that as a result of the creation of a general theory (superunification) they can be reduced to one Universal Force of Nature. This global problem has been on the agenda since the time of A. Einstein, whose genius was not enough to solve it, although he spent about 30 of the last years of his life on this. Hopes for such a possibility are connected with the fact that there is already one universal approach to the description of all types of fundamental interactions, namely, the quantum field one. Schematically, any interaction of two particles (bodies) in vacuum (i.e., without any transmitting media) can be described as an exchange of these particles with quanta of the corresponding field emitted by one of them and absorbed by the other. In this case, the field quanta, propagating at a finite speed (in vacuum at the speed of light), transfer energy and momentum, which is felt by the particles absorbing them as the action of a force. In connection with the finite speed of propagation of field quanta in space, the concept of "short-range interaction" was established. This means that any action, any information is transmitted from one body to another not instantly, but sequentially from point to point with a finite speed. The opposite point of view that prevailed before - "long-range action" - intuitively, a priori assuming that information about the position of any particle and its position spreads throughout the Universe instantly, did not stand the test of experience and is now only of historical value.

Particles have a rest mass, while field quanta do not have it. The particles are localized in one or another region of space, and the fields are distributed in it. But at the same time, both of them simultaneously possess both the properties of waves and the properties of particles (the so-called "particle-wave dualism"). The possibility of transformations matter - field - matter in the world of elementary particles reflects the internal unity of matter.

The structure of natural science. The most important structural units of matter can be lined up according to their characteristic sizes. Here it is important to understand that we are talking only about orders of magnitude characterizing the extent of a typical representative in space and the duration of typical processes in it. Despite the general methodological unity of natural science (see the next module), when the characteristic dimensions and times change by a colossal number of orders of magnitude, it becomes necessary to develop specific techniques for research and analysis. On an enlarged and very conditional basis (in the sense of the position of the boundaries), nature can be divided into three "floors" (or "worlds"): micro-, macro- and mega-.

The first is the world of elementary particles, fundamental fields and systems containing a small number of such particles. These are the roots of natural science, and the most fundamental problems of the universe are concentrated in them. The macroworld is the level of objects and phenomena around us that is familiar to us. Even it seems huge and extremely diverse, although it is only a small part of nature. Finally, the megaworld is made up of objects comparable in size to the Universe, the dimensions of which have not yet been established even in order of magnitude. A more detailed and also very conditional division of these levels led to the emergence of the corresponding sciences in natural science: physics, chemistry, biology, etc. Each of them contains about a hundred even narrower specific disciplines (for example, mechanics, thermodynamics, organic chemistry, zoology, botany, plant physiology, etc.). There are also interdisciplinary branches of science, for example, synergetics (from the Greek word joint, acting in concert) is a theory of self-organization in open non-equilibrium systems, covering all levels of the structure of matter and considering nature as a complex self-organizing system.

The macrocosm is accessible to direct observation, the events in it are familiar to us, we contact and interact with it every moment of time. It has been studied by man for many millennia and knowledge about it has a direct practical utility. Nevertheless, there are many unsolved mysteries of nature in it, and the vast majority of modern scientists continue to work in this area of ​​science.

Phenomena in micro and mega worlds practically do not manifest themselves at the everyday level, so many people are unaware of their existence. Others think that in a practical sense they have no meaning. In part, this point of view can be understood, because indeed, not only the influence, but also the very existence of elementary particles or, say, black holes in the depths of the Universe, cannot be established without sophisticated instruments. Even qualitative ideas about them cannot be derived from everyday experience, by analogy with known macroscopic events. Nevertheless, we ourselves, being macroscopic objects, consist 100% of a set of elementary particles organized and interconnected in a certain way, and are part of a gigantic Universe. So new knowledge about micro- and mega-worlds is important not only in the cognitive or ideological sense, but also leads to a deeper and clearer understanding of the essence of the processes occurring in the macro-world.

