Open Library is an open library of educational information. Science as a cultural phenomenon. Functions of science

Science as a specific type of knowledge is investigated by the logic and methodology of science. At the same time, the main problem here is associated with the identification of features that are necessary and sufficient to distinguish between science and other forms of human spiritual life - art, religion, everyday consciousness and others.

The relative nature of the criteria for scientific character. The border between scientific and non-scientific forms of knowledge is flexible and changeable, therefore, enormous efforts to develop criteria for scientific character did not give an unambiguous solution. First, in the course of the historical development of science (see Chapter 3), the criteria for scientific character have constantly changed. Thus, the main features of science in Ancient Greece were considered accuracy and certainty, logical evidence, openness to criticism, democracy. In the science of the Middle Ages, theologism, scholasticism and dogmatism were essential features, the "truths of reason" were subordinated to the "truths of faith." The main criteria of scientific character in modern times are objectivity and objectivity, theoretical and empirical validity, consistency, and practical usefulness. Science itself from contemplative and observational has turned into a complex theoretical and experimental activity, creating its own specific language and methods.

Over the past 300 years, science has also made its own adjustments to the problem of identifying signs of scientificity. Such characteristics, originally inherent in scientific knowledge as accuracy and certainty, began to give way to hypothetical scientific knowledge, i.e. scientific knowledge is becoming more and more probabilistic. In modern science, there is no longer such a rigid distinction between the subject, object and means. scientific knowledge... When assessing the truthfulness of the knowledge obtained about an object, one has to take into account the correlation of the results obtained scientific research with the peculiarities of the means and operations of the activity, as well as with the value-target attitudes of the scientist and the scientific community as a whole. All this suggests that the criteria for scientific character are not absolute, but change when the content and status of scientific knowledge change.

Secondly, the relative nature of the criteria for scientific character is determined by its multidimensionality, the variety of research subjects, methods of constructing knowledge, methods and criteria for its truth. In modern science, it is customary to distinguish between at least three classes of sciences - natural, technical and social and humanitarian. In the natural sciences, methods of explanation based on various types of logic dominate, and in social and humanitarian knowledge, methods of interpretation and understanding become decisive (see Chapter 11).

However, the relative nature of the criteria for scientific character does not negate the presence of certain invariants, the main features of scientific knowledge, which characterize science as an integral specific phenomenon of human culture. These include: objectivity and objectivity, consistency, logical evidence, theoretical and empirical validity.

All other necessary features that distinguish science from other forms of cognitive activity can be presented as derivatives, depending on the specified main characteristics and due to them.

The objectivity and objectivity of scientific knowledge are inseparable unity.

Objectivity is the property of an object to consider itself as the investigated essential relationships and

laws. Substantiveness of scientific knowledge is accordingly based on its objective nature. Science sets as its ultimate goal to foresee the process of transforming the subject of practical activity into a product. Scientific activity can be successful only when it meets these laws. Therefore, the main task of science is to identify the laws and relationships according to which objects change and develop. The orientation of science towards the study of objects is one of the main features of scientific knowledge. Objectivity, like objectivity, distinguishes science from other forms of human spiritual life. So, if science is constantly developing means capable of leveling the role of the subjective factor, its influence on the result of cognition, then in art, on the contrary, value attitude artist to the work is directly included in the artistic image. Of course, this does not mean that the personal aspects and value orientations of the scientist do not play a role in scientific creativity and absolutely do not affect scientific results. But the main thing in science is to design an object that would obey objective relationships and laws, so that human activity based on the results of research on this subject is successful. According to the apt remark of V.S. Stepin, where science cannot construct an object determined by its essential connections, there its claims end.

The systematic nature of scientific knowledge, which characterizes all aspects of science (its content, organization, structure, expression of the result obtained in the form of principles, laws and categories), is a specific feature that distinguishes scientific knowledge from everyday life. Ordinary knowledge, just like science, seeks to comprehend the real objective world, but unlike scientific knowledge, it develops spontaneously in the process of human life. Ordinary knowledge, as a rule, is not systematized: it is, rather, some fragmentary ideas about objects obtained from various sources of information. Scientific knowledge is always and in everything systematized. As you know, a system is a set of subsystems and elements that are in relationships and connections with each other, forming a certain integrity, unity. In this sense, scientific knowledge is a unity of principles, laws

and categories consistent with the principles and laws of the explored world itself. The systematic nature of science is also manifested in its organization. It is built as a system of certain areas of knowledge, classes of sciences, etc. Consistency is more and more included in theory and methodology modern science... So, the subject of a relatively young science - synergetics - is complex self-organizing systems, and among the methods of science, the most widespread are systems analysis, a systematic approach that implements the principle of integrity.

