There are two levels in the structure of scientific knowledge: empirical and theoretical. These two levels should be distinguished from the two stages of the cognitive process as a whole - sensual and rational. Sensory knowledge is close, but not identical, to empirical, rational differs from theoretical.

Sensual and rational are forms of human knowledge in general, both scientific and everyday; empirical and theoretical knowledge is characteristic of science. Empirical knowledge is not limited to sensory knowledge, it includes moments of reflection, understanding, interpretation of observational data and the formation of a special type of knowledge - a scientific fact. The latter is the interaction of sensory and rational knowledge.

Theoretical knowledge is dominated by forms of rational knowledge (concepts, judgments, conclusions), but visual model representations such as an ideal ball, an absolutely rigid body are also used. A theory always contains sensory-visual components. Thus, at both levels of cognition, both feelings and reason function.

The difference between the empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge occurs for the following reasons (Table 2):

The level of reflection of reality,

The nature of the subject of study,

Applied methods of study,

Forms of knowledge

Language tools.

table 2

The difference between empirical and theoretical levels of knowledge

Levels of scientific knowledge	Reflection level	Subject of study	Methods of scientific knowledge	Forms of scientific knowledge	Language
Empiric	Phenomenon	Empirical object	Observation, comparison, measurement, experiment	scientific fact	natural
Transition	-	-	Generalization, abstraction, analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction	Scientific problem, scientific hypothesis, empirical law	-
Theoretical	Essence	Theoretical ideal object	Idealization, formalization, ascent from the abstract to the concrete, axiomatic, thought experiment	scientific theory	mathematical

Empirical and theoretical research is aimed at cognition of the same objective reality, but its vision, reflection in knowledge occurs in different ways. Empirical research is basically focused on the study of external relations and aspects of objects, phenomena and dependencies between them. As a result of this study, empirical dependencies are clarified. They are the result of an inductive generalization of experience and represent probabilistically true knowledge. This is, for example, the Boyle-Mariotte law, which describes the correlation between the pressure and volume of a gas: РV= сonst, where Р is the gas pressure, V is its volume. Initially, it was discovered by R. Boyle as an inductive generalization of experimental data, when a relationship was found in the experiment between the volume of gas compressed under pressure and the value of this pressure.

At the theoretical level of cognition, there is a selection of internal, essential connections of the object, which are fixed in the laws. No matter how many experiments we make and generalize their data, a simple inductive generalization does not lead to theoretical knowledge. Theory is not constructed by inductive generalization of facts. Einstein considered this conclusion to be one of the important epistemological lessons of the development of physics in the 20th century. Theoretical law is always reliable knowledge.

Empirical research is based on the direct practical interaction of the researcher with the object under study. And in this interaction, the nature of objects, their properties and features are known. The truth of empirical knowledge is verified by direct appeal to experience, to practice. At the same time, the objects of empirical knowledge should be distinguished from the objects of reality, which have an infinite number of features. Empirical objects are abstractions that have a fixed and limited set of features.

In a theoretical study, there is no direct practical interaction with objects. They are studied only indirectly, in a thought experiment, but not in a real one. Theoretical ideal objects are studied here, which are called idealized objects, abstract objects or constructs. Their examples are a material point, an ideal product, an absolutely rigid body, an ideal gas, etc. For example, a material point is defined as a body devoid of size, but concentrating in itself the entire mass of the body. There are no such bodies in nature, they are constructed by thinking to reveal the essential aspects of the object under study. Verification of theoretical knowledge by referring to experience is impossible, and therefore it is associated with practice through empirical interpretation.

The levels of scientific knowledge also differ in functions: at the empirical level, a description of reality takes place, at the theoretical level, an explanation and prediction.

The empirical and theoretical levels differ in the methods and forms of knowledge used. The study of empirical objects is carried out with the help of observation, comparison, measurement and experiment. The means of empirical research are devices, installations and other means of real observation and experiment.

At the theoretical level, there are no means of material, practical interaction with the object under study. Special methods are used here: idealization, formalization, thought experiment, axiomatic, ascent from the abstract to the concrete.

The results of empirical research are expressed in natural language with the addition of special concepts in the form of scientific facts. They record objective, reliable information about the objects under study.

The results of theoretical research are expressed in the form of law and theory. For this, special language systems are created in which the concepts of science are formalized and mathematized.

The specificity of theoretical knowledge is its reflexivity, focus on oneself, the study of the very process of knowledge, its methods, forms, conceptual apparatus. In empirical knowledge, this kind of research, as a rule, is not conducted.

In real cognition of reality, empirical and theoretical knowledge always interact as two opposites. The data of experience, arising independently of theory, are sooner or later covered by theory and become knowledge, conclusions from it.

On the other hand, scientific theories, arising on their own special theoretical basis, are built relatively independently, without a rigid and unambiguous dependence on empirical knowledge, but obey them, representing, in the final analysis, a generalization of experimental data.

Violation of the unity of empirical and theoretical knowledge, the absolutization of any of these levels leads to erroneous one-sided conclusions - empiricism or scholastic theorizing. Examples of the latter are the concept of building communism in the USSR in 1980, the theory of developed socialism, Lysenko's antigenetic doctrine. Empiricism absolutizes the role of facts and underestimates the role of thinking, denies its active role and relative independence. The only source of knowledge is experience, sensory knowledge.

Methods of scientific knowledge

Consider the essence of general scientific methods of cognition. These methods originate in the bosom of one science, and then are used in a number of others. Such methods include mathematical methods, experiment, modeling. General scientific methods are divided into those applied at the empirical level of knowledge and at the theoretical level. The methods of empirical research include observation, comparison, measurement, experiment.

Observation- systematic purposeful perception of the phenomena of reality, during which we gain knowledge about the external aspects, properties and their relationships. Observation is an active cognitive process, based primarily on the work of the human senses and its objective material activity. This, of course, does not mean that human thinking is excluded from this process. The observer consciously searches for objects, guided by a certain idea, hypothesis or previous experience. Observation results always require a certain interpretation in the light of existing theoretical positions. The interpretation of observational data enables the scientist to separate essential facts from non-essential ones, to notice what a non-specialist can ignore. Therefore, nowadays in science it rarely happens that discoveries are made by non-specialists.

Einstein in a conversation with Heisenberg noted that the possibility of observing a given phenomenon or not depends on the theory. It is the theory that must establish what can be observed and what cannot.

The progress of observation as a method of scientific knowledge is inseparable from the progress of means of observation (for example, a telescope, microscope, spectroscope, radar). Devices not only increase the power of the sense organs, but also give us, as it were, additional organs of perception. So, devices allow you to "see" the electric field.

For surveillance to be effective, it must meet the following requirements:

intentionality or purposefulness

planning,

Activity,

Systematic.

Observation can be direct, when the object affects the senses of the researcher, and indirect, when the subject uses technical means, devices. In the latter case, scientists make a conclusion about the objects under study through the perception of the results of the interaction of unobserved objects with observed objects. Such a conclusion is based on a certain theory that establishes a certain relationship between observable and unobservable objects.