3. Methodology and methods of natural science

Methodology - this is a system of the most important principles and methods of organizing and implementing any type of activity, as well as the doctrine of this system. Each type of activity has its own methodology, which exists in an explicit or implicit form, formulated and fixed in any form or applied spontaneously and intuitively. Principles are the key provisions of the methodology, and methods are a set of specific techniques by which this or that type of activity is carried out (from the Greek "methodos" - the path to something).

The methodology of science in general and all scientific methods proceed from principle of causality . Its content has changed with the development of science, but the key position on which the scientific approach is based remains unchanged: everything that happens in nature is due to its own causes. The global task of science is to find out all significant cause-and-effect relationships in the surrounding world. They may be non-one-dimensional, complex, unknown, but this does not negate their existence. Nature does not leave any place for arbitrariness, for supernatural intervention of otherworldly forces.

It is very important to understand that the principle of causality is fundamental not only for the "exact" sciences, but also for history, sociology, jurisprudence, etc. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine, for example, an investigator investigating a criminal offense and allowing "miracles" in the form of evidence appearing or disappearing for no reason from a crime scene, a "supernatural" instinct for bringing money to a bank, or a sudden drop in the price of certain shares.

The famous French philosopher, physicist, mathematician and physiologist of the 17th century, R. Descartes, formulated the concept of method as follows: “By method, I mean precise and simple rules, strict adherence to which ... without wasting mental strength, but gradually and continuously increasing knowledge, contributes to the fact that the mind achieves true knowledge of everything that is available to it. In our time, the term "algorithm" rather corresponds to this understanding.

Usually there are several groups (levels) methods of knowledge , in particular, in almost all classifications there are:

 General scientific methods

 Private scientific methods

 Special methods

According to other criteria, they can be divided into empirical, theoretical and modeling methods .

In turn, all of them can be differentiated further. Thus, general scientific empirical methods include observation, experiment, measurement.

Observation is the simplest of them. At the initial stages of the development of any science, observations play an important role and form the empirical basis of science. It allows you to search, compare, classify objects, etc., however, as science develops, its value decreases. A more informative experiment is the purposeful impact on an object under strictly controlled conditions and the study of its behavior under these conditions.

The art of the experimenter, first of all, is precisely in creating such experimental conditions that allow you to “clear” the situation from the influence of a large number of side factors and leave one or two that you can consciously control and purposefully influence the object, studying its responses to these controlled influences. . At the same time, it is often not known in advance which factors are important and which are less important, whether all uncontrolled impacts are excluded and whether they create interference comparable or even greater than the object's response to a controlled impact. In the very formulation of the experiment, which limits the degree of freedom of the object and the set of factors acting on it, there is a great danger of “throwing the baby out of the bath with foam”.

Experiments can be qualitative or quantitative. The former can help in solving fundamental questions: does such an effect exist in nature? Does the rate of the process increase or decrease as pressure increases? Is this value really constant when conditions change over a wide range (for example, the charge of an electron, the speed of light in a vacuum, etc.)? etc. Quantitative experiments involving measurements are much more informative. Thus, the famous English physicist W. Thomson (Lord Kelvin), after whom the absolute temperature scale is named, wrote "every thing is known only as far as it can be measured." Measurement is the process of determining the quantitative characteristics of an object or process, expressed in pre-accepted units of measurement of a given value (for example, in meters, seconds, grams, Volts, degrees, etc.).

Abstraction, thought experiment, induction, deduction, etc. can be distinguished among the general scientific theoretical methods. abstraction consists in the mental simplification of the object by ignoring a number of its insignificant (in the given formulation of the problem) features and endowing it with several (sometimes one, two) most significant ones, for example, a material point, a birch, an unstable state. In the first example, all geometric and physical characteristics of a real body (volume, shape, material and its physical properties) are ignored, except for the mass, which is mentally concentrated in the center of mass. In the second, despite the fact that there are no two absolutely identical birches in the world, we still clearly understand that we are talking about a type of tree with its own characteristic features of architecture, shape and structure of leaves, etc., in the third example it is meant some abstract system (without considering its structure and composition), which, under the influence of negligibly small random causes, can leave its initial state, characterized by a certain set of parameters, and spontaneously pass into another, with a different set of characteristics. Of course, in this consideration we lose a lot of details that characterize the real object, but in return we get a simple scheme that allows for broad generalizations. Indeed, we cannot set ourselves the task of studying every birch on Earth, although they all differ from each other in some way.

