Submitting your good work to the knowledge base is easy. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://allbest.ru

1. Key concepts

2. The concept of science. Patterns of science development

3. Scientific and philosophical pictures of the world. Scientific revolutions and changes in types of rationality

4. Main directions of “philosophy of science”

5. Scientific knowledge: features, structure, methods and forms

6. Science and technology. Philosophy of technology

1. Key Concepts

Abstraction- the result of the abstraction process, i.e. distraction, mental highlighting of any side, aspect and discarding everything that interferes with the targeted consideration of the element (object) of research. philosophical science ideological positivism

Hypothesis- a scientific hypothesis put forward to explain a phenomenon. Unlike an axiom, a hypothesis must receive experimental verification in order to be recognized.

Science- the sphere of cognitive activity of people, the search for new knowledge about the world, a sum of knowledge brought into a logically consistent system based on the development of scientific concepts and scientific theories, the formulation of laws, principles that allow one to make a correct description, explanation and prediction of processes and phenomena of reality.

Scientific picture of the world - an integrative system of ideas about the world, developed within science by generalizing and synthesizing the most important theoretical knowledge about the world obtained at one or another stage of the historical development of science. The scientific picture of the world influences the formation of ideological meanings of everyday thinking, on which the dynamics of social life depend. But the worldview, in turn, influences the content of the scientific picture of the world both directly and indirectly (through philosophy).

Scientific rationality - concept of classical rationalist philosophy, expressing the ability of thinking to create a special world of ideal objects and turn it into a special subject of activity. Ideal objects of scientific rationality, in contrast to those invented by fantasy, can be objectified, i.e. translate into a practically made thing and reproduce it in a controlled manner an infinite number of times in an experiment. Scientific rationality puts a limit to the freedom of interpretation of the world, correlating knowledge only with logical and methodological norms and emancipating the cognitive act from any value orientations of consciousness. Guided by the principle of the identity of thinking and being, as well as the criteria of evidence and validity, scientific rationality claims to comprehend the truth.

Axiom- the initial position of a scientific theory, accepted as true without logical proof and underlying the proof of other provisions of this theory.

Differentiation- side of the development process associated with the division, dismemberment of the developing whole into parts, steps, levels.

Idealization- mental construction of concepts about objects that do not exist and are not realizable in the real world, but those for which there are prototypes in the real world. The result of idealization is an idealized object.

Integration- the side of the development process with the integration of various parts and elements into a whole.

Method- a set of techniques and operations for the practical and theoretical mastery of reality.

Rational- relating to reason, established and justified by reason, arising from it.

2 . Science concept. Patterns of science development

Science is a form of spiritual activity of people aimed at producing knowledge about nature, society and knowledge itself, with the immediate goal of comprehending the truth and discovering objective laws based on a generalization of real facts in their interrelation in order to anticipate trends in the development of reality and contribute to its change.

Science is a creative activity to obtain new knowledge, and the result of this activity: a body of knowledge, conceptually brought into an integral system based on certain principles, and the process of their production. A collection of scattered, chaotic information is not scientific knowledge. Like other forms of knowledge, science is a sociocultural activity, and not just “pure knowledge”, a kind of social institution.

Science forms a single, interconnected, developing system of knowledge about its laws. This system is divided into many branches of knowledge (special sciences), which differ from each other in what aspect of reality, the form of movement of matter they study. According to the subject and method of cognition, one can distinguish the sciences of nature - natural science, and society - social science(humanities, social sciences), about cognition, thinking(logic, epistemology, etc.). A separate group consists of technical sciences. Modern mathematics is a very unique science. In turn, each group of sciences can be subjected to more detailed division. Thus, the natural sciences include mechanics, physics, chemistry, geology, biology, etc., each of which is divided into a number of separate scientific disciplines. The science of the most general laws of reality is philosophy, which, however, cannot be completely attributed only to science.