Description is a necessary aspect of observation. It is a fixation of the results of observation with the help of concepts, signs, diagrams, graphs. The main requirements that apply to a scientific description are aimed at making it as complete, accurate and objective as possible. The description should give a reliable and adequate picture of the object itself, accurately reflect the phenomenon under study. It is important that the terms used for description have a clear and unambiguous meaning. Description is divided into two types: qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative description involves fixing the properties of the object under study, it gives the most general knowledge about it. A quantitative description involves the use of mathematics and a numerical description of the properties, aspects and relationships of the object under study.

In scientific research, observation performs two main functions: providing empirical information about an object and testing hypotheses and theories of science. Often, observation can also play an important heuristic role, contributing to the development of new ideas.

Comparison- this is the establishment of similarities and differences between objects and phenomena of reality. As a result of comparison, something common is established that is inherent in several objects, and this leads to the knowledge of the law. Only those objects between which an objective commonality can exist should be compared. In addition, the comparison should be carried out according to the most important, essential features. Comparison is the basis of inference by analogy, which plays a large role: the properties of phenomena known to us can be extended to unknown phenomena that have something in common with each other.

Comparison is not only an elementary operation applied in a certain field of knowledge. In some sciences, comparison has grown to the level of a basic method. For example comparative anatomy, comparative embryology. This indicates the ever-increasing role of comparison in the process of scientific knowledge.

Measurement historically, as a method, it developed from the comparison operation, but unlike it, it is a more powerful and universal cognitive tool.

Measurement - the procedure for determining the numerical value of a certain quantity by comparison with a value taken as a unit of measurement. In order to measure, it is necessary to have an object of measurement, a unit of measurement, a measuring instrument, a certain method of measurement, an observer.

Measurements are either direct or indirect. With direct measurement, the result is obtained directly from the process itself. With indirect measurement, the desired value is determined mathematically based on the knowledge of other quantities obtained by direct measurement. For example, the determination of the mass of stars, measurements in the microcosm. Measurement makes it possible to find and formulate empirical laws and, in some cases, serves as a source for the formulation of scientific theories. In particular, the measurement of the atomic weights of elements was one of the prerequisites for the creation of the periodic system by D.I. Mendeleev, which is a theory of the properties of chemical elements. Michelson's famous measurements of the speed of light subsequently led to a radical break in the ideas established in physics.

The most important indicator of the quality of measurement, its scientific value is accuracy. The latter depends on the quality and diligence of the scientist, on the methods used by him, but mainly on the available measuring instruments. Therefore, the main ways to improve the measurement accuracy are:

Improving the quality of measuring instruments operating
based on certain established principles,

Creation of devices operating on the basis of new principles.
Measurement is one of the most important prerequisites for the application of mathematical methods in science.

Most often, the measurement is an elementary method that is included as an integral part of the experiment.

Experiment- the most important and complex method of empirical knowledge. An experiment is understood as such a method of studying an object, when the researcher actively influences it by creating artificial conditions necessary to identify the relevant properties of this object.

The experiment involves the use of observation, comparison and measurement as more elementary research methods. The main feature of the experiment is the intervention of the experimenter during natural processes, which determines the active nature of this method of cognition.

What advantages follow from the specific features of the experiment in comparison with observation?

During the experiment, it becomes possible to study this
phenomena in a "pure form", i.e., various side factors are excluded,
obscuring the essence of the main process.

The experiment allows you to explore the properties of objects of reality in extreme conditions (at ultra-low or ultra-high
temperatures, high pressures). This can lead to unexpected effects, whereby new properties of objects are discovered. This method was used, for example, to discover the properties of superfluidity and
superconductivity.

The most important advantage of the experiment is its repeatability, and its conditions can be systematically changed.

Classification of experiments is carried out on various grounds.

Depending on the goals, several types of experiment can be distinguished:

- research– carried out in order to detect the object has no
previously known properties (a classic example is Rutherford's experiments on

scattering of a-particles, as a result of which the planetary
atom structure);

- verification- is carried out to test certain statements of science (an example of a testing experiment is testing the hypothesis of the existence of the planet Neptune);

- measuring- is carried out to obtain accurate values ​​of certain properties of objects (for example, experimental melting of metals, alloys; experiments to study the strength of structures).

Physical, chemical, biological, psychological, social experiments are distinguished by the nature of the object under study.

According to the method and results of the study, experiments can be divided into qualitative and quantitative. The first of them are rather exploratory, exploratory in nature, the second provide an accurate measurement of all significant factors influencing the course of the process under study.

An experiment of any kind can be carried out both directly with the object of interest, and with its substitute - the model. Accordingly, experiments are nature and model. Models are used in cases where the experiment is impossible or impractical.

The experiment has received the greatest application in natural science. Modern science began with the experiments of G. Galileo. However, at present, it is also receiving more and more development in the study of social processes. Such a spread of the experiment in an increasing number of branches of scientific knowledge speaks of the growing importance of this research method. With its help, problems are solved to obtain the values ​​of the properties of certain objects, experimental testing of hypotheses and theories is carried out, and the heuristic value of the experiment in finding new aspects of the studied phenomena is also great. The effectiveness of the experiment also increases in connection with the progress of experimental technology. There is also such a feature: the more experiment is used in science, the faster it develops. It is no coincidence that textbooks in experimental sciences age much faster than those in descriptive sciences.

Science is not limited to the empirical level of research, it goes further, revealing the essential connections and relationships in the object under study, which, taking shape in a law known by man, acquire a certain theoretical form.

At the theoretical level of cognition, other means and methods of cognition are used. The methods of theoretical research include: idealization, formalization, the method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete, axiomatic, thought experiment.

Method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete. The concept of "abstract" is used mainly to characterize human knowledge. Abstract is understood as one-sided, incomplete knowledge, when only those properties that are of interest to the researcher are highlighted.

The concept of "concrete" in philosophy can be used in two senses: a) "concrete" - reality itself, taken in all its diversity of properties, connections and relationships; b) "concrete" - the designation of multifaceted, comprehensive knowledge about the object. The concrete in this sense acts as the opposite of abstract knowledge, i.e. knowledge, poor in content, one-sided.

What is the essence of the method of ascent from the abstract to the concrete? The ascent from the abstract to the concrete is the general form of the movement of knowledge. According to this method, the process of cognition is divided into two relatively independent stages. At the first stage, the transition from the sensory-concrete to its abstract definitions is carried out. The object itself in the process of this operation, as it were, “evaporates”, turning into a set of abstractions fixed by thinking, one-sided definitions.

The second stage of the process of cognition is actually the ascent from the abstract to the concrete. Its essence lies in the fact that thought moves from abstract definitions of an object to a comprehensive, multifaceted knowledge about an object, to concrete knowledge. It should be noted that these are two sides of the same process, which have only relative independence.

Idealization- the mental construction of objects that do not exist in reality. Such ideal objects include, for example, an absolutely black body, a material point, a point electric charge. The process of constructing an ideal object necessarily implies an abstracting activity of consciousness. So, speaking of a completely black body, we abstract from the fact that all real bodies have the ability to reflect the light falling on them. Other mental operations are also of great importance for the formation of ideal objects. This is due to the fact that when creating ideal objects, we must achieve the following goals:

Deprive real objects of some of their inherent properties;
- mentally endow these objects with certain unrealistic properties. This requires a mental transition to the limiting case in the development of some property and the rejection of some real properties of objects.