A material point in different tasks can mean a molecule, a car, the Moon, the Earth, the Sun, etc. Such an abstraction is convenient for describing mechanical motion, but it is completely unproductive when analyzing, say, the physical or chemical properties of a real solid body. Many extremely useful abstractions have survived centuries and millennia (atom, geometric point and straight line), although they were filled with different meanings in different eras. Others - (caloric, world ether) did not stand the test of time and experience.

Another method of theoretical analysis is thought experiment . It is carried out with idealized objects, reflecting the most essential properties of real ones, and in a number of cases it makes it possible, by means of logical deductions, to obtain some preliminary results that help to simplify and narrow the scope for further detailed studies. Many fundamental problems in natural science have been solved by this method. So, Galileo discovered the law of inertia, mentally lowering, and then completely excluding the friction forces during movement, and Maxwell clarified the essence of the most important law for understanding the nature - the second law of thermodynamics - by mentally placing a hypothetical “demon” on the path of flying molecules, sorting them by speed .

Induction (from the Latin inductio - guidance, motivation, excitation) is a method of cognition, which consists in obtaining, deriving general judgments, rules, laws on the basis of individual facts. Those. induction is the movement of thought from the particular to the general and more universal. Strictly speaking, most of the most general laws of nature are obtained by induction, since it is completely unrealistic to study thoroughly absolutely all objects of this type. Usually, the question is only how many special cases need to be considered and then taken into account in order to draw a convincing generalizing conclusion on this basis. Skeptics believe that it is impossible to reliably prove anything in this way, since neither a thousand, nor a million, nor a billion facts confirming a general conclusion guarantee that the thousand and first or million and first fact will not contradict it.

The method opposite in the direction of movement of thought - from the general to the particular - is called deduction (from the Latin deductio - derivation). Remember the famous deductive method of detective Sherlock Holmes. Those. deduction and induction are complementary methods for constructing logical inferences.

Approximately in the same ratio among themselves are the methods analysis and synthesis , used in both empirical and theoretical studies. Analysis is the mental or real division of an object into its component parts and the study of them separately. Remember an ordinary polyclinic - an institution for the diagnosis and treatment of human diseases and its structure, represented by the offices of an oculist, neuropathologist, cardiologist, urologist, etc. In view of the exceptional complexity of the human body, it is much easier to teach a doctor to recognize diseases of individual organs or systems, and not the whole organism as a whole. In some cases, this approach gives the desired result, in more complex cases it does not. Therefore, the methods of analysis are supplemented by the method of synthesis, i.e. bringing together all knowledge about particular facts into a single coherent whole.

Over the past few decades, methods have been intensively developed modeling , which are younger, but more developed brothers of the method analogies . The conclusion "by analogy" is carried out by transferring the results obtained at one object to another - "similar". The degree of this similarity is determined by various criteria, most systematically introduced in the so-called "Theory of Similarity".

Modeling is usually divided into mental, physical and numerical (computer). Mental modeling of a real object or process by means of ideal objects and relationships is the most important method of science. Without a mental model, it is impossible to understand, interpret the results of an experiment, “design” a mathematical or computer model of a phenomenon, or set up a complex full-scale experiment. Known not only for his brilliant results in physics, but also for his witty remarks, Academician A. Migdal once said: “If mathematics is the art of avoiding calculations (“pure”, non-applied mathematics, as a rule, does not deal with calculations), then theoretical physics is the art of calculating without mathematics.” Of course, here the word "calculate" does not have a literal meaning - making careful, accurate calculations. It implies the art of predicting the result within the framework of a successful, adequate model in order of magnitude, or in the form of a ratio: if one value reaches a certain value, then the other will be equal to that, or the desired value must be greater than some critical value, or lie in a certain interval values. As a rule, in most tasks and real problems, a highly qualified scientist can come to such conclusions without conducting any experiments, but simply by constructing some qualitative model of the phenomenon in his mind. The art lies in making the model realistic and at the same time simple.