There may be other criteria for classifying sciences. Thus, according to their distance from practice, science can be divided into two large types:

fundamental, which clarify the basic laws and principles of the real world and where there is no direct orientation to practice, and applied - the direct application of the results of scientific knowledge to solve specific industrial and socio-practical problems, based on the patterns established by the fundamental sciences. At the same time, the boundaries between individual sciences and scientific disciplines are conditional and fixed. Moreover, scientific knowledge is increasingly being combined in the form of so-called "butt disciplines" - physical chemistry, biophysics, geochemistry, etc.

Every science and scientific discipline includes 4 necessary components in their unity:

a) The subject of science, the scientist, is the main element. This includes an individual researcher, a scientific community, a scientific team and, ultimately, society as a whole.

b) Object (subject, subject area), i.e. what exactly a given science or scientific discipline studies.

c) A system of methods and techniques characteristic of the latter and determined by their subjects.

d) Its own unique language - natural or artificial (signs, symbols, mathematical equations, chemical formulas, etc.).

Scientific knowledge is an integral developing system with a rather complex structure. It expresses the unity of stable relationships between the elements of a given system. The structure of scientific knowledge can be presented in its various “slices” and, accordingly, in the totality of its specific elements:

1) factual material drawn from empirical experience; 2) the results of its initial generalization in concepts and other abstractions; 3) fact-based problems and scientific assumptions (hypotheses); 4) laws, principles and theories (including alternative ones) that “grow” from them; 5) philosophical attitudes; 6) methods, ideals and norms of scientific knowledge; 7) sociocultural grounds; 8) thinking style.

Scientific knowledge is a developing system of knowledge that includes two main interconnected, but qualitatively different levels-empirical and theoretical.

At the empirical level, living contemplation predominates(sensory cognition), the rational moment and its forms are present here, but have a subordinate meaning.

The theoretical level of scientific knowledge is characterized by the predominance of the rational moment- concepts, theories, laws and other forms of “mental actions”. Living contemplation is not eliminated here, but becomes a subordinate (but very important) aspect of the cognitive process.

The main components in which the structure of theoretical knowledge is expressed are problem, hypothesis and theory.

Problem- a form of knowledge, the content of which is that which has not yet been known by man, but that needs to be known.

Hypothesis- a form of knowledge containing an assumption formulated on the basis of a number of facts, the true meaning of which is uncertain and requires proof. Hypothetical knowledge is probabilistic, not reliable, and requires verification and justification.

Theory- the most developed form of scientific knowledge, providing a holistic reflection of the natural and significant connections of a certain area of reality (for more information about the theory, see below).

Any scientific theory is an organic developing system of true knowledge (including elements of error), which has a complex structure and performs a number of functions.

In modern scientific methodology, the following are distinguished: main elements of the theory: 1) Initial foundations - fundamental primary concepts, principles, laws, postulates, axioms, etc.

2) The idealized object of this theory is an abstract model of the essential properties and connections of the objects being studied (for example, “absolutely black body”, “ideal gas”, etc.).

3) The logic of the theory, aimed at clarifying the structure and development of knowledge, containing certain rules of inference and methods of proof.

4) A set of laws and statements logically derived from the principles of a given theory in accordance with certain principles. The key point of the theory is the law, therefore it can be considered as a system of laws that express the essence of the object being studied in all its integrity and specificity.

5) Philosophical and methodological attitudes and value factors.

The main functions of the theory include the following:

1. Synthetic- combining individual reliable knowledge into a single, developing, holistic system.

2. Explanatory- identification of causal and other connections of this phenomenon, its essential characteristics, laws of its origin and development.

3. Methodological- development on the basis of theory of various methods, methods and techniques of research activities.

4. Predictive(foresight function) - the formulation of ideas about the existence of previously unknown facts, objects and their properties, or about those whose existence is known, but they have not yet been identified.

5. Practical- to be ultimately translated into practice, to become a “guide to action” for changing reality.

Historically, the understanding of “science” changes, but in antiquity “science” was understood as an integral part of activity aimed at achieving some goal, it is like a “theory” of activity.

