Legal science has come a long way of formation and development. The first sprouts of legal scientific thought appear in the era of Antiquity, they are filled with vitality in the era of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, and, finally, they acquire maturity in the era of the New and Modern Times. Starting to study the history of legal science, it is necessary to note three moments that are extremely significant for its understanding.

First, legal science is a part of science as a whole, therefore understanding the essence of legal science is inseparable from understanding the essence of science as such.

Second, the history of legal science cannot be viewed in isolation from the history of science as such. The scientific thought of different historical eras is characterized by a certain unity in understanding the fundamental foundations of being. That is why the understanding of the logic of the development of legal science is revealed through its correlation with the logic of the development of science as such.

Finally, the third - the history of legal science is closely linked with the history of culture as a whole. The history of jurisprudence can be viewed as a text, the interpretation of which is not achievable outside of its context - the socio-cultural environment.

These points determine the structure of the first part of the textbook offered to the reader's attention, which contains a theoretical analysis of science as a specific way of knowing and a historical analysis of the genesis and development of scientific knowledge.

Chapter 1. The concept of science

Science is a multifaceted phenomenon, so one-dimensional models of its study are not representative. Many-sided, opening only to stereoscopic vision, the image of science is composed of such aspects as: epistemological (cognitive), ontological (existential), social. Accordingly, science can be considered as a form of knowledge, a sphere of culture, a social institution.

§one. Science as a form of knowledge

In the epistemological aspect, science appears as one of the ways of knowing the world. The basis of cognition is thinking - an active process of processing information about the world. Modern researchers identify two main strategies for processing cognitive (cognizable) information: right hemisphere, figurative-emotional, generalizing knowledge about the world using a system of emotionally colored images; and left-hemispheric, logical-verbal, rational, generalizing information about the world with the help of a system of concepts, symbols (1). Art and myth as forms of cognition are based primarily on the right hemisphere figurative-emotional strategy, while art is based mostly on experiential knowledge, and myth is based on super-experienced knowledge. Philosophy and science as forms of cognition are based on the left-hemispheric rational strategy of information processing, while science is based mainly on experimental knowledge, and philosophy generalizes the experimental and forms super-experimental - abstract, speculative, speculative knowledge. Religion, especially if we are talking from world religions, is a synthetic knowledge. It is undoubtedly dominated by figurative-emotional information processing strategies, but a rational strategy also plays a certain role. At the same time, religion is knowledge, by definition, superexperienced.

Of course, the proposed scheme is rather conditional - in reality, any knowledge is synthetic, we can only talk about priorities.

The development of science, including legal science, is associated with the actualization and promotion of the logical-verbal, analytical-synthetic, rational cognitive strategy, while the figurative-emotional strategy is the second plan of this process.

The main components of a rational cognitive strategy are reason, reason, reflection, and intellectual intuition.

Reason - "final" thinking (G.W.F. Hegel) - the initial level of rational thinking, at which the operation of abstractions occurs within a given scheme, an unchanging pattern, strict principles. The logic of reason is a formal logic that sets certain rules for statements, proofs, which determines not so much the content as the form of the existing knowledge. In essence, reason is the ability to consistently reason, correctly analyze, classify and systematize facts. The main function of reason is the ordering and organization of cognitive material. The main forms of rational thinking are: a concept - a definition that reflects in a generalized form the general and special features of the phenomena of reality and the essential connections between them; judgment - a statement that reflects individual things, phenomena, processes, their properties, connections and relationships, and inductive and deductive conclusions - mental actions through which new knowledge is derived.

Mind - "infinite" thinking (G. W. F. Hegel) - the highest level of rational thinking, which is characterized by creative handling of existing abstractions, their critical rethinking. The mind is aimed at comprehending the essence and laws of various phenomena and processes of the world. The main function of the mind is an adequate display of information in the system of concepts, categories, concepts presented in their interconnection and development. The logic of reason is dialectics - the logic of the transition from one system of knowledge to another higher one through synthesis and removal of contradictions that are revealed both in the object of cognition and in the process of cognition itself, in the interaction of the object and subject of cognition.

Rational cognition is the process of interaction between reason and reason. The transition of reason into reason is carried out as a result of overcoming the historically established conceptual system on the basis of the promotion of new ideas, the formation of new categories. The transition of the mind into the mind is associated with the formalization and schematization of knowledge obtained as a result of the creative activity of the mind.

Scientific rationalism is inseparable from such a way of mental activity as reflection. Reflection is “a thought about a thought catching up with a thought” (Yu. Schreider) or “the ability of thinking to make thinking its subject” (K. Jaspers), the ability to think not only about objects, but also about thoughts, essences. The development of scientific rationality is connected with the development of theoretical reflection - critical thinking, focused on the formation of generalizing constructions freed from specifics, based on evidence.

An essential role in the process of cognition is played by intellectual intuition, which in terms of psychology can be interpreted as an insider - a "peak experience", as a result of which a breakthrough to new knowledge is made. In modern epistemology (the doctrine of cognition), intellectual intuition is considered as a collapsed reasoning, a mental leap carried out subconsciously. In this way, the understanding of intuition is freed from the touch of spiritualism and irrationalism.

Thus, scientific knowledge is experiential and reflexive, demonstrative and critical knowledge, based on rational-rational strategies of thinking, which can be cast in the form of intellectual intuition.

To separate scientific and non-scientific knowledge, some universal principle is needed, a universal basis - a criterion (measure) that would allow one or another idea to be qualified as scientific or non-scientific in nature. In general, scientific knowledge is a way of introducing the subject to the truth, it has objectivity, general validity, universality, evidence. However, it is obvious that these requirements are not absolute, but relative. In the history of science, there have been various criteria for being scientific. Among them: the criterion of empiricism - the experimental verifiability of the put forward scientific position; criterion of rationalism - logical consistency and correctness of scientific theories; the criterion of conventionalism - the general acceptance of certain scientific theories; criterion of falsifiability - the refutation of scientific theories by factual data; the criterion of verifiability - linguistic verifiability of the objectivity of scientific provisions, the criterion of pragmatism - operationality scientific ideas and others. Of course, we can say that scientific knowledge is objective, generally valid and universal knowledge, but with a more detailed study of these criteria, many questions arise. Let's say, what should be considered a criterion of objectivity, if modern science puts forward the principle of correlation of the acquired knowledge about an object not only with the peculiarity of the means and operations of activity, but also with the value-target structures of the cognizing subject and reveals the connections of intra-scientific goals with extra-scientific social values ​​and goals? Or what should be considered a criterion of general validity, if a specific feature of social and humanitarian knowledge is its polyparadigmatic nature, i.e. synchronous existence of various paradigms - theories, principles, provisions? These questions do not have clear answers. Obviously, this kind of uncertainty is justified, since it makes science open, without creating obstacles and rigid barriers to its development, the emergence of new scientific theories and disciplines that do not fit into the existing structure of scientific knowledge and expand its space.