Physical (subject) modeling is carried out in cases where it is impossible or difficult (for technological or financial reasons) to conduct an experiment on the original object. For example, to determine the difficult-to-calculate aerodynamic drag of an aircraft, car, train, or hydrodynamic drag of a ship, a reduced-size model is usually built at the design stage and blown through it in special wind tunnels or hydraulic channels. In a sense, any natural experiment can be regarded as a physical model of some more complex situation.

Mathematical modeling is the most important kind of symbolic modeling. (They also include a variety of graph and topological representations, symbolic records of the structure of molecules and chemical reactions, and much more). In essence, a mathematical model is a system of equations supplemented with initial and boundary conditions and other data taken from experience. In order for such modeling to be effective, it is necessary, firstly, to compose a mental model adequate to the phenomenon under study, reflecting all the essential aspects of the phenomenon, and secondly, to solve a purely mathematical problem, which often has a very high level of complexity.

Finally, in recent decades, computer simulation methods have become very popular. Usually, these are numerical methods, i.e. not giving a solution to the problem in a general form, as in mathematical modeling. This means that each specific numerical version of the same problem requires a new calculation.

Particular and special methods are of interest to representatives of specific scientific disciplines, and we will not consider them.

Methodological foundations of natural science. Let us now proceed to a discussion of the most important and general methodological principles for natural science. principles of scientific creativity, ideals, criteria and norms of science . The most important of them are the following:

1. The materialistic basis of the worldview, objectivity, conviction in the cognizability of nature by rational methods. In turn, these requirements are directly related to the most important methodological concept of the conditionality of everything that happens in reality by causal relationships.

2. The use of strictly defined concepts, characteristics, values. At the same time, it is necessary to understand that it is impossible to define absolutely strictly any object or process. What is the ballpoint pen you are currently using to underline text? Where is the boundary between her and the surrounding air outside and between her and the ink inside on paper? What is the process of underlining text? Is it the physical process of transferring ink to paper, or the chemical process of the interaction of ink molecules with paper molecules, or the intellectual process of selecting and highlighting the most significant fragments of text? Obviously the choice depends on the nature of the task and the range of expected results. There are great dangers of subjectivism here, since the very formulation of the problem already contains a limited set of possible solutions.

3. Reproducibility of results under similar conditions. This principle implies that if the conditions for observing a certain phenomenon are recreated in another place (laboratory, production) or in the same place, but after some time, then the phenomenon or process will repeat again. Those. the only question is the severity of the experimental conditions, the accuracy of reproduction of all circumstances. As already mentioned, it is impossible to reproduce and measure anything absolutely exactly, but abstracting from insignificant details, you can repeat the main, fundamental result as many times as you like.

4. The last instance in the struggle of theories, ideas, concepts is experience (experiment). Only he is the supreme judge in the question of what is the Truth, and not the most elegant, logical or authoritative judgments. It is not necessary to see here the opposition of theory and experience. Purely theoretically, many objects, laws were discovered (for example, electromagnetic waves, many elementary particles, astronomical objects, etc.), but all these discoveries received the status of strict scientific facts only after experimental confirmation. Such an understanding of the relationship between the role of theory and practice in natural science did not arise immediately. Only in the early Middle Ages, in the fight against scholastic methods, the requirement for experimental verification of any conclusions was strengthened, no matter how authorities they expressed and logically harmonious and irreproachable did not seem. This principle was most clearly and concisely formulated, perhaps, by the English thinker of the 16th-17th centuries, Francis Bacon: “The criterion of truth is practice” in his work “The New Organon” (1620), written, as it were, in continuation and development of the famous work of Aristotle , more precisely, a collection of logical and methodological works "Organon" (from the Latin instrument, tool) in the 4th century BC. In a more artistic form, the same principle is expressed in the famous phrase of I. Goethe: "Theory, my friend, is dry, but the tree of life is green."

5. In the previous module, we already talked about the desire to quantify and describe the surrounding reality. In modern natural science, quantitative methods and mathematical apparatus play a large and ever-increasing role. So the "mathematization" of knowledge about nature can be considered an almost mandatory requirement.

