Scientific thinking and modern man. Modern science What will we do with the obtained material?

Casting a glance at world history, we discover three stages of knowledge: firstly, rationalization in general, which in one form or another is a universal human property, appears with man as such; ...secondly, the formation of a logically and methodically conscious science - Greek science and, in parallel, the beginnings scientific knowledge in China and India; thirdly, the emergence of modern science, growing from the end of the Middle Ages, decisively establishing itself from the 17th century. and unfolding in all its breadth since the 19th century. This science makes European culture - at least since the 17th century. - different from the culture of all other countries...
Science has three necessary characteristics: cognitive methods, reliability and general validity...
Modern science universal according to your spirit. There is no area that could isolate itself from it for a long time. Everything that happens in the world is subject to observation, consideration, research - natural phenomena, actions or statements of people, their creations and destinies. Religion and all authorities also become the object of study. And not only reality, but also all mental possibilities become the object of study...
Modern science, addressed to the individual, seeks to reveal its comprehensive connections... The idea of ​​the interconnectedness of all sciences gives rise to dissatisfaction with individual knowledge. Modern science is not only universal, but strives for a unification of sciences that can never be achieved.
Every science is defined by a method and a subject. Each is a perspective of the vision of the world, not one comprehends the world as such, each covers a segment of reality, but not reality - perhaps one side of reality, but not reality as a whole, however, each of them enters into a world that is limitless, but all -still one in the kaleidoscope of connections...
Questions and tasks: 1) What stages of cognition does the author highlight? 2) What does the philosopher understand by such a feature of modern science as universality? 3) How the text treats the problem of integration and differentiation scientific knowledge? 4) How does the author explain the impossibility of complete unification of the sciences?

Each of us, even being very far from professional scientific activity, constantly uses the fruits of science, embodied in a mass of modern things. But science enters our lives not only through the “door” of mass production, technical innovations, and everyday comfort.
Scientific ideas about the structure of the world, about the place and role of man in it ( scientific picture world) to one degree or another penetrate into the consciousness of people; The principles and approaches to understanding reality developed by science become guidelines in our everyday life.
From about the 17th century, as industrial society developed, the authority of science and methodology (principles, approaches) became increasingly stronger. scientific thinking. At the same time, alternative pictures of the world, including religious, and other ways of knowing (mystical insight, etc.) were gradually pushed to the periphery public consciousness.
However, in recent decades, in a number of countries with traditionally strong trust in science, the situation has begun to change. Many researchers note the increasing influence of extrascientific knowledge. In this regard, they even talk about the existing two types of people. The first type is science-oriented. Its representatives are characterized by activity, internal independence, openness to new ideas and experience, willingness to flexibly adapt to changes in work and life, and practicality. They are open to discussion and skeptical of authority.
The thinking of another type of personality, focused on non-scientific pictures of the world, is characterized by an orientation towards practical benefits, an interest in the mysterious and miraculous. These people, as a rule, do not look for evidence of their results and are not interested in checking them. Priority is given to the sensory-concrete rather than the abstract-theoretical form of knowledge. They believe that anyone can make a discovery, not just a professional researcher. For such people, the main support is faith, opinions, authority. (Which type would you classify yourself as?)
But why is the influence of alternative scientific views and attitudes growing? There are different explanations given here. Some believe that in the 20th century. science revealed its powerlessness in solving a number of problems important to humanity, moreover, it became the source of many new difficulties, leading Western civilization to decline. There is also such a point of view: humanity, like a pendulum, is constantly moving from the phase of preference for rational thinking and science to the phase of the decline of rationalism and an increasing craving for faith and revelation. Thus, the first flowering of enlightenment occurred in the era of classical Greece: it was then that the transition from mythological to rational thinking was made. By the end of the reign of Pericles, the pendulum swung in the opposite direction: all kinds of cults, magical healing, and astrological forecasts took center stage. Supporters of this point of view believe that modern humanity has entered the final phase of the flowering of rationalism, which began with the Age of Enlightenment.
But perhaps those who believe that civilization has already accumulated a certain fatigue from the burden of choice and responsibility and that astrological predestination is preferable to scientific criticism and constant doubts are right. (What do you think?)
Basic concepts: scientific theory, empirical law, hypothesis, scientific experiment, modeling, scientific revolution.
Terms: differentiation, integration.