Ideal objects play an important role in science; they make it possible to significantly simplify complex systems, which makes it possible to apply mathematical methods of investigation to them. Moreover, science knows many examples when the study of ideal objects led to outstanding discoveries (Galileo's discovery of the principle of inertia). Any idealization is justified only within certain limits, it serves for the scientific solution of only certain problems. Otherwise, the use of idealization can lead to some misconceptions. Only with this in mind can one correctly assess the role of idealization in cognition.

Formalization- a method of studying a wide variety of objects by displaying their content and structure in a sign form and studying the logical structure of the theory. The advantage of formalization is the following:

Ensuring the completeness of the review of a certain area of ​​​​problems, the generalization of the approach to solving them. A general algorithm for solving problems is being created, for example, calculating the areas of various figures using integral calculus;

The use of special symbols, the introduction of which ensures the brevity and clarity of fixing knowledge;

Attributing certain meanings to individual symbols or their systems, which avoids the ambiguity of terms that is characteristic of natural languages. Therefore, when operating with formalized systems, reasoning is distinguished by clarity and rigor, and conclusions by evidence;

The ability to form iconic models of objects and replace the study of real things and processes with the study of these models. This simplifies cognitive tasks. Artificial languages ​​have a relatively large independence, independence of the sign form in relation to the content, therefore, in the process of formalization, it is possible to temporarily digress from the content of the model and explore only the formal side. Such a distraction from the content can lead to paradoxical, but truly ingenious discoveries. For example, with the help of formalization, the existence of the positron was predicted by P. Dirac.

Axiomatization found wide application in mathematics and mathematic sciences.

The axiomatic method of constructing theories is understood as their organization, when a number of statements are introduced without proof, and all the rest are derived from them according to certain logical rules. Propositions accepted without proof are called axioms or postulates. This method was first used to construct elementary geometry by Euclid, then it was used in various sciences.

A number of requirements are imposed on an axiomatically constructed system of knowledge. According to the requirement of consistency in the system of axioms, a proposition and its negation must not be deduced simultaneously. According to the requirement of completeness, any sentence that can be formulated in a given system of axioms can be proved or refuted in it. According to the requirement of independence of axioms, any of them must not be deducible from other axioms.

What are the advantages of the axiomatic method? First of all, the axiomatization of science requires a precise definition of the concepts used and adherence to the strictness of the conclusions. In empirical knowledge, both have not been achieved, which is why the application of the axiomatic method requires the progress of this field of knowledge in this respect. In addition, axiomatization streamlines knowledge, excludes unnecessary elements from it, eliminates ambiguities and contradictions. In other words, axiomatization rationalizes the organization of scientific knowledge.

At present, attempts are being made to apply this method in non-mathematized sciences: biology, linguistics, geology.

thought experiment is carried out not with material objects, but with ideal copies. A thought experiment acts as an ideal form of a real experiment and can lead to important discoveries. It was a thought experiment that allowed Galileo to discover the physical principle of inertia, which formed the basis of all classical mechanics. This principle could not be discovered in any experiment with real objects, in real environments.

The methods used both at the empirical and theoretical levels of research include generalization, abstraction, analogy, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, modeling, historical and logical methods, and mathematical methods.

abstraction has the most universal character in mental activity. The essence of this method is the mental abstraction from non-essential properties, connections and the simultaneous selection of one or more aspects of the subject being studied that are of interest to the researcher. The process of abstraction has a two-stage character: the separation of the essential, the identification of the most important; the realization of the possibility of abstraction, i.e., the actual act of abstraction or abstraction.

The result of abstraction is the formation of various kinds of abstractions - both individual concepts and their systems. It should be noted that this method is an integral part of all other methods that are more complex in structure.

When we abstract some property or relations of a number of objects, we thereby create the basis for their unification into a single class. In relation to the individual features of each of the objects included in this class, the feature that unites them acts as a common feature.

Generalization- a method, a method of cognition, as a result of which the general properties and signs of objects are established. The generalization operation is carried out as a transition from a particular or less general concept and judgment to a more general concept or judgment. For example, concepts such as "pine", "larch", "spruce" are primary generalizations from which one can move on to the more general concept of "coniferous tree". Then you can move on to such concepts as "tree", "plant", "living organism".

Analysis- a method of cognition, the content of which is a set of methods for dividing an object into its constituent parts for the purpose of their comprehensive study.

Synthesis- a method of cognition, the content of which is a set of methods for connecting individual parts of an object into a single whole.

These methods complement, condition and accompany each other. To make it possible to analyze a thing, it must be fixed as a whole, for which its synthetic perception is necessary. Conversely, the latter presupposes its subsequent dismemberment.

Analysis and synthesis are the most elementary methods of cognition that lie at the very foundation of human thinking. At the same time, they are also the most universal techniques, characteristic of all its levels and forms.

The possibility of analyzing an object is, in principle, unlimited, which logically follows from the proposition of the inexhaustibility of matter. However, the choice of elementary components of the object is always carried out, determined by the purpose of the study.

Analysis and synthesis are closely interconnected with other methods of cognition: experiment, modeling, induction, deduction.

Induction and deduction. The division of these methods is based on the allocation of two types of reasoning: deductive and inductive. In deductive reasoning, a conclusion is made about a certain element of a set based on knowledge of the general properties of the entire set.

All fish breathe with gills.

perch - fish

__________________________

Therefore, the perch breathes with gills.

One of the premises of deduction is necessarily a general judgment. Here there is a movement of thought from the general to the particular. This movement of thought is very often used in scientific research. Thus, Maxwell, from several equations expressing the most general laws of electrodynamics, successively developed the complete theory of the electromagnetic field.

Especially great cognitive significance of deduction is manifested in the case when a new scientific hypothesis acts as a general premise. In this case, deduction is the starting point for the birth of a new theoretical system. The knowledge created in this way determines the further course of empirical research and directs the construction of new inductive generalizations.

Consequently, the content of deduction as a method of cognition is the use of general scientific provisions in the study of specific phenomena.

Induction is a conclusion from the particular to the general, when, on the basis of knowledge about a part of the objects of a class, a conclusion is made about the class as a whole. Induction as a method of cognition is a set of cognitive operations, as a result of which the movement of thought from less general provisions to more general ones is carried out. Thus, induction and deduction are directly opposite directions of the train of thought. The immediate basis of inductive reasoning is the repetition of the phenomena of reality. Finding similar features in many objects of a certain class, we conclude that these features are inherent in all objects of this class.

There are the following types of induction:

-full induction, in which a general conclusion about a class of objects is made on the basis of the study of all objects of the class. Complete induction gives
reliable conclusions and can be used as evidence;

-incomplete induction, in which the general conclusion is obtained from the premises,
not covering all items of the class. There are three types of incomplete
induction:

Induction by simple enumeration or popular induction, in which a general conclusion about a class of objects is made on the basis that among the observed facts there was not one that contradicted the generalization;

Induction through the selection of facts is carried out by selecting them from the general mass according to a certain principle, which reduces the likelihood of random coincidences;

Scientific induction, in which the general conclusion about all items in the class
is done on the basis of knowledge of the necessary signs or causal
connections of a part of class objects. Scientific induction can give not only
probable, but also reliable conclusions.