Logical proof. Theoretical and empirical validity. It makes sense to consider these specific features of scientific knowledge together, since logical evidence can be presented as one of the types of theoretical substantiation of scientific knowledge. Specific ways of substantiating scientific truth also distinguish science from ordinary knowledge and religion, where much is taken for granted or based on direct everyday experience. Scientific knowledge necessarily includes theoretical and empirical validity, logic and other forms of proof of the reliability of scientific truth.

Modern logic is not a homogeneous whole, on the contrary, it is possible to distinguish relatively independent sections or types of logics that arose and developed in different historical periods with different goals. Thus, traditional logic with its syllogistics and schemes of evidence and refutation arose in the early stages of scientific knowledge. The increasing complexity of the content and organization of science has led to the development of the logic of predicates and non-classical logics - modal logic, the logic of temporal relations, intuitionistic logic, etc. The means by which these logics operate are aimed at confirming or refuting any scientific truth or its foundation.

Proof is the most common procedure for the theoretical validity of scientific knowledge and is the logical derivation of a reliable judgment from its foundations. In the proof, three elements can be distinguished: o thesis - a judgment that needs justification;

About arguments, or grounds, - reliable judgments from which the thesis is logically deduced and substantiated;

Demonstration - reasoning involving one or more inferences. During the demonstrations, the conclusions of the logic of statements, categorical syllogisms, inductive inferences, analogy can be used. The use of the last two types of inference leads to the fact that the thesis will be substantiated as true only with a greater or lesser degree of probability.

Empirical validity includes procedures for confirming and repeating an established relationship or law. The means of confirming a scientific thesis include scientific fact, the revealed empirical pattern, experiment. Repeatability as a criterion of scientific character is manifested in the following: the scientific community does not accept as reliable the phenomena recorded by instruments, observed by experts - representatives of academic science, if there is no possibility of their repetition; therefore, such phenomena are not included in the subject of scientific research; first of all, this concerns such areas of knowledge as parapsychology, ufology, etc.

The criteria for the logical proof of a scientific theory, as well as other criteria for scientific character, are not always and not fully realizable, for example, the results of A. Church on the provability of the second-order predicate calculus, K. Gödel's theorem on the unprovability of the formal consistency of arithmetic natural numbers and etc. . In such cases, additional logical and methodological principles are introduced into the arsenal of scientific tools, such as the principle of complementarity, the principle of uncertainty, non-classical logics, etc.

Scientific criteria may not be realizable if it is impossible to design the very subject of scientific research. This applies to any integrity, when something fundamentally not objectified (context not fully clarified) or, in Husserl's words, a certain “horizon”, “background” as a preliminary understanding that cannot be expressed by logical means, remains outside the “evidence brackets”. Then scientific knowledge is complemented by hermeneutic procedures as a kind of method of understanding and interpretation. Its essence is as follows: you must first understand the whole, so that then the parts and elements become clear.

The relativity of the criteria for scientific character testifies to the constant development of science, the expansion of its problem field, the formation of new, more adequate means of scientific research. Scientific criteria are important regulatory elements in the development of science. They allow you to systematize, evaluate and adequately understand the result of scientific research.

So, science as an objective and objective knowledge of reality is based on controlled (confirmed and repeated) facts, rationally formulated and systematized ideas and provisions; asserts the need for proof. Scientific criteria determine the specifics of science and reveal the direction human thinking to objective and universal knowledge. The language of science is notable for its consistency and consistency (the exact use of concepts, the definiteness of their connection, the rationale for their following, derivability from each other). Science is a holistic education. All elements of the scientific complex are in mutual relations, are combined into certain subsystems and systems.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC LIST

1. Nenashev M.I. Introduction to logic. M., 2004.

2. Stepin V.S. Philosophical anthropology and philosophy of science. M., 1992.

3. Philosophy: problem course: textbook; ed. S.A. Lebedev. M., 2002.

Assessment of the reliability and accuracy, as well as the validity (verification) of the forecast - the refinement of hypothetical models, usually by interviewing experts. The reliability of the forecast includes: 1) the depth and objectivity of the analysis; 2) knowledge of specific conditions; 3) efficiency and speed in carrying out and processing of materials. 1.