1. Here is how the German philosopher K. Popper proved the unscientific nature of astrology: the prophecies of astrologers are uncertain, they are difficult to verify, many prophecies did not come true, astrologers use an unsatisfactory way of explaining their failures (predicting the individual future is a difficult task; mutual arrangement stars and planets are constantly changing, etc.).
What criteria for distinguishing scientific and extra-scientific knowledge can be identified using this example? Name other criteria.
2. Expand your understanding of Pushkin’s lines “Science reduces our experiences of fast-flowing life.”
3. L. Pasteur argued: “Science should be the most sublime embodiment of the fatherland, for of all nations the first will always be the one that is ahead of others in the field of thought and mental activity.”
Is this conclusion confirmed by the course of history?
4. Find errors in the following text.
Rigorous empirical knowledge is accumulated only through observation. Close to observation is experiment. But it no longer gives strict knowledge, because a person here interferes with the nature of the subject being studied: he places it in an environment unusual for it, tests it in extreme conditions. Thus, the knowledge obtained during the experiment can only be partially considered true and objective.

Read an excerpt from the work of the German philosopher K. Jaspers “The Origins of History and Its Purpose.”

Modern science

Casting a glance at world history, we discover three stages of knowledge: firstly, rationalization in general, which in one form or another is a universal human property, appears with man as such; ...secondly, the formation of logically and methodically conscious science - Greek science and, in parallel, the beginnings of scientific knowledge in China and India; thirdly, the emergence of modern science, growing from the end of the Middle Ages, decisively establishing itself from the 17th century. and unfolding in all its breadth since the 19th century. This science makes European culture - at least since the 17th century. - different from the culture of all other countries...
Science has three necessary characteristics: cognitive methods, reliability and general validity...
Modern science universal according to your spirit. There is no area that could isolate itself from it for a long time. Everything that happens in the world is subject to observation, consideration, research - natural phenomena, actions or statements of people, their creations and destinies. Religion and all authorities also become the object of study. And not only reality, but also all mental possibilities become the object of study...
Modern science, addressed to the individual, seeks to reveal its comprehensive connections... The idea of ​​the interconnectedness of all sciences gives rise to dissatisfaction with individual knowledge. Modern science is not only universal, but strives for a unification of sciences that can never be achieved.
Every science is defined by a method and a subject. Each is a perspective of the vision of the world, not one comprehends the world as such, each covers a segment of reality, but not reality - perhaps one side of reality, but not reality as a whole, however, each of them enters into a world that is limitless, but all -still one in the kaleidoscope of connections...
Questions and tasks: 1) What stages of cognition does the author highlight? 2) What does the philosopher understand by such a feature of modern science as universality? 3) How does the text treat the problem of integration and differentiation of scientific knowledge? 4) How does the author explain the impossibility of complete unification of the sciences?

Social cognition

Let's imagine a scientist bending over a microscope, in front of the control panel of a microparticle accelerator or the terminal of a modern telescope. The study of the living, micro- and macro-world includes scrupulous observation, verified calculations and experiments, and the construction of mathematical or computer models. When studying society, scientists also observe, compare, calculate, and sometimes experiment (for example, selecting a space crew or a polar expedition based on the principle of psychological compatibility). Does this mean that the same methods are used to study society as to study nature? Scientists have answered this question in different ways.

SCIENTIFIC THINKING AND MODERN MAN

Each of us, even being very far from professional scientific activity, constantly uses the fruits of science, embodied in the mass of modern things. But science enters our lives not only through the “door” of mass production, technical innovations, and everyday comfort.
Scientific ideas about the structure of the world, about the place and role of man in it (the scientific picture of the world) to one degree or another penetrate into the consciousness of people; The principles and approaches to understanding reality developed by science become guidelines in our everyday life.
From about the 17th century, as industrial society developed, the authority of science and the methodology (principles, approaches) of scientific thinking became increasingly stronger. At the same time, alternative pictures of the world, including religious ones, and other ways of knowing (mystical insight, etc.) were gradually forced out to the periphery of public consciousness.
However, in recent decades, in a number of countries with traditionally strong trust in science, the situation has begun to change. Many researchers note the increasing influence of extrascientific knowledge. In this regard, they even talk about the existing two types of people. The first type is science-oriented. Its representatives are characterized by activity, internal independence, openness to new ideas and experience, willingness to flexibly adapt to changes in work and life, and practicality. They are open to discussion and skeptical of authority.
The thinking of another type of personality, focused on non-scientific pictures of the world, is characterized by an orientation towards practical benefits, an interest in the mysterious and miraculous. These people, as a rule, do not look for evidence of their results and are not interested in checking them. Priority is given to the sensory-concrete rather than the abstract-theoretical form of knowledge. They believe that anyone can make a discovery, not just a professional researcher. For such people, the main support is faith, opinions, authority. (Which type would you classify yourself as?)
But why is the influence of alternative scientific views and attitudes growing? There are different explanations given here. Some believe that in the 20th century. science revealed its powerlessness in solving a number of problems important to humanity, moreover, it became the source of many new difficulties, leading Western civilization to decline. There is also such a point of view: humanity, like a pendulum, is constantly moving from the phase of preference for rational thinking and science to the phase of the decline of rationalism and an increasing craving for faith and revelation. Thus, the first flowering of enlightenment occurred in the era of classical Greece: it was then that the transition from mythological to rational thinking was made. By the end of the reign of Pericles, the pendulum swung in the opposite direction: all kinds of cults, magical healing, and astrological forecasts took center stage. Supporters of this point of view believe that modern humanity has entered the final phase of the flowering of rationalism, which began with the Age of Enlightenment.
But perhaps those who believe that civilization has already accumulated a certain fatigue from the burden of choice and responsibility and that astrological predestination is preferable to scientific criticism and constant doubts are right. (What do you think?)
Basic concepts: scientific theory, empirical law, hypothesis, scientific experiment, modeling, scientific revolution.
Terms: differentiation, integration.