In general, it is advisable to talk about a set of criteria, distinguishing between paradigm criteria - criteria that are legitimate at a particular stage in the development of science, operating within a particular scientific paradigm; and universal criteria - metacriteria that determine the most general parameters of scientific knowledge, regardless of any of its paradigm affiliation. The criteria formed within the framework of one or another scientific paradigm, for example, positivism, pragmatism, structuralism, phenomenology, act as paradigmatic criteria. As metacriteria, one can distinguish such requirements as: rationality, logical consistency, intersubjectivity, reproducibility, experimental verifiability (15). Scientific, in this context, is knowledge that meets the requirements of a larger number of metacriteria, and vice versa, knowledge that most of the metacriteria do not work with can hardly claim the status of scientific.

Scientific rationalism should be distinguished from everyday knowledge, ordinary knowledge can also operate with logical-verbal methods of information processing, but it is not evidence-based, ordinary rationality is rational, it is the logic of common sense based on the belief in the obviousness of any phenomena or processes. Ordinary knowledge cannot be considered as erroneous or harmful, it is a different form of knowledge, without which the existence of culture would be problematic. Moreover, modern researchers consider everyday knowledge as a source of information for scientific knowledge. I. Prigogine and I. Stengers, for example, argue that: “In the open world that we are now learning to describe, theoretical knowledge and practical wisdom need each other” (2).

Scientific rationalism must also be distinguished from philosophical rationalism. The problem of identifying the specifics of philosophical and scientific knowledge is extremely important, because through its solution it is possible to specify such disciplines as jurisprudence and the philosophy of law. The differences between science, in particular legal science, and philosophy, in particular the philosophy of law, should be seen in the degree of abstraction of political and legal thought from specific experimental knowledge. Jurisprudence is an experimental science. It analyzes, synthesizes, generalizes, systematizes and conceptualizes specific factual information regarding the existence of the political and legal sphere of society. Thus, jurisprudence acts as a reflection of the first order - a reflection on the established forms of political and legal culture. The philosophy of law is a reflection of the second order, a generalization of a generalization, a conceptualization of conceptualizations, a theory of theories or a metatheory. Between jurisprudence and the philosophy of law, there are direct and reverse links. Jurisprudence, being concrete scientific knowledge, acts for the philosophy of law as a kind of initial empirical basis, and the philosophy of law, in turn, acts for jurisprudence as an ideological and methodological basis. The boundary between proper scientific legal and knowledge and philosophical knowledge is rather conditional and transparent, for example, such a section of legal science as the theory of state and law has much in common and even coincides with the philosophy of law.

Science, including legal science, should be distinguished from practice - legal practice. Practice (Greek prakticos - active, active) is an objective, goal-setting human activity aimed at the development and transformation of natural and social objects. Legal practice is an activity related to the regulation of social and political relations by referring to established legal norms and laws. Legal practice arises at a certain stage in the development of society - the stage of formation of a large complex society. It relies primarily on rational thinking, the content of which is reduced to law understanding and law enforcement. Legal science is based on rational-rational thinking aimed at legal transformation and law formation. Thus, the most important social function of legal science is the improvement of the legal sphere of society. Legal science is the most important element of the self-organization of society, through the efforts of scientists - lawyers, the legal system of society is being reconstructed, models of the legal organization of society are being created, new systems of law, new political and legal technologies are being formed. Of course, for the implementation, introduction of political and legal technologies, the participation of legal policy is necessary, i.e. state political forces.

The concept of science. The problem of defining science is one of the most difficult in modern research on the theory of knowledge and philosophy of science. There are many definitions of science and scientific knowledge, in each of which the following are singled out as a defining feature or essential characteristic of science: a set of specific cognitive procedures (experiment, description, classification, explanation, etc.); object-subject nature of knowledge obtained as a result of scientific research; the level of systemic organization and validity of scientific knowledge, etc. Such a pluralism of approaches and methodological orientations in the definition of science is understandable and explainable, since in modern conditions it reveals its obvious polyfunctionality and can be interpreted as a specific method of cognition, social institution, a form of accumulation of knowledge and cognitive traditions, a factor in the development of production and modern technologies activities, etc.

However, as soon as we face the task of defining science as a unique phenomenon of modern culture, in its integrity and significant differences from such forms of spiritual and cognitive activity as mythology, religion, philosophy, everyday knowledge, etc., we are faced with a number of serious logical, conceptual and substantive issues. Let's point out some of them.

1. The problem of the logical circle in the definition of science, associated with the need for a correct answer to the question of where, when and in what sociocultural conditions science first appears and the transition from protoscience to proper scientific forms of cognition of the world takes place.

2. The problem of structural and functional differentiation of modern science and the isolation of such basic parameters as cognitive activity in accordance with certain logical and methodological norms and imperatives; scientific knowledge with appropriate cognitive and logical characteristics; social institution as a form of organization and regulation of scientific research, as well as a communication system in science.

3. The problem of subject-disciplinary differentiation of science and the definition of specific features of logical-mathematical, natural-science, technical, social and humanitarian knowledge. One of the most important dimensions of this problem in modern conditions is the substantiation of the special status of interdisciplinary research and the identification of specific features of such integrative areas in science that synthesize various scientific disciplines and their characteristic methods and means of cognition.

A clear explication of the specific features of science and the substantiation of its categorical definition require a meaningful analysis and correct interpretation of the above problems. It is no coincidence that one of the founders of modern science of science, J. Bernal, noted that it is essentially impossible to define science. We can only outline the paths along which we can come closer to understanding what science is.

First of all, science should become the subject of structural analysis, during which its main components are singled out, the content and functional characteristics of each of them are revealed, which makes it possible to significantly deepen the ordinary idea of ​​science and various purely descriptive models of its description.

The main structural components of science as a systemic integrity or the most important parameters of the existence of science include:

1) science as an activity;

2) science as knowledge;

3) science as a social institution.

1. Science as an activity represents creative process subject-object interaction, aimed at the production and reproduction of new objectively true knowledge about reality.

Special Analysis scientific activity allows you to fix a number of characteristic features of science that distinguish it from other types of spiritual and cognitive activity and, in particular, various forms of everyday or non-specialized knowledge, which are very actively used in Everyday life human and constitute the so-called "logic" of common sense. In the structure of any activity, including scientific activity, one can single out its components such as subject, object (or object), means and methods, goals and programs, results or products. Characteristically, in all these parameters, scientific activity differs significantly from other types of cognitive activity and forms of knowledge generation. So, for example, in acts of everyday or non-specialized cognition, the subject, as a rule, is formed in the process of natural socialization and the assimilation of traditional skills of cognitive and practical activity. In science, a special system of professional socialization is being formed, which involves the development by the subject of a huge information array of knowledge, skills, forms and methods of communication.