Validity "by content". This technique is used primarily in achievement tests. Usually, achievement tests do not include all of the material that students have passed, but some of it is not. most of(3-4 questions). Is it possible to be sure that the correct answers to these few questions indicate the assimilation of all the material. This is what content validation should answer. To do this, a comparison of the success on the test with the expert assessments of teachers (for this material) is carried out. Content validity also applies to criterion-based tests. This technique is sometimes referred to as logical validity. 2. The "simultaneity" validity, or current validity, is determined using an external criterion by which information is collected concurrently with experiments using the tested methodology. In other words, data relating to the present performance during the test period, performance during the same period, and so on are collected. This is correlated with the results of success on the test. 3. "Predictive" validity (also called "predictive" validity). It is also determined by a fairly reliable external criterion, but information on it is collected some time after the test. An external criterion is usually expressed in some assessments of a person's ability to the type of activity for which he was selected according to the results of diagnostic tests. Although this technique is most consistent with the task of diagnostic techniques - predicting future success, it is very difficult to apply. The forecast accuracy is inversely related to the time set for such forecasting. The more time passes after the measurement, the more factors must be taken into account when assessing the predictive value of the technique. However, it is almost impossible to take into account all the factors influencing the prediction. 4. "Retrospective" validity. It is determined on the basis of a criterion that reflects events or a state of quality in the past. It can be used to quickly obtain information about the predictive capabilities of the technique. So, to check to what extent nice results ability tests correspond to rapid learning, past grades, past expert opinions, etc. can be compared. in persons with high and low diagnostic indicators at the moment. The principle of alternativeness is associated with the possibility of the development of political life and its individual links along different trajectories, with different interconnections and structural relations. The need to build alternatives, i.e. determining the possible ways of development of political relations, always arises in the transition from the imitation of the existing processes and trends to the foresight of their future. The main task: to separate feasible development options from options that cannot be implemented under the prevailing and foreseeable conditions. Each alternative to the development of the political process has its own set of problems that must be taken into account when forecasting. What is the source of the alternatives? First of all, they are served by possible qualitative shifts, for example, in the transition to a new political course. The formation of alternatives is influenced by specific policy goals. They are determined by the prevailing trends in the development of social needs, the need to solve specific political problems. The principle of consistency means that, on the one hand, politics is viewed as a single object, and on the other, as a set of relatively independent directions (blocks) of forecasting. Systems approach involves the construction of a forecast based on a system of methods and models, characterized by a certain hierarchy and sequence. It allows you to develop a coherent and consistent forecast of political life. The principle of continuity. The task of the subject developing the forecast includes continuous adjustment of forecast developments as new information becomes available. For example, any initial long-term forecast is inevitably large-scale. Over time, this or that tendency manifests itself more clearly and reveals itself from many sides. In this regard, the information that comes to the forecaster and contains new data makes it possible to predict with greater accuracy the onset of a political event: the need to convene a congress political party, holding various political actions, rallies, strikes, etc. Verification (verifiability) is aimed at determining the reliability of the developed forecast. Verification can be direct, indirect, consequential, duplicate, inverse. All the above principles of forecasting cannot be taken in isolation, in isolation from each other. PR-n consistency - requires coordination of normative and exploratory forecasts of different nature and different lead times. Pr-n variance - requires the development of forecast options based on the options for the forecast background. Pr-n profitability - requires the excess of the economic effect from the use of the forecast over the cost of its development.

Every year science more and more confidently enters our life. Films, books, serials are filled with specialized terms that were previously used only by scientists. Everything more people seeks to understand how it works the world, according to what laws our Universe exists.

In this regard, questions arise: what is science? What methods and means does she use? What are the criteria for scientific knowledge? What properties does it have?

Human cognitive activity

All cognitive human activity can be divided into two types:

• The commonplace is done spontaneously by all people during their life. Such knowledge is aimed at acquiring the skills that a person needs to adapt to real life conditions.
• Scientific - involves the study of phenomena, the mechanism of action of which has not yet been fully disclosed. The information obtained is distinguished by its fundamental novelty.

Scientific knowledge is a system of knowledge about the surrounding world (laws of nature, man, society, etc.), obtained and recorded using specific means and methods (observation, analysis, experiment, and others).

It has its own characteristics and criteria.

Features of scientific knowledge:

• Universality. Science studies the general laws and properties of an object, identifies the patterns of development and functioning of an object in a system. Knowledge is not guided by the unique traits and properties of an object.
• Need. The main, system-forming aspects of the phenomenon are fixed, and not random aspects.
• Consistency. Scientific knowledge is organized structure, the elements of which are closely related. Knowledge cannot exist outside of a specific system.

Basic principles of scientific knowledge

The signs or criteria of scientific knowledge were developed by representatives of the logical positivism of the Vienna Circle under the leadership of Moritz Schlick in the 1930s. The main goal that scientists pursued in their creation was the separation of scientific knowledge from various metaphysical statements, mainly due to the ability to verify scientific theories and hypotheses. According to scientists, in this way scientific knowledge was deprived of its emotional coloring and baseless faith.