Science is mastered by an expert in his field, he knows how to do it and why he needs to do it that way. Aristotle distinguished three types of sciences:

1. theoretical, speculative, higher sciences that understand their subject with the help of reason (philosophy, physics, mathematics);

2. practical sciences (study the principles of the state: politics, ethics, economics);

3. creative, craft, lower sciences that study artificial things: construction, medicine, military affairs, cooking, etc.

From the time of the emergence of science until the beginning of the 17th century. The main goal of science was to develop a general idea of the world and man’s place in it. For the ancient Greeks, knowledge is valuable as a tool for changing the spiritual world of a person, and not because with its help you can do the right things. This attitude to knowledge was developed by the Greek philosophers Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.

In the Middle Ages, science became the handmaiden of theology; it bowed to authorities and dogmas. Since the Renaissance, there has been a tendency towards experimental study of nature. In the 17th century science becomes a factor in the production process, which in turn becomes the sphere of application of science. Science acquires a number of features that make it similar to material production.

At the end of the 18th century. in the process of the ongoing process of differentiation of sciences, the separation of applied knowledge from theoretical knowledge began. By the middle of the 19th century. the process of one-sided differentiation has largely exhausted itself. The dominant trend is towards the integration of sciences. In the 20th century science becomes a direct productive force in the course of the scientific and technological revolution, more and more signs of a turn of science towards man appear. Automation results in humans exercising control over the functioning of machines.

Development of science in the 20th century. led to a change in the attitude of a significant part of scientists to the problem of “science and ethics”. Scientists are faced with acute questions about the nature of the use of scientific discoveries, about the moral responsibility of scientists to humanity. The progress of cybernetics and computer technology, the widespread introduction of robots and computers raise the question of the freedom and sovereignty of the individual, and the fate of democratic public institutions. And science is considered as an activity for the production of objectively true knowledge and the result of this activity is systematized, reliable, practically verified knowledge.

Science is an attempt to see the world as it is in itself, to give an objective picture of reality.

The essence of science:

· reliable generalization of facts, true reflection of the processes under study, objectivity;

· identification of laws governing processes in the object of study;

· forecasting trends in the development and functioning of the facility;

· control and management of processes in the facility.

The vital meaning of science: to know in order to anticipate, to anticipate in order to act.

In the 20th century scientific activity has been institutionalized, acquired stable social forms, and organized.

As a type of activity, science is characterized by:

1. a certain system of values: the values of truth, the value of reason, the value of new knowledge; the value of independence of judgment and willingness to admit one’s mistakes;

2. a certain set of technical devices, equipment, tools used in scientific activities;

3. a set of methods used to obtain new knowledge;

4. way of organizing scientific activities.

Science is a complex social institution that includes three components:

1. production of new knowledge;

2. bringing knowledge to its practical use;

3. training of scientific personnel.

Scientific research includes:

· use of scientific research methods; establishing facts, results of observations and experiments;

· generalization and explanation of facts, construction of hypotheses and their testing;

· establishing regular connections between facts;

· construction of theory, laws, principles;

· philosophical interpretation of scientific data;

· accumulation of new experimental data;

· correction, revision of previous theoretical concepts.

The most important laws of science development are:

1. the development of science is conditioned by the needs of socio-historical practice;

2. relative independence of the development of science;

3. continuity in the development of ideas and principles, theories and concepts, methods and techniques of science;

4. gradual development of science, alternating periods of evolutionary development and revolutionary disruption of the theoretical foundations of science;

5. interaction and interrelation of all constituent branches of science;

6. freedom of criticism, free collision of different opinions, scientific hypotheses;

7. differentiation and integration of scientific knowledge;

8. mathematization of science.

Modern science not only serves the needs of production, but also acts as a prerequisite for the technical revolution and the development of the productive forces of society. The volume of scientific activity and production in the 20th century. doubles every 5-10 years.

According to the subject of research, sciences are divided into two groups: natural and public (social).