Causal relationships can be established by methods of scientific induction. The following canons of induction are distinguished (Bacon-Mill rules of inductive research):

Single similarity method: if two or more cases of the phenomenon under study have only one circumstance in common, and all the others
circumstances are different, then this is the only similar circumstance and
there is a reason for this phenomenon;

Single difference method: if the cases in which the phenomenon
occurs or does not occur, differ only in one preceding circumstance, and all other circumstances are identical, then this circumstance is the cause of this phenomenon;

The combined method of similarity and difference, which is
a combination of the first two methods;

Concomitant change method: if a change in one circumstance always causes a change in another, then the first circumstance
there is a reason for the second;

Residual method: if it is known that the cause of the phenomenon under study
the circumstances necessary for it do not serve, except for one, then this one circumstance is the cause of this phenomenon.

The attractiveness of induction lies in its close connection with facts, with practice. It plays an important role in scientific research - in putting forward hypotheses, in discovering empirical laws, in the process of introducing new concepts into science. Noting the role of induction in science, Louis de Broglie wrote: "Induction, insofar as it seeks to avoid the paths already beaten, inasmuch as it inevitably tries to push the already existing boundaries of thought, is the true source of truly scientific progress" 1 .

But induction cannot lead to universal judgments in which regularities are expressed. Inductive generalizations cannot make the transition from empiricism to theory. Therefore, it would be wrong to absolutize the role of induction, as Bacon did, to the detriment of deduction. F. Engels wrote that deduction and induction are interconnected in the same necessary way as analysis and synthesis. Only in mutual connection can each of them fully show their merits. Deduction is the main method in mathematics, in the theoretically developed sciences, in the empirical sciences, inductive conclusions predominate.

Historical and logical methods are closely interconnected. They are used in the study of complex developing objects. The essence of the historical method is that the history of the development of the object under study is reproduced in all its versatility, taking into account all laws and chances. It is used primarily to study human history, but it also plays an important role in understanding the development of inanimate and living nature.

The history of the object is reconstructed in a logical way based on the study of certain traces of the past, the remnants of past eras, imprinted in material formations (natural or man-made). Historical research is characterized by a chronological aftermath.

________________

1 Broglie L. On the paths of science. M., S. 178.

consistency of consideration of the material, analysis of the stages of development of the objects of study. Using the historical method, the entire evolution of an object is traced from its inception to its current state, the genetic relationships of the developing object are studied, the driving forces and conditions for the development of the object are clarified.

The content of the historical method is revealed by the structure of the study: 1) the study of "traces of the past" as the results of historical processes; 2) comparing them with the results of modern processes; 3) reconstruction of past events in their spatio-temporal relations based on the interpretation of "traces of the past" with the help of knowledge about modern processes; 4) identification of the main stages of development and the reasons for the transition from one stage of development to another.

The logical method of research is the reproduction in thinking of a developing object in the form of a historical theory. In logical research, one abstracts from all historical accidents, reproducing history in a general form, freed from everything insignificant. The principle of the unity of the historical and the logical requires that the logic of thought should follow the historical process. This does not mean that thought is passive; on the contrary, its activity consists in isolating from history the essential, the very essence of the historical process. We can say that the historical and logical methods of cognition are not only different, but also largely coincide. It is no coincidence that F. Engels noted that the logical method is, in essence, the same historical method, but freed from the historical form. They complement each other.

The empirical level of scientific knowledge is characterized by a direct study of real-life, sensually perceived objects. At this level, the process of accumulating information about the objects under study is carried out (by measurement, experiments), here the primary systematization of the acquired knowledge takes place (in the form of tables, diagrams, graphs).

Empirical cognition, or sensual, or living contemplation, is the process of cognition itself, which includes three interrelated forms:

• 1. sensation - a reflection in the mind of a person of individual aspects, properties of objects, their direct impact on the senses;
• 2. perception - a holistic image of an object, directly given in a living contemplation of the totality of all its sides, a synthesis of these sensations;
• 3. representation - a generalized sensory-visual image of an object that acted on the senses in the past, but is not perceived at the moment.

There are images of memory and imagination. Images of objects are usually fuzzy, vague, averaged. But on the other hand, in the images, the most important properties of the object are usually singled out and insignificant ones are discarded.

According to the sense organ through which they are received, sensations are divided into visual (the most important), auditory, gustatory, etc. Usually, sensations are an integral part of perception.

As you can see, the cognitive abilities of a person are connected with the sense organs. The human body has an exteroceptive system aimed at the external environment (vision, hearing, taste, smell, etc.) and an interoreceptive system associated with signals about the internal physiological state of the body.

Empirical research is based on the direct practical interaction of the researcher with the object under study. It involves the implementation of observations and experimental activities. Therefore, the means of empirical research necessarily include instruments, instrumental installations, and other means of real observation and experiment. Empirical research is basically focused on the study of phenomena and the relationships between them. At this level of cognition, essential connections are not yet distinguished in their pure form, but they seem to be highlighted in phenomena, appear through their concrete shell.

Empirical objects are abstractions that actually highlight a certain set of properties and relations of things. Empirical knowledge can be represented by hypotheses, generalizations, empirical laws, descriptive theories, but they are directed at an object that is given directly to the observer. The empirical level expresses the objective facts revealed as a result of experiments and observations, as a rule, from their external and obvious connections. At this level, real experiment and real observation are used as the main methods. An important role is also played by the methods of empirical description, focused on the objective characterization of the studied phenomena, as clear as possible from subjective layers. 1. Observation. Observation is a sensual reflection of objects and phenomena of the external world. This is the initial method of empirical knowledge, which allows obtaining some primary information about the objects of the surrounding reality.

Scientific observation (unlike ordinary, everyday observations) is characterized by a number of features: - purposefulness (observation should be carried out to solve the set research task, and the observer's attention should be fixed only on phenomena related to this task); - regularity (observation should be carried out strictly according to plan compiled based on the task of the study); - activity (the researcher must actively seek, highlight the moments he needs in the observed phenomenon, drawing on his knowledge and experience for this, using various technical means of observation). Scientific observations are always accompanied by a description of the object of knowledge. The latter is necessary to fix those properties, aspects of the object under study, which constitute the subject of the study. Descriptions of the results of observations form the empirical basis of science, based on which researchers create empirical generalizations, compare the studied objects according to certain parameters, classify them according to some properties, characteristics, and find out the sequence of stages of their formation and development. Almost every science goes through this initial, "descriptive" stage of development. At the same time, as emphasized in one of the works on this issue, the main requirements that apply to a scientific description are aimed at making it as complete, accurate and objective as possible. The description should give a reliable and adequate picture of the object itself, accurately reflect the phenomena under study. It is important that the concepts used for description always have a clear and unambiguous meaning. With the development of science, changes in its foundations, the means of description are transformed, and a new system of concepts is often created. Observation as a method of cognition more or less satisfied the needs of sciences that were at the descriptive-empirical stage of development. Further progress in scientific knowledge was associated with the transition of many sciences to the next, higher stage of development, at which observations were supplemented by experimental studies, suggesting a targeted impact on the objects under study. As for observations, there is no activity in them aimed at transforming, changing objects of knowledge. This is due to a number of circumstances: the inaccessibility of these objects for practical impact (for example, observation of remote space objects), the undesirability, based on the objectives of the study, of interference in the observed process (phenological, psychological, etc.). observations), the lack of technical, energy, financial and other opportunities for setting up experimental studies of objects of knowledge.2.Experiment. An experiment is a more complex method of empirical knowledge compared to observation. It involves an active, purposeful and strictly controlled influence of the researcher on the object under study in order to identify and study its various aspects, properties, and connections. At the same time, the experimenter can transform the object under study, create artificial conditions for its study, and interfere with the natural course of processes. The experiment includes other methods of empirical research (observation, measurement). At the same time, it has a number of important, unique features. First, the experiment makes it possible to study the object in a “purified” form, i.e., to eliminate all sorts of side factors, layers that impede the research process. For example, some experiments require specially equipped rooms protected (shielded) from external electromagnetic influences on the object under study. Secondly, during the experiment, the object can be placed in some artificial, in particular, extreme conditions, i. temperatures, at extremely high pressures or, conversely, in a vacuum, with enormous electromagnetic field strengths, etc. Under such artificially created conditions, it is possible to discover amazing, sometimes unexpected properties of objects and thereby comprehend their essence more deeply. Very interesting and promising in this regard are space experiments that make it possible to study objects and phenomena in such special, unusual conditions (weightlessness, deep vacuum) that are unattainable in terrestrial laboratories. Thirdly, while studying any process, the experimenter can interfere with it, actively influence its course. As academician I.P. Pavlov, “experience, as it were, takes phenomena into its own hands and sets in motion one or the other, and thus, in artificial, simplified combinations, determines the true connection between phenomena. In other words, observation collects what nature offers it, while experience takes from nature what it wants. Fourth, an important advantage of many experiments is their reproducibility. This means that the conditions of the experiment, and, accordingly, the observations and measurements carried out in this case can be repeated as many times as necessary to obtain reliable results.