Presentation: "Methodology and methodology of scientific research"

As a result, representatives of the Vienna Circle developed the following criteria:

1. Objectivity: scientific knowledge should be an expression of objective truth and be independent of the subject knowing it, his interests, thoughts and feelings.
2. Reasonableness: knowledge must be supported by facts and logical conclusions. Statements without evidence are not considered scientific.
3. Rationality: scientific knowledge cannot rely only on people's faith and emotions. It always gives the necessary grounds for proving the truth of a statement. The idea of ​​a scientific theory should be pretty simple.
4. Use of technical terms: scientific knowledge is expressed in terms formed by science. Clear definitions also help to better describe and classify the observed phenomena.
5. Consistency. This criterion helps to exclude the use of mutually exclusive statements within the same concept.
6. Verifiability: The facts of scientific knowledge should be based on controlled experiments that can be repeated later. This criterion also helps to limit the use of any theory, showing in which cases it is confirmed, and in which its use would be inappropriate.
7. Mobility: Science is constantly evolving, which is why it is so important to recognize that some statements may be wrong or inaccurate. It should be recognized that the conclusions obtained by scientists are not final and can be further supplemented or completely refuted.

Sociological and historical features occupy an important place in the structure of scientific knowledge:

• Sometimes the historical criterion for the development of science is singled out separately. All kinds of knowledge and various theories could not exist without previous hypotheses and data obtained. The solution of problems and scientific paradoxes of the present time is carried out by relying on the results of the activities of predecessors. But modern scientists take as a basis already existing theories, supplement them with new facts and show why old hypotheses do not work in the current situation and what data should be changed.
• The sociological criterion is also sometimes singled out separately in the structure of scientific knowledge. Its main property is the formulation of new tasks and questions that should be worked on. Without this criterion, the development of not only science, but also society as a whole would not be possible. Science is the main engine of progress. Each discovery raises many new questions that scientists will need to answer.

The structure of scientific knowledge also has its own properties:

1. The highest value is objective truth. That is, the main goal of science is knowledge for the sake of knowledge itself.
2. For all areas of science, there are a number of significant requirements that are universal for them.
3. Knowledge is systematic and well-ordered.

These properties partly generalize the features identified in scientific knowledge back in the 30s.

Science today

Per last years science has acquired a special status in public life. But at the same time, the significantly increased flow of information led to the growth of pseudoscientific theories. Distinguishing one from the other can be difficult, but in most cases, using the criteria above will help. Often it is enough to check the logical validity of the assumptions, as well as the experimental basis, in order to assess the validity of the proposed theory.

Any science has the most important property: it has no boundaries: neither geographic nor temporal. It is possible to study a variety of objects anywhere in the world for many years, but the number of questions that arise will only increase. And this is perhaps the most wonderful gift that science has made for us.

"... The criteria for the scientific character of knowledge are its validity, reliability, consistency, empirical confirmation and fundamentally possible falsifiability, conceptual coherence, predictive power and practical efficiency ..."

The main criteria are truth, objectivity and consistency: “... the specificity of scientific knowledge is reflected in the criteria of scientific character that distinguish scientific knowledge from unscientific: 1. The truth of scientific knowledge…. ... science seeks to obtain true knowledge, exploring various ways to establish the validity of scientific knowledge. 2. Intersubjectivity of knowledge. Scientific knowledge is ... knowledge of objective relationships and laws of reality. 3. The consistency and validity of scientific knowledge. In the most important ways substantiation of the knowledge gained are: A). on an empirical level: - Repeated checks by observation and experiment. B). not a theoretical level: - Determination of logical coherence, deducibility of knowledge; - Revealing their consistency, compliance with empirical data; - Establishing the ability to describe known phenomena and predict new ones ... "

Scientists questioned the benefits of psychologists' discoveries

The researchers concluded that most of the discoveries from the world of psychology are dubious, since research results cannot be reproduced.

In the study of this issue, 300 psychologists from different parts of the world were involved. They were faced with the task of analyzing in detail the results of about a hundred psychological research which have been featured in prestigious peer-reviewed journals. The conclusions turned out to be disappointing: it was possible to re-achieve such results only in 39% of cases. Project leader Brian Nosek said this was the first time such a study was being conducted.

For four years, scientists analyzed previously published work of their colleagues and accurately reproduced the described methods. Only in a third of the cases did they manage to achieve similar results. In other words, the conclusions of most psychologists are incorrect: they may contain errors or are the product of the desire to obtain a "beautiful" result.

Some experts have already stated that this casts a shadow on psychology as a science. Brian Nosek himself is in no hurry to bury her and believes that psychology and the discoveries made within it are very important. Meanwhile, he emphasizes the need to improve research methods. A number of journals have already changed the rules for publishing materials, listening to new conclusions.