Equally significant are the differences between scientific and ordinary forms of cognitive activity in terms of their object or subject. Ordinary knowledge masters only those objects or subject complexes that are directly included in the structure of a person's practical activity and make up the space of his life world or everyday experience. Science, on the other hand, constructs a special world of idealized objects, such an objective reality that is not represented in the real forms of human practical activity or in his ordinarily empirical experience. The subject of science is always the result of the creative construction of a type of reality that can only be mastered in future forms of practice.

Since scientific and cognitive activity is one of the most complex and developed forms of cognition of the world, it also differs significantly from other types of cognition in terms of such parameters in the structure of this activity as its means, methods, goals and programs. Modern science uses many diverse and carefully adapted to the studied subject complexes means of understanding nature, society and spiritual and psychic reality. Among them are material resources, constituting the experimental-measuring or instrumental base of modern science. Conceptual-logical means- which include specialized artificial languages ​​and categorical systems, logical and methodological standards and standards for the organization of knowledge, its validity and objective truth. Mathematical tools- includes various systems mathematical languages and formalisms designed to provide procedures for describing, explaining and predicting the phenomena and processes under study in accordance with the requirements of logical consistency, accuracy, meaningful certainty.

One of the distinguishing features of scientific and cognitive activity is its characteristic methodological reflection, aimed at comprehending and constantly evaluating ongoing cognitive actions, as well as developing a system of special methods and means designed to optimize these actions and contribute to the achievement of objectively true knowledge about the reality under study. Unlike science, in acts of ordinary or non-specialized cognition, the methods and forms of obtaining knowledge are not recognized and analyzed. They are, as it were, "melted" in the fabric of real cognitive actions and are assimilated by the subject directly in the process of education, natural socialization and familiarization with certain customs and traditions.

Scientific activity is fundamentally different from other types and forms of cognition also in terms of its result or final product. Any cognitive action, ideally, should be aimed at obtaining knowledge or information about a cognizable phenomenon. However, in different forms and at different levels of cognition this information is specified according to a number of essential features. In its content, the objective-objective aspects of the existence of phenomena and processes of reality can be represented. It can fix subjectively and personally significant meanings of the social world and the universe of culture. This may be information about the values, programs and goals of possible acts of activity of an individual, a social group or society as a whole. At the same time, it is very important to fix those properties and parameters that distinguish scientific knowledge as a specific type of information and the end product of scientific and cognitive activity. This characteristic science involves its analysis as a specific system of knowledge.

2. Science as knowledge. The realization of a person's cognitive attitude to the world creates the preconditions for the transfer of cognizable objects into an ideal sign form, in which they are de-objectified and acquire the status of knowledge. Various typologies of knowledge as a product of spiritual and cognitive activity are possible. Depending on the specifics of the cognizable reality, knowledge is distinguished as information about the objective world of nature and society; knowledge about the inner spiritual and mental world of a person, which contains ideas about the essence and meaning of self-knowledge; knowledge about the goals and ideal-theoretical programs of human activity, etc. At the same time, each of these types of knowledge can exist in the forms of proto-scientific, extra-scientific and scientific knowledge. At the same time, knowledge itself is a kind of information about the studied phenomena and processes of reality, which must satisfy a number of requirements or scientific criteria.

The problem of criteria for the scientific nature of knowledge is one of the most debatable in modern philosophy of science and, depending on the tasks and objectives of the study, various groups of scientific criteria are distinguished. So, for example, in order to fix historically specific forms of scientific knowledge and distinguish them from protoscience, a set of historical criteria of scientificity. These usually include:

a) formal-logical consistency of knowledge;

b) its experimental verifiability and empirical validity;

c) the rational nature of knowledge;

d) reproducibility and semantic invariance;

e) intersubjectivity and universality, etc.

Other varieties of historical criteria of scientific character make it possible to specify various historical stages in the development of science and the forms of knowledge corresponding to them. At the same time, classical, non-classical and post-non-classical science are distinguished; disciplinary and interdisciplinary organized systems scientific knowledge, etc.

Another group of scientific standards is called functionally oriented criteria. They include such logical criteria such as consistency, completeness, independence of the original axioms, etc. This group also includes such requirements for systems of scientific knowledge as their simplicity, aesthetic significance, and instrumental efficiency. These criteria are called pragmatic.

However, no matter how varied the various groups of criteria for the scientific nature of knowledge may be, all of them, in the final analysis, should only supplement some basic characteristics of knowledge that are attributable to science and determine its special status and functions in the total knowledge of natural, social and spiritual-psychic reality.

Science has always sought to see the reality under study as a set of causally determined, natural events and phenomena, subject to certain regularities and laws. These regularities can be both dynamic and static in nature, however, they necessarily fix the objective-objective and independent of the will and consciousness of the cognizing subject aspect of the being of the cognizable reality. This fundamental norm of scientific knowledge reveals itself in such essential requirements for the content and organization of scientific knowledge as consistency, evidence and validity, reliability and objective truth.

The analysis of science as a system of knowledge can be significantly supplemented and concretized if its structural division is carried out on other grounds and in other functional “sections”. Thus, within the framework of any scientific discipline (physics, chemistry, biology, psychology, sociology, etc.), one can isolate the structures of empirical knowledge, theoretical knowledge, and metatheoretical knowledge. Each of these structural levels of knowledge organization specifies exactly science and has a number of functional features. There are other typologies and classifications of scientific knowledge, within which natural science, mathematical, social and humanitarian, technical knowledge are singled out; fundamental scientific knowledge, applied scientific knowledge and knowledge in the form of development projects and developments.

In order for science as activity and knowledge to really exist in society, it must be organically integrated into the system of social ties and communications, i.e. act as a social institution.

3. Science as a social institution can be referred to as a collection scientific organizations and institutions integrated by certain norms of scientific ethos, principles and methods of professional communication, as well as forms of relationship with a specific historical type of society.

Structural and meaningful analysis of science as a social institution makes it possible to significantly supplement the idea of ​​it as a complex system of relationships between scientists, the scientific community, and various subsystems of society. The isolation of this aspect or dimension of science as a socio-cultural integrity makes it possible to reconstruct the process of development and formation of the institutional structures of scientific activity and to characterize such forms of organization of scientists as scientific schools, research laboratories and institutes, "invisible colleges", etc. At the same time, considerable attention is usually pay attention to the characteristics of the ways of transferring knowledge, forms and methods of scientific communication both within scientific communities and in the mode of dialogue with society as a whole. In modern conditions of frontal intensification of scientific research, the development of effective systems value-normative regulation of scientific activity, the study of ethical and sociocultural aspects science as a specific form of spiritual production and intellectual innovation. The freedom of scientific creativity and the social responsibility of a scientist are combined in modern science as two inextricably linked incarnations of a single process. scientific discovery and the use of its results in the social and economic life of society.