Science is the engine of progress. Without the knowledge that scientists pass on to us every day, human civilization would never have reached any significant level of development. Great discoveries, bold hypotheses and assumptions - all this moves us forward. By the way, what is the mechanism of cognition of the surrounding world?

General information

In modern science, empirical and theoretical methods are distinguished. The first of them should be recognized as the most effective. The fact is that the empirical level of scientific knowledge provides for an in-depth study of the object of direct interest, and this process includes both the observation itself and a whole set of experiments. As it is easy to understand, the theoretical method provides for the knowledge of an object or phenomenon through the application of generalizing theories and hypotheses to it.

Often the empirical level of scientific knowledge is characterized by multiple terms, which fix the most important characteristics of the subject under study. It must be said that this level in science is especially respected for the fact that any statement of this type can be verified in the course of a practical experiment. For example, this thesis can be attributed to such expressions: "A saturated solution of table salt can be made by heating water."

Thus, the empirical level of scientific knowledge is a set of ways and methods of studying the surrounding world. They (methods) are based, first of all, on sensory perception and accurate data of measuring instruments. These are the levels of scientific knowledge. Empirical, theoretical methods allow us to cognize various phenomena, open up new horizons of science. Since they are inextricably linked, it would be foolish to talk about one of them without talking about the main characteristics of the other.

At present, the level of empirical knowledge is constantly increasing. Simply put, scientists are learning and classifying ever-greater amounts of information, on the basis of which new scientific theories are built. Of course, the ways in which they obtain data are also improving.

Methods of empirical knowledge

In principle, you can guess about them yourself, based on the information that has already been given in this article. Here are the main methods of scientific knowledge of the empirical level:

1. observation. This method is known to everyone without exception. He assumes that an outside observer will only impartially record everything that happens (in natural conditions), without interfering with the process itself.
2. Experiment. It is somewhat similar to the previous method, but in this case everything that happens is placed in a rigid laboratory framework. As in the previous case, a scientist is often an observer who records the results of some process or phenomenon.
3. Measurement. This method assumes the need for a standard. A phenomenon or object is compared with it to clarify discrepancies.
4. Comparison. Similar to the previous method, but in this case the researcher simply compares any arbitrary objects (phenomena) with each other, without needing reference measures.

Here we briefly analyzed the main methods of scientific knowledge of the empirical level. Now let's look at some of them in more detail.

Observation

It should be noted that it can be of several types at once, and the researcher himself selects the specific one, focusing on the situation. Let's list all types of observation:

1. Armed and unarmed. If you have at least some concept of science, then you know that “armed” is called such an observation, in which various instruments and devices are used that allow you to record the results with greater accuracy. Accordingly, "naked" is called observation, which is carried out without the use of something like that.
2. Laboratory. As the name implies, it is carried out exclusively in an artificial, laboratory environment.
3. Field. Unlike the previous one, it is performed exclusively in natural conditions, “in the field”.

In general, observation is good precisely because in many cases it allows you to obtain completely unique information (especially field information). It should be noted that this method is far from being widely used by all scientists, since its successful application requires considerable patience, perseverance and the ability to impartially fix all observed objects.

This is what characterizes the main method, which uses the empirical level of scientific knowledge. This leads us to the idea that this method is purely practical.

Is the infallibility of observations always important?

Oddly enough, but in the history of science there are many cases when the most important discoveries became possible due to gross errors and miscalculations in the process of observation. Thus, in the 16th century, the famous astronomer Tycho de Brahe did his life's work by closely observing Mars.

It is on the basis of these invaluable observations that his student, no less famous I. Kepler, forms a hypothesis about the elliptical shape of planetary orbits. But! Subsequently, it turned out that Brahe's observations were distinguished by a rare inaccuracy. Many suggest that he deliberately gave the student incorrect information, but the essence of this does not change: if Kepler had used accurate information, he would never have been able to create a complete (and correct) hypothesis.

In this case, due to inaccuracies, it was possible to simplify the subject under study. By doing without complex multi-page formulas, Kepler was able to find out that the shape of the orbits was not round, as was then assumed, but elliptical.

The main differences from the theoretical level of knowledge

On the contrary, all expressions and terms used by the theoretical level of knowledge cannot be verified in practice. Here's an example for you: "A saturated solution of salts can be made by heating water." In this case, an incredible amount of experimentation would have to be done, since "salt solution" does not indicate a specific chemical compound. That is, "salt solution" is an empirical concept. Thus, all theoretical statements are unverifiable. According to Popper, they are falsifiable.

Simply put, the empirical level of scientific knowledge (as opposed to theoretical) is very specific. The results of the experiments can be touched, smelled, held in hands or seen graphs on the display of measuring instruments.

By the way, what are the forms of the empirical level of scientific knowledge? Today there are two of them: fact and law. Scientific law is the highest form of the empirical form of knowledge, since it derives the basic patterns and rules in accordance with which a natural or technical phenomenon occurs. A fact is understood only as the fact that it manifests itself under a certain combination of several conditions, but scientists in this case have not yet had time to form a coherent concept.

Relationship between empirical and theoretical data

A feature of scientific knowledge in all areas is that theoretical and empirical data are characterized by mutual penetration. It should be noted that it is absolutely impossible to separate these concepts in an absolute way, no matter what some researchers claim. For example, we talked about making a salt solution. If a person has ideas about chemistry, this example will be empirical for him (since he himself knows about the properties of basic compounds). If not, the statement will be theoretical.

The Importance of the Experiment

It must be firmly grasped that the empirical level of scientific knowledge is worthless without an experimental basis. It is the experiment that is the basis and primary source of all knowledge that has been accumulated by mankind at the moment.