1. Here is how the German philosopher K. Popper proved the unscientific nature of astrology: the prophecies of astrologers are vague, they are difficult to verify, many prophecies did not come true, astrologers use an unsatisfactory way of explaining their failures (predicting the individual future is a difficult task; the relative positions of stars and planets are constantly changing, etc. . P.).
What criteria for distinguishing scientific and extra-scientific knowledge can be identified using this example? Name other criteria.
2. Expand your understanding of Pushkin’s lines “Science reduces our experiences of fast-flowing life.”
3. L. Pasteur argued: “Science should be the most sublime embodiment of the fatherland, for of all nations the first will always be the one that is ahead of others in the field of thought and mental activity.”
Is this conclusion confirmed by the course of history?
4. Find errors in the following text.
Rigorous empirical knowledge is accumulated only through observation. Close to observation is experiment. But it no longer provides strict knowledge, because a person here interferes with the nature of the subject being studied: he places it in an environment unusual for it, tests it in extreme conditions. Thus, the knowledge obtained during the experiment can only be partially considered true and objective.

Read an excerpt from the work of the German philosopher K. Jaspers “The Origins of History and Its Purpose.”

Modern science

Casting a glance at world history, we discover three stages of knowledge: firstly, rationalization in general, which in one form or another is a universal human property, appears with man as such; ...secondly, the formation of logically and methodically conscious science - Greek science and, in parallel, the beginnings of scientific knowledge in China and India; thirdly, the emergence of modern science, growing from the end of the Middle Ages, decisively establishing itself from the 17th century. and unfolding in all its breadth since the 19th century. This science makes European culture - at least since the 17th century. - different from the culture of all other countries...
Science has three necessary characteristics: cognitive methods, reliability and general validity...
Modern science universal according to your spirit. There is no area that could isolate itself from it for a long time. Everything that happens in the world is subject to observation, consideration, research - natural phenomena, actions or statements of people, their creations and destinies. Religion and all authorities also become the object of study. And not only reality, but also all mental possibilities become the object of study...
Modern science, addressed to the individual, seeks to reveal its comprehensive connections... The idea of ​​the interconnectedness of all sciences gives rise to dissatisfaction with individual knowledge. Modern science is not only universal, but strives for a unification of sciences that can never be achieved.
Every science is defined by a method and a subject. Each is a perspective of the vision of the world, not one comprehends the world as such, each covers a segment of reality, but not reality - perhaps one side of reality, but not reality as a whole, however, each of them enters into a world that is limitless, but all -still one in the kaleidoscope of connections...
Questions and tasks: 1) What stages of cognition does the author highlight? 2) What does the philosopher understand by such a feature of modern science as universality? 3) How does the text treat the problem of integration and differentiation of scientific knowledge? 4) How does the author explain the impossibility of complete unification of the sciences?

§ 25. Social cognition

Let's imagine a scientist bending over a microscope, in front of the control panel of a microparticle accelerator or the terminal of a modern telescope. The study of the living, micro- and macro-world includes scrupulous observation, verified calculations and experiments, and the construction of mathematical or computer models. When studying society, scientists also observe, compare, calculate, and sometimes experiment (for example, selecting a space crew or a polar expedition based on the principle of psychological compatibility). Does this mean that the same methods are used to study society as to study nature? Scientists have answered this question in different ways.

SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE OF NATURE AND SOCIETY

The idea that all sciences should use the methods of mathematical science originated in the 18th century. under the influence of the successes of natural science that amazed the imagination of contemporaries, and especially the technical applications of mechanics. The development of technology contributed to an unprecedented rise in social productive forces and transformed daily life of people. The enormous cultural authority of the natural sciences predetermined the role of mechanics as a model in accordance with which both natural and social Sciences. The founder of sociology, the French scientist O. Comte, believed that the science of society should study the connections between observed social phenomena using natural scientific methods, so he called sociology “social physics.” His follower, E. Durkheim, believed social facts all social phenomena that influence a person and encourage him to behave in a certain way. He included legal and moral norms, customary ways of doing things, social movements, and even fashion as social facts. E. Durkheim considered the main principle of the scientific method in sociology treating social facts as things. This meant identifying the connection and dependence between them, just as one studies the causal relationship of natural phenomena.
Widespread naturalistic ideas about society V late XIX- early 20th century contributed to the objective social processes of the formation of industrial capitalism - the decomposition of the social structures of traditional society and the formation of a mass society. It is in a mass society, deprived of the complex social hierarchy characteristic of feudalism, that the opportunity arises to widely use mathematical methods to study social phenomena.
But not all scientists shared such naturalistic views. Thus, the German philosopher W. Dilthey believed that the “sciences of the spirit” are fundamentally different from the “sciences of nature” in that the former deal with man - the only creature in the Universe capable of not only cognition, but also experience. This is a special activity of human consciousness, arising from the connection between the phenomena of his inner life. Realizing his own involvement in the world of society and culture, the scientist empathizes, i.e. understands other people, compatriots and contemporaries, texts and meanings of other eras and other cultures. W. Dilthey was convinced that the fundamental difference between the natural and social sciences lies in the method: the “spiritual sciences” are understanding, whereas the natural sciences are explanatory.
Another German philosopher, a follower of I. Kant, G. Rickert, also believed that the sciences of culture differ significantly from the sciences of nature. Their main difference, in his opinion, is the researcher’s approach to studying his object. Studying nature, a scientist seeks to discover general, that is, what is similar in the phenomenon being studied to other phenomena of the same type. In the cultural sciences, the scientist’s interest is directed mainly to individual, i.e., on what is specific to a given phenomenon. It is the unique individuality of the object, G. Rickert is convinced, that gives it meaning cultural object, Unlike objects of nature. And although some social sciences, such as economics, can also use methods of generalization, cultural research is more like the work of a historian who is interested in the individual and unique in the events of the past. At the same time, when working with cultural material, a scientist always correlates it with generally significant values: moral, political, economic, artistic, religious. Attribution to universal values, according to the scientist, allows the sciences of culture to be just as objective, as well as the natural sciences.
What are the difficulties of objective scientific knowledge of society?
In classical natural science, the objectivity of scientific research was understood as the study of nature independently of man, that is, nature “in itself.” Therefore, a scientist studying the interaction of elementary particles or the behavior of animals tends to exclude himself from the research situation. But he is still included in it, albeit in a special way: he “constrained nature with the art of the observer” and formulated a question addressed to nature to which he wants to receive an answer. But a social scientist cannot exclude himself from the process of social development, and the results of his research affect both his own life and the future of his children. Social cognition affects interests people - stable social orientations that guide people in everyday life and business relationships. Modern scientists talk about the possibility of different interpretations of phenomena public life - pluralism of opinions. They are generated not only by personal biases, preferences or differences in life experience, but also by incompatible social interests, expressing the different position of people in the system of social relations. This explains the diversity of views and assessments that distinguishes the results of social cognition from generally valid judgments in natural science. M. Weber gives an example of the impact of corporate interests on social cognition. When compiling crime statistics, the police, protecting the “honor of the uniform,” tend to present any unsolved murder as a suicide, while the church, guided by the idea of ​​suicide as a grave sin, tends to interpret dubious cases as crimes. English philosopher of the 17th century. T. Hobbes even believed that if geometry affected the interests of people, then it would be disputed or hushed up. The impact of social interests on social cognition is most clearly manifested in ideologies - theoretical expression of social interests in election declarations and programs political parties and broad social movements. When comparing the ideological attitudes of various political parties or election associations, first of all it is necessary to find out the interests of which social forces they express.
If we comprehend nature using the concepts of cause and effect, then human action is by studying the motives, goals and intentions of man. And if a cause in nature always entails an effect, then the motives and intentions of one person, interacting in a complex way with the motives and intentions of other people, as well as the traditions, morals and laws of society, cannot always be embodied in actions. Conscious abstinence from an action that is prescribed by social norms and socially significant motives of behavior, for example, refusal to sell a product at a set price, failure to appear in court, evasion of responsibility, as well as missed opportunity and criminal inactivity, are no less objective social facts than social actions.
Scientific social knowledge deals with human actions and their consequences, that is, with events in culture and social life. This world is humanized, it is conscious and meaningful. Concept meaning expresses a specifically human attitude towards a subject. M. Weber believed that sociological research society is aimed at understanding the meaning of individual human actions, which ultimately make up all social life. But how is it possible to scientifically study the subjective dimensions of social actions: meanings, motives, intentions? Indeed, unlike the objects of natural sciences, they are immaterial and express a human attitude towards objects of any kind, and not objects in themselves.
As we see, the difficulties on the path of objective scientific knowledge of society are great. What should a scientist be guided by in order to achieve a sufficient level of accuracy and objectivity of social knowledge?