In this way, structural analysis The phenomenon of science allows us to significantly deepen our understanding of it and give a meaningful description of its most important components.

Further concretization of the image of science and filling it with real content, reflecting the processes of integration of scientific knowledge and high technologies in all spheres of the life of modern society, involves the analysis and characterization of the main functions of science. The theoretical reconstruction of the history of the formation and development of science as a unique form of cognition and transformation of the world allows us to fix the many functions that it has implemented in various types of society and culture. Nevertheless, several of the most important and invariant ones can be singled out among them. These usually include:

1) Cultural and ideological function;

2) Industrial and production function;

3) The function of social management and rationalization social relations;

4) The function of generation and reproduction of scientific knowledge in education systems and transmission of social experience.

These functions of science make it possible to characterize it in more detail and meaningfully not only as a cognitive-cognitive phenomenon, but also to reveal its sociocultural nature, fixing the role and significance of science in civilizational dynamics and the functioning of modern society.

The structural-functional analysis of science makes it possible to identify and fix various aspects of its content, to describe the forms of its interaction with other cultural phenomena and cognitive activities. However, the task of a categorical definition of science involves the fixation and justification of its features, which present the main and most significant features of science as a specific and unique type of spiritual and cognitive activity. The following features of science can be distinguished as such features, which fundamentally distinguish it from other types and forms of cognition:

1) objective-subject orientation of scientific knowledge;

2) the constructive and creative nature of science, which consists in the fact that it explores not only objects that are mastered in cash forms social activities, but also creates theoretical models of potentially possible objects and their interactions in the practice of the future.

Consideration of science as a system integrity in the unity of its main structural components, taking into account the main and most specific characteristics of scientific knowledge, allows us to define science as follows. The science -it is a form of socially organized cognitive activity, in which, on the basis of an anticipatory reflection of reality, its rational-conceptual assimilation is carried out, fixed in the system of objective, objectively true, new knowledge.

Forms of reflective comprehension of scientific knowledge. Problem field of the philosophy of science. The study of science as one of the dominant components of modern culture is characterized by an impressive variety of forms, genres and styles of its description and interpretation. As a rule, this reveals a significant influence of the traditions of the philosophical analysis of cognition on the forms and methods of modern science of science. The philosophy of knowledge as one of the main sections of any developed system of philosophical knowledge is usually considered as integrating the following main components:

1) traditional or classical epistemology (theory of knowledge);

2) modern epistemological concepts, which present interpretations of cognition and knowledge, based on the principles of postclassical philosophizing;

3) philosophical and methodological analysis of scientific knowledge and forms of its constitution in various sociocultural systems.

Within the framework of this course, the content analysis of the third component is of the greatest interest, since its development and legitimization in modern science studies have led to the formation of the philosophy of science as a system-oriented strategy for studying science in the unity of its cognitive, methodological and sociocultural characteristics. The synthetic intentions of the philosophy of science could be realized only insofar as its models and concepts made extensive use of the results and conceptual approaches substantiated in other disciplines that study science.

With a certain degree of conventionality, the entire array of knowledge about science and the main directions of its study and research can be divided into three blocks:

1) Disciplinary studies of science (history of science, sociology of science, psychology of science, logic of science, etc.)

2) Interdisciplinary research of science, which most fully revealed its orientation within the framework of the so-called science of science.

3) Philosophical and methodological analysis of scientific knowledge, on the basis of which the philosophy of science develops as a form of systematic understanding of the phenomenon of science in its historical dynamics and functioning in the modern socio-cultural environment.

Speaking about the philosophy of science, it is necessary to clearly distinguish between two main meanings of this terminological construct. On the one hand, the philosophy of science is understood as a set of epistemological concepts about the nature, functions and dynamics of scientific knowledge, developed in Western and Russian philosophy of knowledge during the 20th century. On the other hand, the philosophy of science is developing today in the form of a systematically organized body of knowledge about the logical-cognitive, methodological and socio-cultural aspects of the existence of science as a specific and unique component of modern culture.

The formation of the philosophy of science as a special type of theoretical and methodological reflection on scientific knowledge and the forms of its assimilation in the economic and social life of society is usually associated with the so-called first positivism of the 19th century and the activities of its most famous representatives (O. Comte, J. Mill, G. Spencer ). The positivist doctrine of science receives its further development and more differentiated interpretation in the epistemological programs of empirio-criticism (E. Mach, R. Avenarius, A. Bogdanov and others); in the conventionalism of A. Poincaré and P. Duhem; in instrumentalist versions of the interpretation of science and scientific research (J. Dewey, P. Bridgman, etc.)

The next fundamental step in the development of the philosophy of science as a specific direction in the analysis and comprehension of the phenomenon of scientific knowledge was made by representatives of neopositivist philosophy. This applies primarily to the analysis of the foundations of mathematics within the framework of the Logistic program (H. Frege, B. Russell); the development of the philosophy of logical positivism through the efforts of L. Wittgenstein and members of the Vienna Circle (M. Schlick, R. Carnap, O. Neurath, G. Reichenbach, and others). During this period, the neo-positivist program of logical analysis of the language of science reveals itself in the forms of radical reductionism and verificationism, offers models of empirical substantiation of the universal language of science, strict demarcation of scientific knowledge and metaphysics.

The next stage in the development of Western philosophy of science is the development of a fallibilist model of scientific knowledge, represented primarily in the concepts of falsificationism by K. Popper and the methodology of research programs by I. Lakatos. Popper's philosophy of critical rationalism is developed and concretized in G. Bachelard's neo-rationalism and M. Polanyi's post-critical philosophy of science.

In the 60s - 70s of the twentieth century, relativistic and historicist tendencies in the analysis and methodological understanding of the phenomenon of scientific knowledge became noticeably more active in Western philosophy of science. These tendencies manifest themselves most prominently in various schools and directions of the positivist philosophy of science, which focuses on the study of the historical, psychological, sociocultural aspects of scientific knowledge (T. Kuhn, S. Toulmin, P. Feyerabend, D. Bohm, J. Holton, L. . Laudan, etc.)

The current situation in the Western philosophy of science is specified by the intensive development of two dominant trends in the analysis and interpretation of science and its characteristic forms of research practice. First of all, these are various schools and directions of analytical and linguistic philosophy (P. Strawson, N. Chomsky, D. Davidson, J. Searle, M. Dammit, etc.), as well as active controversy between representatives of scientific realism, on the one hand ( H. Putnam, W. Sellars, B. van Frassen) instrumentalism and radical constructivism - on the other hand (G. Folmer, H. Maturana, F. Varela, N. Goodman, etc.)