On the other hand, theoretical research without a practical basis at all turns into groundless hypotheses, which (with rare exceptions) have absolutely no scientific value. Thus, the empirical level of scientific knowledge cannot exist without theoretical substantiation, but it is also insignificant without experiment. Why are we saying all this?

The fact is that the consideration of methods of cognition in this article should be carried out, assuming the actual unity and interrelation of the two methods.

Characteristics of the experiment: what is it

As we have repeatedly said, the features of the empirical level of scientific knowledge lie in the fact that the results of experiments can be seen or felt. But for this to happen, it is necessary to make an experiment, which is literally the "core" of all scientific knowledge from ancient times to this day.

The term comes from the Latin word "experimentum", which just means "experiment", "test". In principle, an experiment is the testing of certain phenomena in artificial conditions. It must be remembered that in all cases the empirical level of scientific knowledge is characterized by the desire of the experimenter to influence what is happening as little as possible. This is necessary to obtain truly “pure”, adequate data, according to which one can confidently speak about the characteristics of the object or phenomenon under study.

Preparatory work, instruments and equipment

Most often, before setting up an experiment, it is necessary to carry out detailed preparatory work, the quality of which will determine the quality of the information obtained as a result of the experiment. Let's talk about how preparation is usually carried out:

1. First, a program is being developed in accordance with which scientific experience will be carried out.
2. If necessary, the scientist independently manufactures the necessary apparatus and equipment.
3. Once again, all points of the theory are repeated, for the confirmation or refutation of which the experiment will be carried out.

Thus, the main characteristic of the empirical level of scientific knowledge is the availability of the necessary equipment and instruments, without which the experiment becomes impossible in most cases. And here we are not talking about common computer technology, but about specialized detector devices that measure very specific environmental conditions.

Thus, the experimenter must always be fully armed. This is not only about technical equipment, but also about the level of knowledge of theoretical information. Having no idea about the subject being studied, it is quite difficult to conduct some kind of scientific experiments to study it. It should be noted that in modern conditions, many experiments are often carried out by a whole group of scientists, since this approach allows us to rationalize efforts and distribute areas of responsibility.

What characterizes the object under study under experimental conditions?

The studied phenomenon or object in the experiment is placed in such conditions that they will inevitably affect the sense organs of the scientist and/or the recording instruments. Note that the reaction may depend both on the experimenter himself and on the characteristics of the equipment he uses. In addition, the experiment is far from always able to provide all the information about the object, since it is carried out in isolation from the environment.

It is very important to remember this when considering the empirical level of scientific knowledge and its methods. It is because of the latter factor that observation is so valued: in most cases, only it can provide really useful information about how a particular process occurs in the natural conditions of nature. Such data is often impossible to obtain even in the most modern and well-equipped laboratory.

However, one can still argue with the last statement. Modern science has made a good leap forward. So, in Australia, even ground forest fires are studied, recreating their course in a special chamber. This approach allows you not to risk the lives of employees, receiving quite acceptable and high-quality data. Unfortunately, this is far from always possible, because not all phenomena can be recreated (at least for now) in the conditions of a scientific institution.

Theory of Niels Bohr

The fact that experiments in the laboratory are far from always accurate was also stated by the famous physicist N. Bohr. But his timid attempts to hint to his opponents that the means and instruments to a large extent affect the adequacy of the data obtained were met with extremely negative opinions by his colleagues for a long time. They believed that any influence of the device can be eliminated by somehow isolating it. The problem is that it is almost impossible to do this even at the present level, not to mention those times.

Of course, the modern empirical level of scientific knowledge (what it is, we have already said) is high, but we are not destined to bypass the fundamental laws of physics. Thus, the task of the researcher is not only a banal description of an object or phenomenon, but also an explanation of its behavior in various environmental conditions.

Modeling

The most valuable opportunity to study the very essence of the subject is modeling (including computer and / or mathematical). Most often, in this case, they experiment not on the phenomenon or object itself, but on their most realistic and functional copies, which were created in artificial, laboratory conditions.

If it is not very clear, let us explain: it is much safer to study a tornado using the example of its simplified model in a wind tunnel. Then the data obtained during the experiment are compared with information about a real tornado, after which appropriate conclusions are drawn.

Scientific knowledge can be divided into two levels: theoretical and empirical. The first is based on inferences, the second - on experiments and interaction with the object under study. Despite their different nature, these methods are equally important for the development of science.

Empirical Research

Empirical knowledge is based on direct practical interaction between the researcher and the object he is studying. It consists of experiments and observations. Empirical and theoretical knowledge are opposite - in the case of theoretical research, a person manages only his own ideas about the subject. As a rule, this method is the lot of the humanities.

Empirical research cannot do without instruments and instrumental installations. These are means related to the organization of observations and experiments, but in addition to them there are also conceptual means. They are used as a special scientific language. It has a complex organization. Empirical and theoretical knowledge is focused on the study of phenomena and the dependencies that arise between them. By experimenting, man can discover an objective law. This is also facilitated by the study of phenomena and their correlation.

Empirical methods of knowledge

According to the scientific view, empirical and theoretical knowledge consists of several methods. This is a set of steps necessary to solve a specific problem (in this case, we are talking about identifying previously unknown patterns). The first empirical method is observation. It is a purposeful study of objects, which primarily relies on various senses (perceptions, sensations, ideas).

At its initial stage, observation gives an idea of ​​the external characteristics of the object of knowledge. However, the ultimate goal of this is to determine the deeper and inner properties of the subject. A common misconception is that the idea that scientific observation is passive is far from true.

Observation

Empirical observation is distinguished by a detailed character. It can be both direct and indirect by various technical devices and instruments (for example, a camera, telescope, microscope, etc.). As science advances, observation becomes more complex and complex. This method has several exceptional qualities: objectivity, certainty and unambiguous design. When using devices, an additional role is played by the decoding of their readings.

In the social and human sciences, empirical and theoretical knowledge takes root in a heterogeneous manner. Observation in these disciplines is particularly difficult. It becomes dependent on the personality of the researcher, his principles and attitudes, as well as the degree of interest in the subject.

Observation cannot be carried out without a certain concept or idea. It should be based on some hypothesis and record certain facts (in this case, only interconnected and representative facts will be indicative).

Theoretical and empirical studies differ from each other in details. For example, observation has its own specific functions that are not characteristic of other methods of cognition. First of all, this is providing a person with information, without which further research and hypotheses are impossible. Observation is the fuel on which thinking runs. Without new facts and impressions, there will be no new knowledge. In addition, it is with the help of observation that one can compare and verify the validity of the results of preliminary theoretical studies.

Experiment

Different theoretical and empirical methods of cognition also differ in the degree of their intervention in the process under study. A person can observe it strictly from the outside, or can analyze its properties on their own experience. This function is carried out by one of the empirical methods of cognition - experiment. In terms of importance and contribution to the final result of research, it is in no way inferior to observation.

An experiment is not only a purposeful and active human intervention in the course of the process under study, but also its change, as well as reproduction in specially prepared conditions. This method of cognition requires much more effort than observation. During the experiment, the object of study is isolated from any extraneous influence. A clean and uncluttered environment is created. The experimental conditions are completely set and controlled. Therefore, this method, on the one hand, corresponds to the natural laws of nature, and on the other hand, it is distinguished by an artificial, human-defined essence.