According to function and purpose, they are distinguished: fundamental sciences and applied sciences (technical).

According to the research method, they are divided into: theoretical sciences and empirical sciences.

3 . Scientific and philosophical pictures of the world. Scientific revolutions and changes in types of rationality

Picture of the world - this is an “image of the world”, reflecting the laws of nature, a set of ideas created by researchers about objects of the external world, from which information can be logically obtained regarding the behavior of these objects.

The picture of the world, which consists of existing scientific ideas about the structure and development of nature, is called the natural scientific picture of the world.

Scientific pictures of the world change in the process of scientific development and are relative in nature. The scientific picture of the world is a system of general ideas about the world, developed at the appropriate stages of the historical development of scientific knowledge.

Philosophical picture of the world is a system of the most general philosophical concepts (categories), principles, concepts, which at a certain historical stage gives an idea of the world as a whole.

These pictures of the world do not exist in isolation, in isolation from each other. The philosophical picture of the world is based on the provisions of natural science, confirming and specifying its provisions and conclusions. In turn, the natural science picture of the world is necessarily connected with certain philosophical ideas characteristic of a particular era.

The history of scientific knowledge has been accompanied by periodic changes in pictures of the world and changes in paradigms. A paradigm is a certain set of ideas, concepts, theories, and methods of scientific research generally accepted in the scientific community at a given historical stage. Scientific revolutions were accompanied by paradigm shifts.

Scientific revolutions - these are turning points in the development of scientific knowledge, decisive stages in the progressive development of knowledge, radically changing the previous vision of the world.

Scientific revolutions are not short-term events, but represent a more or less long historical period, since fundamental changes in scientific knowledge require a certain time.

The global scientific revolution leads to the formation of a completely new vision of the world, causes the emergence of fundamentally new ideas about its structure and functioning, and also entails new ways and methods of understanding it.

In the history of natural science, there are four global scientific revolutions.

The first scientific revolution occurred in the period of the 15th-16th centuries, during the era of transition from the Middle Ages to the New Age, called the Renaissance.

The first scientific revolution is characterized by a change in the cosmological picture of the world (the transition from the Aristotelian-Ptolemaic geocentric system of the world: “The Earth is the center of the universe” to the heliocentric teaching of the astronomer Copernicus: “The Earth is one of the planets moving around the Sun in circular orbits”). The teachings of Copernicus undermined the religious picture of the world based on the ideas of Aristotle.

Second scientific revolution: (XVII century) - the birth of modern science, a new mechanistic natural science, the origins of which were Galileo, Kepler, Newton. Main features:

1. application of the method of scientific reasoning, mathematical calculations and experiment;

2. the foundations of physics were laid, the laws of the motion of bodies, the fall of bodies, the rotation of the Sun around its axis (Galileo), the laws of the movement of planets around the Sun, the theory of solar and lunar eclipses (Kepler), the theory of “vortices in outer space”, analytical geometry ( R. Descartes), the creation of differential and integral calculus, the theory of “dynamics” - the doctrine of forces and their interaction, the laws of motion that formed the basis of mechanics as a science: the law of inertia, the law of body acceleration, the law of equality of action and reaction, the law of universal gravitation (I. Newton);

3. the laws established for the mechanical sphere of phenomena were transferred to a wide variety of natural phenomena;

4. metaphysical approach: all objects are studied as isolated from each other, without taking into account their development and interrelations. The third scientific revolution (from the end of the 17th century to the end of the 19th century) is characterized by the dialectization of natural science:

Main discoveries and provisions:

1. attempts to consider the development of the Solar system - the Kant-Laplace cosmogonic hypothesis about the origin of the Solar system from a gas nebula;

2. the doctrine of the evolution of the organic world of Laplace under the influence of changing environmental conditions; Darwin's theory of the laws of natural selection and evolution of the animal world, the origin of man; theory of the cellular structure of plants and animals by Schleiden and Schwann;