BASIC PRINCIPLES OF SCIENTIFIC SOCIAL COGNITION

In order to overcome these difficulties, when studying the phenomena of social life, the scientist is guided by scientific methods. A scientist studying society resorts to general scientific that is, the methods of obtaining knowledge and the norms of scientific research characteristic of both natural and social sciences. These include reliance on facts, rigor and unambiguity of theoretical concepts, evidence of reasoning and their logical consistency, objectivity of scientific conclusions, i.e., independence of scientific truth from personal desires, opinions and social prejudices.
But knowledge of society also has its own characteristics. In contrast to the natural scientist, who strives to exclude his own uncontrolled influence on the subject of research and sees this as a condition for achieving the objectivity of scientific knowledge, the social scientist studies an object to which he himself belongs: he and the researcher social life, and its participant. Moreover, the condition for successful knowledge of other people, cultures and historical eras is the ability of empathy, sympathy, the ability to see and feel the way other people see and feel. This takes on particular significance in a situation of “participant observation,” in which the scientist himself strives to act like those whom he observes. But at the same time, he must be extremely attentive to the premises of his thinking, which are drawn from his own life, from the traditions of his education, upbringing and scientific school: inattention to them can distort the picture of the life of other people and cultures. Therefore, M. Weber called on the scientist to “keep a distance from the object,” warning that an uncritical attitude to one’s own sociocultural experience when studying someone else’s is as reprehensible as selfishness in everyday life.
A social scientist strives for a complete description of the characteristics of the object being studied. This means that any social phenomenon must be considered in its historical development and in mutual connection with other social phenomena, i.e. in historical And cultural context. In order to understand, for example, the social nature of the Jacobin terror, it is necessary to consider it not as an isolated event, but in the context of the Great French Revolution, as one of the stages of its development. But it is also necessary to approach the Great French Revolution itself specifically historically, consider its systemic connections with other events of European history and, at the same time, not lose sight of how this event was understood and experienced by representatives of various strata of the then society.
The science of history helps us understand the connection of times, without which the events of the past would have broken up into a series of separate episodes. It relies on historical documents - evidence that allows us to get an idea of ​​​​the life of our ancestors. However, a fact of science is not an event in life. Nor is it a scrupulous description of what is happening. A scientific fact always involves identifying meaningful in the social phenomenon being studied. It includes the scientist’s assessment of his role in what is happening, interpretation social fact. Creating a holistic scientific theory, the scientist determines which of the facts known to him are significant for understanding social patterns. His theoretical position, on the one hand, determines the direction of the search for new facts, the existence of which is predicted by his concept, and on the other hand, the discovery of other facts that are not consistent with this concept forces it to be clarified, and sometimes to reject it as incorrect.

IDEAL TYPE - INSTRUMENT OF SCIENTIFIC SOCIAL COGNITION

In scientific social cognition, as well as in the natural sciences, they use scientific concepts. When studying social actions, scientists resort to the use of concepts of a special kind - ideal types.
The ideal type allows us to capture the most important, consistently recurring features of the subject of a certain social action. Thus, describing the ideal type of a capitalist entrepreneur, M. Weber paints a portrait young man an ascetic lifestyle, a Protestant religion, which travels from village to city day after day, organizing the delivery of raw materials to processing sites, and finished goods to the market. Of course, the ideal type lacks the concreteness of an artistic image. We don’t know the young man’s name, where he lives, or what kind of product he produces. But it is precisely this generalization of characteristics that is important for scientific social cognition: while losing to the artistic understanding of the world in concrete terms, the ideal type allows one to go beyond the existing situation and describe the typical, i.e., steadily repeating, characteristics of the subject of a certain social action, wherever and under whatever conditions circumstances it did not happen. The ideal-typing methodology allowed M. Weber to theoretically express the laws of the process of formation of capitalism in Western Europe regardless of the variety of specific conditions in different countries.
The use of ideal types helps the scientist gain knowledge about stable and systematically reproduced relationships of large groups of people, classes, and states. With the help of ideal types, a scientist can look into the future, but only to the extent that the features of modernity, presented as typical, will retain their significance in the future.
Ideal type as a tool social analysis is not a description of the behavior of a specific person. He is a character in a scientific picture of the social process, which reproduces real life in its essential features.