Various forms of philosophical and methodological analysis of social and humanitarian cognition and knowledge were developed and constituted within the framework of the structuralist program (C. Levi-Strauss, J. Lacan, M. Foucault, R. Barthes, etc.), and then in the core of post-structuralist interpretations language and "logic" humanities(J. Deleuze, F. Baudrillard, J. Derrida, etc.)

No less famous and popular in Western philosophy of science are various versions of hermeneutic interpretations of the language of science and the forms of its mediation in culture (G. Gadamer, P. Riker, K.-O. Appel, etc.)

An important contribution to the development of modern philosophy of science was made by domestic philosophers and methodologists. In the models and concepts of the structure, dynamics and functions of science developed by them in various types of society, the system-dialectical tradition of modern science of science was substantiated, which in many respects turned out to be more promising and adequate to the real practice of scientific research than Western counterparts. The most famous and authoritative representatives of the Russian philosophy of science are B.M. Kedrov, P.V. Kopnin, M.E. Omelyanovsky, V.A. Shtoff, V.S. Shvyrev, A.I. Rakitov, V.S. Stepin and others. Thanks to the fruitful activity of these and many other scientists and philosophers, since the second half of the twentieth century, a number of schools and research centers have been formed and thoroughly declare themselves in the domestic philosophy of science. Among them are Moscow, Minsk, Leningrad, Kyiv, Novosibirsk, Rostov schools, whose representatives continue to develop domestic traditions in the field of philosophy of science even today.

Speaking about the subject area of ​​the philosophy of science as a form of philosophical reflection on various aspects of the existence of science, and also bearing in mind that it is characterized by the intention to create a systemic picture of the "life of science" in the unity of its logical-cognitive, methodological and sociocultural characteristics, it is necessary to state the existence of many points of view on this issue and the existence of an impressive pluralism of interpretations. This state of affairs is quite understandable and understandable, since the "philosophy of science" is an intensively developing field of knowledge about the most diverse projections and forms of manifestation of the "scientific spirit" in the modern sociocultural situation.

Let us point out some of the most typical and frequently encountered approaches to the definition of the subject area of ​​the philosophy of science.

According to F. Frank, a well-known specialist in this field, the central problem of the philosophy of science is the substantiation of the necessity and real ways of transforming human cognition from the maxims of common sense and everyday thinking to natural scientific principles and methods for mastering the studied reality. K. Popper believed that the problem of the growth of knowledge and the related analysis of competition in science, which inevitably accompanies any cognitive action, should be considered as the central core of the problems of the philosophy of science.

There is a widespread opinion that the subject matter of the philosophy of science combines several types or levels of analysis of science as a kind of systemic integrity and a specific component of modern culture:

1) analysis of the structure of science presented in various forms of its existence (science as an activity, knowledge and social institution);

2) the study of the fundamental functions of science in various socio-cultural systems and the features of its existence in modern society;

3) studying the problem of the growth of knowledge and the sociodynamics of science in the era of scientific revolutions and during periods of its “normal” existence;

4) axiological problems of science, within the framework of which numerous issues of the relationship and dialogue of science with society and various components of culture are considered.

Some authors argue that the most important task of the philosophy of science is to study a certain boundary between philosophy and real private scientific knowledge of the cognitive component, which they call the foundations of science. As a rule, they include: ontological, epistemological, logical, methodological and value bases.

A fairly popular point of view is that the main task of the philosophy of science is to analyze and consider critical issues science. At the same time, various typologies and classifications of these problems are substantiated. These include: 1) general philosophical problems of science as a cognitive and cognitive integrity; 2) the block of problems that is characteristic of certain areas of knowledge (mathematics, natural Sciences, technical and technological knowledge, social sciences and humanities), or specific scientific knowledge (physics, chemistry, biology, psychology, sociology, etc.); 3) problems that are constituted depending on the direction of the emergence and goals of the philosophical and methodological study of science (from philosophy to science or from science to philosophy).

The so-called descriptive approach to determining the status of the philosophy of science and its subject area has also become widely known. From the standpoint of this approach, the philosophy of science is a description of various cognitive situations that occur both at the empirical and theoretical levels of scientific research. This type of situation can include a large array of cognitive actions and operations from "ad hoc" hypotheses to "case studies" focused on the study of real single events in science with their subsequent extrapolation to a wide class of similar cognitive situations.

AT contemporary literature there are also attempts to justify such interpretations of the subject area of ​​research within the framework of the philosophy of science, which are based on the principles of their historical and genetic classification. According to such approaches, the main problems of the philosophy of science in the first third of the twentieth century were the following questions:

– analysis of the problem of causality in physical cognition and substantiation complex system relations between determinism and indeterminism in modern natural science;

– study of dynamic and statistical regularities, forms and methods of their fixation in the structure of scientific knowledge;

– study of relations and mediations between the classical and quantum-relativistic scientific pictures of the world, etc.

The second third of the twentieth century is usually associated with the activation of philosophical and methodological research in science in such areas as:

- analysis of the possibilities and boundaries of the empirical substantiation of scientific knowledge;

– the problem of theoretical loading of experience;

– study of the contexts of the psychology of discovery and the logic of substantiation of scientific knowledge;

– development of the problems of knowledge growth and metatheoretical structures of science, etc.

Finally, in the last third of the 20th century and in recent studies, questions related to analysis have become increasingly relevant:

– various kinds and forms of scientific rationality, as well as their change in the era of cardinal transformations of science and scientific revolutions;

– cognitive and methodological possibilities of the history of science, the psychology of scientific creativity, the sociology of science and other disciplinary and interdisciplinary oriented areas of its study and research;

– a wide range of worldview, ethical, socio-cultural and axiological problems of science and the forms of its objectification in various spheres of life of modern society (economics, politics, culture, etc.);

– methodological ideas of global evolutionism, synergetics and principles of non-linear thinking in modern scientific research;

– prospects and tendencies of convergence of subject areas and methodological standards of the natural and human sciences, rational and non-rational factors as incentives and determinants of the latest research strategies and orientations in scientific research.

It is possible to fix other interpretations of the subject area of ​​the philosophy of science as a dynamically developing sphere of philosophical knowledge. However, the noted ones are quite enough to make a reasonable conclusion that the modern philosophy of science is a strategy that is in the process of intensive development. system research science based on the use of heuristic potential and methodological resources of the philosophy of knowledge.

The phenomenon of scientific rationality. Scientific and non-scientific knowledge. The significance of a rationally organized civilization, which is inherent in the spirit of expedient and pragmatic solution of emerging problems, has been assigned to European civilization. In order to reveal the nature of this global orientation towards the structure of social reality and the principles of its historical change, it is necessary to answer the question of what constitutes the phenomenon of rationality as a certain characteristic of thought and action. Usually it is associated with such parameters as expediency, efficiency, clarity and certainty, lawfulness, etc.