Experiment structure

All theoretical and empirical methods have a certain ideological load. The experiment, which is carried out in several stages, is no exception. First of all, planning and step-by-step construction take place (the goal, means, type, etc. are determined). Then comes the experimentation stage. However, it takes place under the perfect control of a person. At the end of the active phase, it is the turn to interpret the results.

Both empirical and theoretical knowledge differ in a certain structure. In order for an experiment to take place, the experimenters themselves, the object of the experiment, instruments and other necessary equipment, a methodology and a hypothesis are required, which is confirmed or refuted.

Instruments and installations

Every year scientific research becomes more and more difficult. They need more and more modern technology that allows them to study what is inaccessible to simple human senses. If earlier scientists were limited to their own sight and hearing, now they have at their disposal unprecedented experimental facilities.

During the use of the device, it can have a negative impact on the object under study. For this reason, the result of an experiment sometimes diverges from its original goals. Some researchers try to achieve such results on purpose. In science, this process is called randomization. If the experiment takes on a random character, then its consequences become an additional object of analysis. The possibility of randomization is another feature that distinguishes empirical and theoretical knowledge.

Comparison, description and measurement

Comparison is the third empirical method of cognition. This operation allows you to identify differences and similarities of objects. Empirical, theoretical analysis cannot be carried out without deep knowledge of the subject. In turn, many facts begin to play with new colors after the researcher compares them with another texture known to him. Comparison of objects is carried out within the framework of features that are essential for a particular experiment. At the same time, objects that are compared according to one feature may be incomparable in their other characteristics. This empirical technique is based on analogy. It underlies the important science

Methods of empirical and theoretical knowledge can be combined with each other. But research is almost never complete without description. This cognitive operation fixes the results of the previous experience. For the description, scientific notation systems are used: graphs, diagrams, drawings, diagrams, tables, etc.

The last empirical method of knowledge is measurement. It is carried out through special means. Measurement is necessary to determine the numerical value of the desired measured value. Such an operation must be carried out in accordance with strict algorithms and rules accepted in science.

Theoretical knowledge

In science, theoretical and empirical knowledge has different fundamental supports. In the first case, this is a detached use of rational methods and logical procedures, and in the second, direct interaction with the object. Theoretical knowledge uses intellectual abstractions. One of its most important methods is formalization - the display of knowledge in a symbolic and sign form.

At the first stage of expressing thinking, the usual human language is used. It is characterized by complexity and constant variability, which is why it cannot be a universal scientific tool. The next stage of formalization is connected with the creation of formalized (artificial) languages. They have a specific purpose - a strict and precise expression of knowledge that cannot be achieved using natural speech. Such a symbol system can take the format of formulas. It is very popular in mathematics and other areas where numbers cannot be dispensed with.

With the help of symbolism, a person eliminates the ambiguous understanding of the record, makes it shorter and clearer for further use. Not a single research, and therefore all scientific knowledge, can do without speed and simplicity in the application of its tools. Empirical and theoretical study equally needs formalization, but it is at the theoretical level that it takes on an exceptionally important and fundamental significance.

An artificial language, created within a narrow scientific framework, is becoming a universal means of exchanging thoughts and communicating specialists. This is the fundamental task of methodology and logic. These sciences are necessary for the transmission of information in an understandable, systematized form, free from the shortcomings of natural language.

The meaning of formalization

Formalization allows you to clarify, analyze, clarify and define concepts. The empirical and theoretical levels of knowledge cannot do without them, so the system of artificial symbols has always played and will continue to play a big role in science. Common and colloquial concepts seem obvious and clear. However, due to their ambiguity and uncertainty, they are not suitable for scientific research.

Formalization is especially important in the analysis of alleged evidence. The sequence of formulas based on specialized rules is distinguished by the precision and rigor necessary for science. In addition, formalization is necessary for programming, algorithmization and computerization of knowledge.

Axiomatic Method

Another method of theoretical research is the axiomatic method. It is a convenient way of deductively expressing scientific hypotheses. Theoretical and empirical sciences cannot be imagined without terms. Very often they arise due to the construction of axioms. For example, in Euclidean geometry at one time the fundamental terms of angle, line, point, plane, etc. were formulated.

Within the framework of theoretical knowledge, scientists formulate axioms - postulates that do not require proof and are the initial statements for further construction of theories. An example of this is the idea that the whole is always greater than the part. With the help of axioms, a system for deriving new terms is built. Following the rules of theoretical knowledge, a scientist can obtain unique theorems from a limited number of postulates. At the same time, it is much more effectively used for teaching and classification than for discovering new patterns.

Hypothetical-deductive method

Although theoretical, empirical scientific methods differ from each other, they are often used together. An example of such an application is that it builds new systems of closely intertwined hypotheses. On their basis, new statements concerning empirical, experimentally proven facts are derived. The method of deriving a conclusion from archaic hypotheses is called deduction. This term is familiar to many thanks to the novels about Sherlock Holmes. Indeed, a popular literary character in his investigations often uses the deductive method, with the help of which he builds a coherent picture of the crime from a multitude of disparate facts.

The same system operates in science. This method of theoretical knowledge has its own clear structure. First of all, there is an acquaintance with the invoice. Then assumptions are made about the patterns and causes of the phenomenon under study. To do this, various logical techniques are used. Guesses are evaluated according to their probability (the most probable one is selected from this heap). All hypotheses are checked for consistency with logic and compatibility with basic scientific principles (for example, the laws of physics). Consequences are derived from the assumption, which are then verified by experiment. The hypothetical-deductive method is not so much a method of a new discovery as a method of substantiating scientific knowledge. This theoretical tool was used by such great minds as Newton and Galileo.

FEATURES OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE. EMPIRICAL AND THEORETICAL LEVELS OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE.

The most prominent cognitive activity of a person is manifested in scientific knowledge, because. It is science, in relation to other forms of social consciousness, that is most of all aimed at the cognitive assimilation of reality. This is expressed in the features of scientific knowledge.

The hallmark of scientific knowledge is its rationality- an appeal to the arguments of reason and reason. Scientific knowledge constructs the world in concepts. Scientific thinking, first of all, is a conceptual activity, while in art, for example, an artistic image acts as a form of mastering the world.

Another feature- orientation towards revealing the objective laws of functioning and development of the objects under study. It follows from this that science strives for the objective and objective knowledge of reality. But since it is known that any knowledge (including scientific) is an alloy of objective and subjective, it should be noted the specificity of the objectivity of scientific knowledge. It consists in the maximum possible elimination (removal, expulsion) of the subjective from knowledge.

Science aims to discover and develop future ways and forms of practical development of the world, not only today. In this it differs, for example, from ordinary spontaneous-empirical knowledge. Decades can pass between scientific discovery and its application in practice, in any case, but, ultimately, theoretical achievements create the foundation for future applied engineering developments to satisfy practical interests.

scientific knowledge relies on specialized research tools, which affect the object under study and make it possible to identify its possible states under conditions controlled by the subject. Specialized scientific equipment allows science to experimentally study new types of objects.

The most important features of scientific knowledge are its evidence, validity and consistency.

The specifics of the systematic nature of science - in its two-level organization: empirical and theoretical levels and the order of their interaction. This is the uniqueness of scientific knowledge and knowledge, since no other form of knowledge has a two-level organization.