ORDINARY AND SCIENTIFIC SOCIAL KNOWLEDGE

Until now we have talked only about scientific social knowledge. But the concept of social knowledge is much broader. It covers the entire body of accumulated knowledge about man and society, enshrined both in oral tradition and in books, scientific publications, works of art and historical monuments, which for scientists play the role of documents.
Social knowledge can be not only scientific, but also ordinary, that is, acquired in everyday life. Scientific knowledge is always conscious, systematized and meets the rules of the scientific method. Ordinary knowledge, as a rule, is not systematized or even consciously understood - it can exist in the form of habit or custom. And if scientific knowledge is carried out by a special category of professionally trained people united in the scientific community, then the subject of everyday knowledge is society as a whole. One of the features of scientific social knowledge in comparison with natural science is that the object of scientific social knowledge, as a rule, has already been mastered in one way or another by everyday thinking. And if the scientific picture of nature means nothing for physical fields and particles, then the scientific picture of society reflects a reality that is already interpreted by people in everyday life. And this social world, already comprehended at the level of everyday knowledge, must, in turn, be comprehended by the scientist in accordance with the rules of the scientific method. However, this does not mean that ordinary knowledge is erroneous and scientific knowledge is true. Modern scientists believe that both types of social knowledge are equally important in social life. Science must take into account the ordinary, including erroneous, ideas of people, and study the public opinion of all layers of society.
Modern society introduces into everyday life not only complex technical devices, but also complex shapes social relationships that require awareness in economic, political, legal and other areas. That's why modern man in everyday life cannot do without turning to elements of scientific knowledge. IN modern society everyday knowledge includes elements of scientific knowledge. Of course, the person who picks up the telephone does not necessarily know what technical devices make it possible to reproduce the sound of his voice hundreds of kilometers away, but the idea that the telephone transmits sound vibrations, somehow converting them into electrical ones, is still It has. Modern man shows similar awareness in relation to scientific social knowledge. Anyone who opened a bank account is not necessarily familiar with the laws of circulation of paper money. But he has an idea about money as a way of regulating his social relations with his employer, about inflation, and bank interest. The media have a huge influence on everyday social cognition. Modern people learn about what is happening in the world from newspapers, radio and television. Imperiously intruding into our lives, the media convey to the viewer, reader, listener a judgment about what is happening, that is, a more or less agreed opinion of the journalistic community. But it may not coincide with the opinion of scientists. After all, a journalist strives to inform about an event, often emphasizing the role of random but effective details that can make an impression. The scientist, on the contrary, is interested in the essence of the phenomenon being studied in a form purified from accidents. In addition, coverage of current events is also related to the degree of dependence of the media on the authorities and financial corporations, i.e., on the level of freedom of speech achieved in society. Therefore, each person must have a significant stock of social knowledge, be able to compare and analyze information gleaned from different sources in order to be able to assess what is happening in society.

The author writes about the integration of scientific knowledge, the convergence of research methods in different fields of knowledge, emphasizing that “the theoretical levels of individual sciences converge in a general theoretical, philosophical explanation of open principles and laws, in the formation of ideological and methodological aspects of scientific knowledge as a whole.” Is integration only characteristic of modern science? Formulate your point of view and provide two arguments to support it.

Read the text and complete tasks 21-24.

<...>Science is a historically established form of human activity aimed at knowing and transforming objective reality, a spiritual production that results in purposefully selected and systematized facts, logically verified hypotheses, generalizing theories, fundamental and particular laws, as well as research methods.

Science is simultaneously a system of knowledge, its spiritual production, and practical activity based on it.

For any scientific knowledge, the presence of what is being studied and how it is being studied are essential. The answer to the question of what is being researched reveals the nature of the subject of science, and the answer to the question of how the research is carried out reveals the research method.

The qualitative diversity of reality and social practice has determined the multifaceted nature of human thinking and different areas of scientific knowledge. Modern science is an extremely ramified collection of individual scientific branches. The subject of science is not only the world external to man, various forms and types of movement of things, but also their reflection in consciousness, i.e. the man himself. According to their subject, sciences are divided into natural-technical, studying the laws of nature and methods of its development and transformation, and social, studying various social phenomena and the laws of their development, as well as man himself as a social being ( humanitarian cycle). Among the social sciences, a special place is occupied by a complex of philosophical disciplines that study the most general laws development of nature, society, and thinking.

The subject of science influences its methods, i.e. techniques, ways of studying an object. Thus, in the natural sciences, one of the main methods of research is experiment, and in the social sciences - statistics. At the same time, the boundaries between sciences are quite arbitrary. For modern stage The development of scientific knowledge is characterized not only by the emergence of related disciplines (for example, biophysics), but also by mutual enrichment scientific methodologies. General scientific logical techniques are induction, deduction, analysis, synthesis, as well as systematic and probabilistic approaches and much more. Each science has a different empirical level, i.e. accumulated factual material - the results of observations and experiments, and the theoretical level, i.e. generalization of empirical material, expressed in relevant theories, laws and principles; scientific assumptions based on facts, hypotheses that need further verification by experience. The theoretical levels of individual sciences converge in a general theoretical, philosophical explanation of open principles and laws, in the formation of ideological and methodological aspects of scientific knowledge as a whole<...>

(Spirkin A.G.)