Obviously, in this context, rationality should be interpreted primarily as a specific characteristic of consciousness that creates the necessary prerequisites for achieving optimal and effective forms of cognition and transformation of reality. Traditionally, in classical philosophy, such a characteristic of consciousness was associated with its ability to provide a conceptually discursive and logically justified reflection of reality. And this ability itself was explained by the fact that in the structure of consciousness, along with sensations, perceptions, memory, emotions, will and other components, rational-logical thinking was also distinguished, which was proclaimed the highest cognitive ability the subject, providing him with the possibility of purposeful, generalized and mediated knowledge of reality.

In modern interpretations of the structure of consciousness, it is quite often distinguished cognitive and mental layers or components. The first of them is responsible for the implementation of a rational-conceptual attitude to the world and the desire to achieve objectively true knowledge about it. The second - for subjective experiences, value judgments and regulations, as well as emotional contexts of the "life of consciousness" (faith, hope, joy, longing, justice, etc.). Of course, a really acting consciousness is always characterized by the inseparable unity of the cognitive and mental principles in its content, therefore the correct interpretation of rationality as a fundamental ability of consciousness should be based on taking into account this dialectical nature of it.

Thus, rationality as an integral characteristic of a person's consciousness can be defined through the fixation of such his ability, which provides him with the possibility of a generalized, mediated and essential reflection of reality, expressed in a verbal-conceptual form. The presence of this ability of consciousness allows a person not only to learn deep and regular connections and relationships, but also to provide the possibility of effective transmission of knowledge in culture through the transfer of information presented in the form of semiotic semiotic constructions from one social system to another.

In modern culture, it is precisely such shaping as science that most vividly represents the rational ability of consciousness. Therefore, today it is more common to talk about the phenomenon of scientific rationality and analyze its various types.

The concept of "scientific rationality" is also very amorphous in content and polysemantic. Several semantic aspects of its content can be fixed:

1) the nature and level of orderliness of the systems studied in science, which is fixed in the form of ideal objects of varying degrees of generality;

2) a method of conceptual and discursive description and explanation of the reality under study;

3) a set of norms and methods of scientific research, which is fixed in a certain type of methodological reflection or style of scientific thinking.

It is the third semantic aspect of the term "scientific rationality" that has become the most popular and in demand in modern philosophical and methodological literature. There are different models or types of scientific rationality interpreted in this way: inductivist (R. Carnap); deductive (Hempel); mesh (L. Laudan); thematic (J. Holton), etc.

One of the well founded and widely known interpretations scientific rationality is developed in the domestic philosophy of science (V.S. Stepin, V.S. Shvyrev, P.P. Gaidenko, V.N. Porus, etc.) its historical and genetic concept, within which three historical types of scientific rationality: classical

Man has sought to know himself, the world around him, the phenomena that occur in it, for thousands of years. In other words, cognition is the process of comprehending the surrounding world and oneself in this world. Cognition as a form of spiritual activity has existed in society since its inception and has gone through certain stages of development along with it. On each of them, the process of cognition is carried out in diverse and interconnected socio-cultural forms developed in the course of human history. The following forms of cognition are distinguished: ordinary, playful, mythological, artistic-figurative, philosophical, religious, personal, scientific cognition. Although they are related, each of them has its own specifics. Since the subject of this study is scientific knowledge, it is not necessary to consider other forms of knowledge.

Let us consider the main features of scientific knowledge (criteria of scientific character):

• 1. The main task of scientific knowledge is to discover the objective laws of reality - natural, social, the laws of cognition itself, thinking, etc. Hence the focus of research is mainly on the essential properties of the subject and their expression in a system of abstractions.
• 2. On the basis of knowledge of the laws of functioning and development of the objects under study, science predicts the future in order to further the practical development of reality.
• 3. An essential feature of scientific knowledge is its consistency, that is, the totality of knowledge put in order on the basis of certain theoretical principles, which unite individual knowledge into an integral organic system.
• 4. Science is characterized by constant methodological reflection. This means that in it the study of objects, the identification of their specificity, properties and relationships is always accompanied by an awareness of the methods and techniques by which these objects are studied.
• 5. Scientific knowledge is a contradictory process of reproduction of knowledge that forms an integral developing system of concepts, theories, hypotheses, laws, and other ideal forms.
• 6. In the process of scientific knowledge, such specific material means as devices, instruments, and other scientific equipment are used. Also, science is characterized by the use for the study of its objects and itself of such spiritual means and methods as modern logic, mathematical methods, dialectics, etc.
• 7. Scientific knowledge is characterized by strict evidence, the validity of the results obtained, the reliability of the conclusions. At the same time, there are many hypotheses, conjectures, assumptions, probabilistic judgments, etc. That is why the perfection of the thinking of researchers is of paramount importance here.
• 8. The immediate goal and highest value of scientific knowledge is objective truth, comprehended mainly by rational means and methods, but not without the participation of living contemplation. From here feature scientific knowledge - objectivity.

Scientific truth is knowledge that meets two kinds of requirements: first, it corresponds to reality; secondly, it satisfies a number of scientific criteria. There are the following criteria of scientific truth:

• - logical consistency. Assumes that true knowledge should be expressed in logically consistent forms;
• - coherence (systematic) implies that new knowledge should be well consistent with those results that are already evaluated as true. Of two theories, the one that is more compatible with fundamental knowledge is recognized as true;
• - heuristic. More heuristic is the theory that helps to predict new facts, provides an increase in knowledge, and does not simply systematize already known facts;
• - simplicity. Of the two theories, preference should be given to the one that explains reality based on a smaller number of independent assumptions, i.e. more simply;
• - conventional concept. Truth is the result of the coincidence of the perceptions of the majority, or the result of agreement;
• - pragmatic concept. Truth consists in the usefulness of knowledge, its effectiveness.

These criteria should not be regarded as something permanent. They are a product historical development science may change in the future.

However, the most important criterion for the truth of knowledge is practice. The verification of knowledge by practice is a process, that is, it has a historical character. This means that the criterion of practice is both absolute and relative. It is absolute because the developing practice in the fullness of its content can finally prove any theoretical or other provisions. At the same time, this criterion is relative, since the practice itself is developing and therefore it cannot this moment, immediately and completely prove certain conclusions obtained in the process of cognition. Perhaps Francis Bacon meant precisely the importance of applying the criterion of practice in the following lines: “But the most serious of all errors consists in deviating from the ultimate goal of science. After all, some people strive for knowledge by virtue of an innate and boundless curiosity, others for the sake of pleasure, still others in order to gain authority, fourth in order to gain the upper hand in competition and dispute, the majority for the sake of material gain, and only a very few in order to be given from God's gift of reason to direct for the benefit of the human race. Science is a rich repository and treasury created for the glory of the creator of all things and to help humanity. Indeed, it is precisely the service of this goal that would really adorn science and raise its significance if theory and practice were united by stronger bonds than hitherto.