Among the characteristic features of science is its special methodology. Along with knowledge about objects, science forms knowledge about the methods of scientific activity. This leads to the formation of methodology as a special branch of scientific research, designed to guide scientific research.

Classical science, which arose in the 16th-17th centuries, combined theory and experiment, highlighting two levels in science: empirical and theoretical. They correspond to two interrelated, and at the same time specific types of scientific and cognitive activity: empirical and theoretical research.

As mentioned above, scientific knowledge is organized on two levels: empirical and theoretical.

To empirical level include techniques and methods, as well as forms of scientific knowledge that are directly related to scientific practice, with those types of objective activities that ensure the accumulation, fixation, grouping and generalization of the source material for the construction of indirect theoretical knowledge. This includes scientific observation, various forms of scientific experiment, scientific facts and ways of grouping them: systematization, analysis and generalization.

To theoretical level include all those types and methods of scientific knowledge and methods of organizing knowledge that are characterized by varying degrees of mediation and ensure the creation, construction and development of scientific theory as a logically organized knowledge about objective laws and other significant connections and relationships in the objective world. This includes theory and its elements and components such as scientific abstractions, idealizations, models, scientific laws, scientific ideas and hypotheses, methods of operating with scientific abstractions (deduction, synthesis, abstraction, idealization, logical and mathematical means, etc.). )

It must be emphasized that although the difference between the empirical and theoretical levels is due to objective qualitative differences in the content and methods of scientific activity, as well as the nature of knowledge itself, however, this difference is also relative. No form of empirical activity is possible without its theoretical understanding and, conversely, any theory, no matter how abstract it may be, ultimately relies on scientific practice, on empirical data.

Observation and experiment are among the main forms of empirical knowledge. Observation there is a purposeful, organized perception of objects and phenomena of the external world. Scientific observation is characterized by purposefulness, regularity and organization.

Experiment differs from observation in its active nature, interference in the natural course of events. An experiment is a type of activity undertaken for the purpose of scientific knowledge, consisting in influencing a scientific object (process) by means of special devices. Thanks to this, it is possible:

- isolate the object under study from the influence of side, insignificant phenomena;

– repeatedly reproduce the course of the process under strictly fixed conditions;

- systematically study, combine various conditions in order to obtain the desired result.

An experiment is always a means for solving a certain cognitive task or problem. There are a wide variety of types of experiment: physical, biological, direct, model, search, verification experiments, etc.

The nature of the empirical level forms determines the research methods. Thus, measurement as one of the types of quantitative research methods has the goal of most fully reflecting in scientific knowledge objective quantitative relations expressed in number and magnitude.

The systematization of scientific facts is of great importance. scientific fact - this is not just any event, but an event that entered the sphere of scientific knowledge and was recorded through observation or experiment. The systematization of facts means the process of grouping them on the basis of essential properties. One of the most important methods of generalization and systematization of facts is induction.

induction defined as a method of achieving probabilistic knowledge. Induction can be intuitive - a simple guess, the discovery of common in the course of observation. Induction can act as a procedure for establishing the general by enumerating individual cases. If the number of such cases is limited, then it is called complete.

Reasoning by analogy also belongs to the number of inductive conclusions, since they are characterized by probability. Usually, analogy is understood as that particular case of similarity between phenomena, which consists in the similarity or identity of relations between elements of different systems. To increase the degree of plausibility of conclusions by analogy, it is necessary to increase the variety and achieve uniformity of the compared properties, to maximize the number of compared features. Thus, through the establishment of similarity between phenomena, in essence, a transition is made from induction to another method - deduction.

Deduction differs from induction in that it is connected with sentences arising from the laws and rules of logic, but the truth of premises is problematic, while induction relies on true premises,

But the transition to proposals-conclusions remains a problem. Therefore, in scientific knowledge, to substantiate the provisions, these methods complement each other.

The path of transition from empirical to theoretical knowledge is very complicated. It has the character of a dialectical leap, in which various and contradictory moments are intertwined, complementing each other: abstract thinking and sensibility, induction and deduction, analysis and synthesis, etc. The key point in this transition is the hypothesis, its advancement, formulation and development, its substantiation and proof.

The term " hypothesis » is used in two senses: 1) in a narrow sense - the designation of some assumption about a regular order or other significant connections and relationships; 2) in a broad sense - as a system of sentences, some of which are initial assumptions of a probabilistic nature, while others represent a deductive deployment of these premises. As a result of a comprehensive verification and confirmation of all the various consequences, the hypothesis turns into a theory.

theory such a system of knowledge is called, for which the true assessment is quite definite and positive. Theory is a system of objectively true knowledge. A theory differs from a hypothesis in its reliability, while it differs from other types of reliable knowledge (facts, statistics, etc.) in its strict logical organization and its content, which consists in reflecting the essence of phenomena. Theory is the knowledge of essence. An object at the level of theory appears in its internal connection and integrity as a system, the structure and behavior of which is subject to certain laws. Thanks to this, the theory explains the variety of available facts and can predict new events, which speaks of its most important functions: explanatory and predictive (the function of foresight). A theory is made up of concepts and statements. The concepts fix the qualities and relationships of objects from the subject area. The statements reflect the regular order, behavior and structure of the subject area. A feature of the theory is that concepts and statements are interconnected in a logically coherent, consistent system. The totality of logical relations between the terms and sentences of a theory forms its logical structure, which is, by and large, deductive. Theories can be classified according to various features and grounds: according to the degree of connection with reality, according to the area of ​​creation, application, etc.

Scientific thinking operates in many ways. It is possible to distinguish such, for example, as analysis and synthesis, abstraction and idealization, modeling. Analysis - this is a method of thinking associated with the decomposition of the object under study into its constituent parts, development trends for the purpose of their relatively independent study. Synthesis- the opposite operation, which consists in combining previously distinguished parts into a whole in order to obtain knowledge as a whole about previously distinguished parts and trends. abstraction there is a process of mental selection, isolating individual features, properties and relationships of interest in the process of research in order to better understand them.

In the process of idealization there is an ultimate abstraction from all the real properties of the object. A so-called ideal object is formed, which can be operated upon while cognizing real objects. For example, such concepts as “point”, “straight line”, “absolutely black body” and others. Thus, the concept of a material point does not actually correspond to any object. But a mechanic, operating with this ideal object, is able to theoretically explain and predict the behavior of real material objects.

Literature.

1. Alekseev P.V., Panin A.V. Philosophy. - M., 2000. Sec. II, ch. XIII.

2. Philosophy / Ed. V.V.Mironova. - M., 2005. Sec. V, ch. 2.

Control questions for self-examination.

1. What is the main task of epistemology?

2. What forms of agnosticism can be identified?

3. What is the difference between sensationalism and rationalism?

4. What is "empiricism"?

5. What is the role of sensibility and thinking in individual cognitive activity?

6. What is intuitive knowledge?

7. Highlight the main ideas of the activity concept of knowledge of K. Marx.

8. How does the connection between the subject and the object proceed in the process of cognition?

9. What determines the content of knowledge?

10. What is "truth"? What main approaches in epistemology to the definition of this concept can you name?

11. What is the criterion of truth?

12. Explain what is the objective nature of truth?

13. Why is truth relative?

14. Is absolute truth possible?

15. What is the peculiarity of scientific knowledge and scientific knowledge?

16. What forms and methods of empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge can be identified?