Explanation.

The correct answer must contain the following elements:

1) An answer is given and a point of view is formulated, let’s say:

Modern science is characterized not only by integration;

In addition to integration, we can also talk about the disintegration of scientific knowledge, the separation of more specific scientific disciplines;

2) Arguments are given, for example:

In the social sciences, increasingly narrow areas of research are distinguished, for example, the science that studies the nature of power - cratology;

In the natural sciences, with the discovery of new elements, particles, and the development of nanotechnology, new areas of knowledge also arise;

With the advent of new techniques and ways of knowing among humanity, new scientific disciplines arise both in the study of the microworld and in the study of the megaworld, the Universe, etc.

Other correct wording of the answer may also be given.

Casting a glance at world history, we discover three stages of knowledge: firstly, rationalization in general, which in one form or another is a universal human property, appears with man as such; ...secondly, the formation of logically and methodically conscious science - Greek science and, in parallel, the beginnings of scientific knowledge in China and India; thirdly, the emergence of modern science, growing from the end of the Middle Ages, decisively establishing itself from the 17th century. and unfolding in all its breadth since the 19th century. This science makes European culture - at least since the 17th century. - different from the culture of all other countries...
Science has three necessary characteristics: cognitive methods, reliability and general validity...
Modern science universal according to your spirit. There is no area that could isolate itself from it for a long time. Everything that happens in the world is subject to observation, consideration, research - natural phenomena, actions or statements of people, their creations and destinies. Religion and all authorities also become the object of study. And not only reality, but also all mental possibilities become the object of study...
Modern science, addressed to the individual, seeks to reveal its comprehensive connections... The idea of ​​the interconnectedness of all sciences gives rise to dissatisfaction with individual knowledge. Modern science is not only universal, but strives for a unification of sciences that can never be achieved.
Every science is defined by a method and a subject. Each is a perspective of the vision of the world, not one comprehends the world as such, each covers a segment of reality, but not reality - perhaps one side of reality, but not reality as a whole, however, each of them enters into a world that is limitless, but all -still one in the kaleidoscope of connections...
Questions and tasks: 1) What stages of cognition does the author highlight? 2) What does the philosopher understand by such a feature of modern science as universality? 3) How does the text treat the problem of integration and differentiation of scientific knowledge? 4) How does the author explain the impossibility of complete unification of the sciences?

End of work -

This topic belongs to the section:

Social science

Social science.. profile level textbook for class educational institutions edited by L N Bogolyubov A Yu Lazebnikova N M Smirnova..

If you need additional material on this topic, or you did not find what you were looking for, we recommend using the search in our database of works:

What will we do with the received material:

If this material was useful to you, you can save it to your page on social networks:

All topics in this section:

Getting ready for the exam
Chapter I. SOCIAL AND HUMANITIES KNOWLEDGE AND PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITY § 1. Science and philosophy

Philosophy about social science
The very term “social and humanitarian knowledge” indicates that social science is “composed” of two different types cognition, i.e. this term captures not so much a connection as a difference. Situation

Myth, fairy tale, legend
When distinguishing between myth and fairy tale, modern folklorists note that myth is the predecessor of a fairy tale, that in a fairy tale, in comparison with myth, there occurs... a weakening of strict faith in the truth of evil

Eastern philosophy: secret knowledge or traditionalism?
The Greeks made the secret obvious, the knowledge that came from the East did not cause them to tremble... On the one hand, they revealed secrets, the knowledge transformed by their daring genius fertilized the human world. N

Philosophy and social sciences in modern and contemporary times
Remember how things have changed catholic church influenced by the Reformation? What new things did you bring?

We go down sighted
World history not like the dreams of our time. The history of man is short when compared with the history of plants and animals, not to mention the long life of the planets. The sudden rise and fall of black

From the history of Russian philosophical thought
Remember: what characterized the development of spiritual culture in Kievan Rus and the Muscovite state? What from

Political freedom and spiritual freedom
Conciliarity means a combination of unity and freedom of many individuals based on their common love for God and all absolute values. It is easy to see that the principle of conciliarity is of great importance not only

Man and humanity
No matter how brilliantly rich the spiritual life of this or that person may be, no matter how fountain the power of his mind flows outward, it is still not self-sufficient and limited if he does not internalize spiritual values.

The essence of man as a problem of philosophy
Remember: what are the features of anthropogenesis and sociogenesis? What place was given to man in all things ancient?