6. At the beginning of this module, the role of modeling as a general scientific method of studying Nature was discussed. In connection with the desire to “mathematize” natural science, the creation of models of one kind or another becomes practically mandatory at all stages of research, whether it is thinking about an idea or a thought experiment, a full-scale experimental setup and experience, processing and interpreting the results obtained. Trying to express this situation in a laconic form of an aphorism, we can say "Modern natural science is a world of quantitative models." Without a reasonable, careful, qualified simplification of a real situation, process, object, it is impossible to make any effective mathematical approaches.

7. Already in the Middle Ages, it was obvious that the avalanche growth of various facts, data, theories requires their systematization and generalization. Otherwise, the flow of information will overwhelm and drown the fundamental, key provisions in a sea of ​​details. At the same time, new concepts, objects, principles, "essences" must be introduced into science with the greatest care, carefully checking whether they are reduced to known ones, whether they are just their varieties. This strict filter protects science from unjustified swelling, makes it in a broad sense "international", transparent, accessible for understanding and mastering by different sections of society. The danger of the opposite approach also became apparent at the dawn of classical natural science, and in the aphoristic form inherent in that time, the demand for laconism, generality, universality was formulated by the English philosopher of the 14th century. Occam: "Entities should not be multiplied unless absolutely necessary" or in a looser translation " do not invent unnecessary entities ". Often this most important methodological principle of science is called " Occam's razor ", cutting off unnecessary, unproductive and artificially introduced "essences" that clutter up science.

8. The need for integration, universalization of knowledge, reducing them to the smallest possible number of fundamental principles is an ideal that thinkers have been striving for since ancient Greece. At the same time, this was seen as the highest aesthetics of science, reflecting the harmony of the structure of the world. “The reduction of many to one is the fundamental principle of beauty,” Pythagoras formulated this principle so succinctly in the 5th century BC.

9. Since science is not a set of ossified rules, laws, theories, but a dynamically developing and continuously renewing living organism, the question regularly arises about the relationship between established “old” knowledge and emerging “new” knowledge. On the one hand, if a certain law, theory, doctrine, through numerous checks, control experiments, applications to practical problems, received the status of not a hypothesis, but a reliable truth, then they have already entered the golden fund of science. On the other hand, if new data or theories have appeared that contradict the old ones, but describe related phenomena better, more fully, or those that could not be explained within the framework of the old ideas, the latter should give way to the new. But how to give in? Just quietly retire into the archives of the history of science, freeing up a niche, or remain in the ranks, but in a different capacity, interacting in a certain way with new ideas? It is hard to imagine that, say, such a powerful theory as the classical mechanics of Sir I. Newton, which has been proving its validity and fruitfulness for three centuries (both in the world of movement of dust particles, balls, steam engines, ships, and in the world of planets) would turn out to be erroneous or unnecessary after the creation of quantum mechanics. Niels Bohr, a brilliant Danish physicist, one of the creators of quantum mechanics, thinking about this problem, formulated in 1918 the most important methodological approach: conformity principle . In short, it lies in the fact that a more universal new concept, a theory (if it is not speculative, but true in reality), should not cross out the well-mastered and repeatedly tested old teaching, but absorb it as a special case (Fig. 3.3). In this case, it is usually easy to formulate the conditions (limits of applicability) within which the old (usually simpler theory) will give correct results. Of course, they can also be obtained from a more general but more complex new theory, but this is not justified from the point of view of labor costs. Not only classical and quantum mechanics, but also, for example, thermodynamics of equilibrium systems and synergetics (the theory of self-organization in open non-equilibrium systems), classical Faraday-Maxwell electromagnetism and quantum electrodynamics, motion mechanics with small (compared to the speed of light) velocities and Einstein's special theory of relativity (mechanics of movement at near-light speeds), Darwinism and genetics, and many other branches of natural science. This, of course, does not exclude the withering away and oblivion of ideas, concepts, theories that have not passed the test of experiment (for example, the theory of caloric, perpetual motion, etc.), but in the overwhelming majority of cases, contradictions in science are removed in accordance with the principle of correspondence.