From all of the above, it follows that scientific knowledge is a developing system of knowledge, which includes two main levels - empirical and theoretical. Although they are related to each other, but each has its own specifics. Empirical (experimental) research is directed directly at its object. It masters it with the help of such methods and means as measurement, observation, experiment, etc., and its most important element is the fact. Any scientific research begins with the collection, systematization and generalization of facts. The concept of “fact” has the following main meanings:

• 1) some fragment of reality, objective events, results related either to objective reality or to the sphere of consciousness and cognition;
• 2) knowledge about any event, the reliability of which is proven;
• 3) a sentence fixing empirical knowledge.

The second and third of these meanings are summarized in the concept of "scientific fact". In scientific knowledge, facts play a twofold role:

• - a set of facts forms an empirical basis for hypotheses and theories;
• - Facts are crucial in confirming theories or refuting them.

It is worth noting that according to Bacon, scientific knowledge of nature is possible only on the basis of experience, experimental method research: “Science improves nature, but it itself is improved by experience, because natural gifts are like wild plants and need to be grown with the help of learned studies, and learning itself gives indications too general, if they are not clarified by experience. The cunning people despise learning, the simple-hearted marvel at it, the wise use it. For learning by itself does not teach how to apply it: that is, special, higher wisdom, which can be acquired only by experience.

The theoretical level of scientific knowledge is characterized by the predominance of the rational moment - concepts, theories, laws and other forms of thinking. Living contemplation, sensory cognition is not eliminated here, but becomes a subordinate aspect of the cognitive process. Theoretical knowledge reflects phenomena and processes from the point of view of their universal internal connections and regularities comprehended with the help of rational data processing of empirical knowledge. Considering theoretical knowledge, it is necessary to determine its structural components. The main ones include the problem, hypothesis and theory, which act as “key points” of the construction and development of knowledge at the theoretical level.

A problem is a form of theoretical knowledge, the content of which is something that is not yet known by man, but that needs to be known. A problem is a process that includes two main points - its formulation and solution. The correct derivation of problematic knowledge from previous facts and generalizations, the ability to correctly pose the problem is a necessary prerequisite for its successful solution.

A hypothesis is a form of theoretical knowledge containing an assumption formulated on the basis of a number of facts, the true meaning of which is uncertain and needs to be proven. In the course of proving the hypotheses put forward, some of them become a true theory, others are refined, others are discarded, turn into errors if the test gives a negative result. In methodology, the term "hypothesis" is used in two senses: as a form of existence of knowledge, characterized by unreliability, the need for proof, and as a method of forming and substantiating explanatory proposals, leading to the establishment of laws, principles, theories.

Theory is the most developed form of scientific knowledge, which gives a holistic reflection of the regular and essential connections of a certain area of ​​reality. The following features of the theory are distinguished:

• - Theory is not separate reliable scientific provisions, but their totality, an integral organic developing system;
• - in order to turn into a theory, knowledge must not only describe a certain set of facts, but also explain them;
• - for the theory, it is obligatory to substantiate, prove the provisions included in it;
• - theoretical knowledge should strive to explain the widest possible range of phenomena;
• - the nature of the theory is determined by the degree of validity of its defining beginning, which reflects the fundamental regularity of this subject.

Science is a sphere of human activity, the result of which is new knowledge about reality that meets the criterion of truth. Practicality, usefulness, effectiveness of scientific knowledge are considered to be derived from its truth. In addition, the term "science" refers to the entire body of knowledge obtained to date by the scientific method.

Science is a special kind of human activity, where the goal and result is a system of objective knowledge about the world and about the ways of its transformation.

This is a special form of intellectual labor aimed at obtaining objective knowledge. Scientific knowledge is both abstract-analytical and constructive-synthetic knowledge, which is carried out with the help of special methods.

After analyzing the empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge, one should consider such a concept as the scientific picture of the world, which is formed as a result of the synthesis of knowledge obtained in various sciences.

Science is a sphere of human activity, the function of which is the development of a theoretical systematization of objective knowledge about reality; one of the forms of social consciousness; includes both the activity of obtaining new knowledge and its result - the sum of knowledge underlying the scientific picture of the world. It denotes certain branches of scientific knowledge. The immediate goals are the description, explanation and prediction of the processes and phenomena of reality, which is the subject of its study, on the basis of the laws it discovers. The system of sciences is conditionally divided into natural, social and technical sciences.

Main Feature scientific knowledge is recognized as its systemic nature, logical proof by deriving some knowledge from others. In terms of content, scientific knowledge is characterized by the desire for truth, for revealing the most profound and general foundations of the range of phenomena under consideration, in the limiting case of the whole world as a whole. What can not be said about the non-scientific form of knowledge.

Prior to the emergence of science as a specialized cognitive activity of people, empirical knowledge coincided with spontaneous, practical, everyday knowledge. Empirical is experienced (obtained in the process of human activity) knowledge. With the emergence of science, empirical knowledge ceases to coincide with everyday, everyday knowledge and turns into a special cognitive activity, the purpose of which is a reliable and practically and logically verifiable establishment of facts, their description, classification, and so on. The most important feature of empirical scientific research should be considered its focus directly on sensually perceived objects through observation and experiment as its main methods. It is also acceptable to characterize empirical cognition as a fact-fixing activity.

Cognition of the essential unity of phenomena, their internal, and not just external connections, constitutes the specifics of theoretical science. It is in theoretical knowledge that the excellent features of scientific knowledge as a whole are most concentrated. If imperial knowledge allows only fixing, ascertaining phenomena and the connections between them, then theoretical knowledge makes it possible to explain the facts, to single them out from general observations, to reveal the general essence and basis, to answer why, how, in what way certain phenomena occur. It is unreasonable to see the criteria for the truth of theoretical knowledge directly in the data of empirical knowledge. Despite the fact that empirical knowledge is based on facts, it is in it that the source of both practical and theoretical errors of people is located. Empirical knowledge is one-sided, since it does not reveal the internal unity of diverse facts. It reflects the presence of not only individual phenomena, but also the links between them, describing them in the form of so-called empirical laws and regularities.

The main and direct function of science, which determines its entire structure and organization, has been and remains the disclosure of objective truth. Truth is the result of the cognitive activity of a person, the subject of knowledge; truth exists in the mind of man. But the truth, being subjective, by virtue of the method of obtaining and the form of expression, is objective in its content. This follows from the definition: truth is knowledge, the content of which does not depend on the cognizing subject, it is conditioned by the objects of cognition, its properties and patterns. A more precise measure, degree and limits of the objectivity of truth can be expressed using the concepts of absolute and relative truth. Absolute truth is the sum of relative truths.