Society as a developing system
Remember: what characterizes any mechanical system? How is the integrity of living organisms expressed? TO

Typology of societies
Remember: what are the main levels of consideration of society? What characterizes the historical-typological level

Historical development of humanity: search for social macrotheory
Remember: what applies to historical sources? What are the methods of studying history? What civilizations exist

Historical process
Remember: how do philosophers solve the question of the meaning and direction of social development? What are the differences?

The role of the people in the historical process
This role is interpreted by scientists in different ways. Marxist philosophy asserts that the masses, which include primarily the working people, are the creators of history and play a decisive role.

Social groups and public associations
Every individual belongs to some community. Speaking about the participants historical process, we refer to communities such as social groups. English philosopher T. Hobbes

Historical figures
At the beginning of the paragraph, the universality of the historical process was noted. Since it covers all manifestations of human activity, the circle of historical figures includes figures from various fields

The Problem of Social Progress
Remember: what meaning does science give to the concept of “society”? What is the difference between the linear-stage approach to p

How we protect our sense of freedom
If persuasive messages are intrusive, then they may be perceived as an intrusion into the sphere of freedom of individual choice and thereby intensify the search for ways to protect against them. So, if you are persistent

Spending free time by young Muscovites
Form of leisure Social status (in%) Above average Average Below average Low

The symbolic nature of culture
Any structure serving the sphere of social communication is a language. This means that it forms a certain system of signs used in accordance with known members of a given group

Labor activity
Remember: what role did labor play in the evolution of humanity? What are the labor relations? Than sq.

Sociology about job satisfaction
People have different attitudes towards their work. Some do not overburden themselves with work and work coolly. Others are literally “burning” at work. When they come home, they continue to think about what they didn’t have time to do

Political activity
Remember: what is the sphere of politics? What is the meaning of the concept “power”?

The problem of the world's cognition
Remember: what sense organs does a person have? How are their activities coordinated? What is human consciousness

How do we recognize an image?
Do we recognize a dog because we first saw its fur, four legs, eyes, ears, etc., or do we recognize these parts because we first saw the dog? This problem is whether recognition begins with cha

Truth and its criteria
Remember: how in the history of philosophical thought the question of the relationship between being and knowledge was resolved? What is expressed in

Faith and knowledge
That something exists outside of us and independently of us - we cannot know this, because everything that we know (is real), that is, everything that we experience, exists in us, and not outside of us (like our feeling

Practical thinking
The difference between theoretical and practical thinking is that they are related to practice in different ways: not that one of them has a connection with practice and the other does not, but that

Social cognition
Remember: what is the difference between the social sciences and the natural sciences? What are the features of activity in spirits

About natural and social sciences
The formation of concepts and theories in the social sciences has become a topic of discussion that has split not only logicians and methodologists, but also social scientists themselves into two camps for more than half a century. One of

Soul of the Crowd
...Decisions concerning general interests adopted by the assembly even famous people in the field of various specialties, differ little from the decisions made by a meeting of fools, since in both

Self-concept
A person's idea of ​​himself and how other people know him never completely coincide. Everyone extracts from their own experiences some essential content from their own point of view.

Personality as a subject of study
If natural Sciences, having the subject of study of a person, analyze his properties as a biological and often biosocial organism, then personality as a social quality of a person is before

Periodization of personality development
How are the mental development of a person and his main activity interconnected? First historical principle L. S. Vygotsk introduced into the study of various periods of age development in psychology

Stages of personality development according to E. Erikson
Stage What choice is made I Trust in the world - distrust in it II Becoming a

Historical character of childhood
The modern division of human life into epochs and periods seems so natural that it is difficult to imagine any other option. The usual trio: childhood, adolescence and youth - like boo

Behavior and attitudes
Three competing theories explain why our actions influence the statements that reflect our attitudes. Self-presentation theory holds that people, especially those who control their behavior in

Communication barriers
The emergence of a barrier to understanding can be caused by a number of reasons, both psychological and other. It may occur due to errors in the process of transmitting information. [...] Phenomenon

Interaction in joint activities
When considering communication from the point of view of human interaction, it is always necessary to keep in mind the purpose of communication. This goal is to satisfy the need for joint activities of people. Result

Errors of perception
Depending on the proposed status of the person, the descriptions given by the subjects from the photograph changed. For example: Criminal. “This beast wants to understand something, looks intelligently and without interruption. WITH

Group cohesion and conformity behavior
Remember: can people always choose which association to participate in? What contributes to effective

Advice for a young wife
Organize your time: give everything a fixed time. Don’t stay with your husband in the morning: drive him to a position in his department, reminding him every minute that he should all belong to him.

Typical negotiation scenarios
Negotiations are a model for organizing conflicts and disagreements that involves “direct” coordination of the interests of the conflicting parties through open discussions by the participants about their differences.