I agree with Vernadsky's statement that the distinguishing feature of science is not the truth of knowledge, but the use of special methods of cognition. There is no absolute truth, everything is changeable and moves forward and forward, just like science with the help of special techniques or methods that allow you to move from what is already known to new knowledge.

Science is not the only form of cognitive activity. Along with science, there are other forms of knowledge: religious, artistic, everyday, playful, etc.

To understand the specifics of science, we highlight the main features of scientific knowledge:

1) The main task of science is to discover the objective laws of reality, primarily the laws of nature and society. Therefore, science focuses mainly on the study of general, essential properties of objects. The very concept of science presupposes the discovery of laws, deepening into the essence of the studied subjects.

2) Scientific knowledge is systemic in nature, i.e. here knowledge is logically ordered. Knowledge becomes scientific only when it is included in a system of concepts, in the composition of theories.

3) The immediate goal and highest value of science is the achievement of objective truth. Objective truth is the content of our knowledge that does not depend on man and mankind.

4) Strict evidence is inherent in scientific knowledge, in other words, this knowledge must be confirmed by facts and arguments.

For scientific knowledge is characterized by experimental verifiability and the possibility of multiple reproduction of the results of scientific research.

Science and philosophy

There are three possible approaches to the problem of the relationship between science and philosophy:

Philosophy is science: it is a kind of science of all sciences (Aristotle, G. Hegel).

Philosophy is not science, because the conclusions of philosophy cannot be verified, i.e. verify by experience (the positivists O. Comte, L. Wittgenstein, and others). B. Russell, a supporter of neopositivism, defined philosophy as a no man's land between science and theology.

Philosophy is partly science and partly not science.(F.Engels). On the one hand, philosophy can be considered a science, since, firstly, it arises simultaneously with science (the first philosophers were scientists at the same time), philosophy is the “mother” of all sciences; Secondly, like science, philosophy relies on the power of reason (this is the comprehension of the world with the help of special concepts, categories).

But, on the other hand, there are significant differences between philosophy and science:

a) private sciences explore phenomena that exist objectively (regardless of consciousness), while philosophy explores phenomena through the prism of their connection with a person, with his consciousness; b) science relies on the experimental verification of its provisions, and philosophy investigates phenomena that are comprehended by the mind, these phenomena, in fact, are inaccessible to sensory verification.

Thus, philosophy is not only a science, but also a worldview.

Science and art

What is common between science and art is that they are means of knowing and transforming the world.

But there are also fundamental differences:

Science is aimed at finding common patterns, while art pays attention to each individual human personality, single event, occasion.

Science explores the world based primarily on the power of the mind, on abstract thinking. Science is a reflection of the world in concepts, categories, conclusions. Art explores the world based on feelings and emotions. Art is a reflection of the world with the help of artistic images, and the artistic image is an alloy of feeling and thought, while the sensual side prevails.

Science and common knowledge:

People acquire ordinary knowledge in the course of direct practical activity, in labor. These are folk medicine, folk agronomy, etc. Ordinary knowledge is often called common sense.

Science and ordinary knowledge are united in that they are aimed at the search for truth. Therefore, there is no insurmountable gap between them. (For example, a doctor and a medicine man pursue the goal of curing a sick person).

At the same time, there are fundamental differences between scientific and everyday knowledge:

In everyday knowledge there is no theoretical "floor" of knowledge. This is a collection of practical information about something. Science presupposes the existence of a theory.

Ordinary knowledge is non-systematic, and scientific knowledge is knowledge brought into a system, that is, ordered knowledge.

12. The function of science in the life of society (science as a worldview, productive and social force).

The functions of science in the life of society

Production of new knowledge

predictive function

Event comprehension function

Science as the basis of worldview

Science as a productive force of society

Science as a social factor in the development of society

The main function of science is to produce new knowledge about the surrounding world. This knowledge is necessary for

in order, first of all, to explain the facts that one has to constantly meet in various areas of production-technical, cultural-historical, cognitive-cultural and everyday practical activities. To carry out this function, science creates concepts, puts forward hypotheses, discovers laws and builds theories.

Of much greater practical interest is the prediction of new phenomena and events, which provides an opportunity to act with knowledge of the matter both in the present and especially in the future. This predictive function of science is carried out with the help of the same laws and theories of science that are used for explanation.

Along with explanation, science also contributes to the understanding of events and phenomena. This function plays a significant role in social and humanitarian knowledge, which is focused on the study of the expedient activities of people in various spheres of public life. In order to understand the actions and actions of people, it is necessary to interpret them accordingly, i.e. reveal their meaning.

The functions of scientific knowledge discussed above are organically linked with such basic goals of science as serving as the basis of the scientific worldview, a source of development of productive forces and a social factor in the development of society.

Science as the basis of the worldview. Each person has his own view of the world around him, with the help of which he expresses his attitude towards him and gives him an assessment, but such a view is individual character. With the emergence of experimental natural science, science becomes an essential component of the modern worldview. Together with philosophy, it constitutes its rational-theoretical basis, since it is with their help that the scientific picture of the world is formed. Such a picture reflects the basic principles and fundamental laws of development, both nature and society. Accordingly, a distinction is made between the natural-scientific picture of nature, on the one hand, and the picture of social life, on the other.

Science exerts its influence on the worldview primarily through the scientific picture of the world, in which the general principles of the world order are expressed in a concentrated form. Therefore, getting to know them is the most important task. modern education and the formation of the scientific worldview of the individual.

Science as a productive force of society. By discovering the objective laws of nature, science creates real opportunities for their practical use by society. Science as a direct productive force was first discussed during the scientific and technological revolution of the 20th century, when the latest achievements of science began to be used to replace manual labor with machine labor, to mechanize and automate labor-intensive processes in production technology, to use computers and other information technology in various industries. National economy. The creation of special associations for scientific research and design development (R&D), which were tasked with bringing scientific projects for their direct use in production. The establishment of such an intermediate link between the theoretical and applied sciences and their embodiment in specific design developments contributed to the convergence of science with production and its transformation into a real productive force.

Science as a social factor in the development of society. Following the transformation of science into a direct productive force, it gradually begins to play an ever greater role as a social force in the development of society. This task is carried out primarily by the socio-economic and cultural-humanitarian sciences, which play a regulatory role in various areas of social activity. At present, when the threats of global crises in ecology, energy, shortages of raw materials and food are growing, the importance of social sciences in the life of society is even more increasing. Their efforts should now be directed towards the rational organization of public life, the main components of which are its democratization, raising the living standards of the population, establishing and strengthening civil society and individual freedom.