3. discovery of the law of conservation and transformation of energy: chemical, thermal and mechanical energies can be converted into each other and are equivalent (Mayer, Joule, Kolding);

4. all of nature is a continuous process of transformation of the universal movement of matter from one form to another;

5. discovery of the periodic law of chemical elements by D. Mendeleev: the properties of chemical elements change periodically depending on their atomic weights; discovery of the possibility of obtaining organic substances by synthesis from initial inorganic substances (F. Wöhler) - the laws of chemistry are the same for the inorganic and organic world;

6. principles of dialectics: the principle of development and the principle of universal interconnection received natural scientific justification;

7. exposing the fallacy of natural philosophical mechanistic hypotheses about the presence of caloric (thermal fluid), phlogiston (a flammable substance, “the vital force of the body,” electrical and magnetic fluids, the world ether;

8. formation of a dialectical-materialist picture of the world (Engels, Marx);

9. types of matter: substance and fields (electromagnetic field, etc.); development of science by the end of the 19th century. forced us to abandon natural scientific approaches to the interpretation of matter (they identified matter with atoms) and move to a philosophical understanding of it;

10. transition from a metaphysical-mechanical understanding of movement to a dialectical-materialistic understanding of movement (movement as a way of existence of matter: the main forms of movement of matter: mechanical movement, physical movement, chemical, biological, social movement);

11. transition to a dialectical understanding of space and time as forms of existence of moving matter;

12. dialectical principle of the material unity of the world (the laws of the natural transformation of some types of matter into others, some forms of motion into others have been discovered).

The fourth scientific revolution (XX century) - the formation of quantum relativistic ideas about the world. Main discoveries and provisions:

1. discovery of radioactive decay, electrons, positrons;

2. creation of the quantum theory of atomic structure (Resenford-Bohr);

3. creation of the theory of relativity (A. Einstein), the dependence of the properties of space and time on the movement of matter and on each other; the relationship between the law of conservation of mass and the law of conservation of energy - the mutual transformation of types of matter and forms of motion;

4. discovery of the wave properties of matter (L. Broglie), corpuscular-wave duality of elementary particles: they propagate like waves, are emitted and absorbed like particles;

5. the movement of microparticles obeys the laws of quantum mechanics, the laws of classical mechanics are unsuitable for the microcosm: the position of a microparticle in space at each moment of time cannot be determined, intranuclear processes cannot be explained based on the laws of quantum mechanics, since it does not reflect internal connections, structure of microparticles;

6. discovery of hundreds of microparticles: elementary particles themselves have an internal structure and consist of quarks; creation of the quark hypothesis;

7. development of genetics, decoding of the DNA molecule;

8. development of the dialectical-materialist picture of the world.

Global revolutions and changes in types of scientific rationality . In the development of science, we can distinguish periods when all the components of its foundations were transformed. The change in scientific pictures of the world was accompanied by a radical change in the normative structures of research, as well as the philosophical foundations of science. These periods can be rightfully considered as global revolutions that can lead to a change in the type of scientific rationality.

Four such revolutions can be found in the history of natural science. The first of these was the revolution of the 17th century, which marked the formation of classical natural science.

Its emergence was inextricably linked with the formation of a special system of ideals and norms of research, in which, on the one hand, the principles of classical science were expressed, and on the other, they were concretized taking into account the dominance of mechanics in the system of scientific knowledge of a given era.

Through all classical natural science since the 17th century. There is an idea according to which the objectivity and objectivity of scientific knowledge is achieved only when everything that relates to the subject and the procedures of his cognitive activity is excluded from the description and explanation. These procedures were assumed to be forever data and unchangeable. The ideal was to construct an absolutely true picture of nature. The main attention was paid to the search for obvious, visual, “derived from experience” ontological principles, on the basis of which it is possible to build theories that explain and predict experimental facts.

In the XVII-XVIII centuries, these ideals and standards of research were fused with a number of specific provisions that expressed the principles of a mechanical understanding of nature. Explanation was interpreted as a search for mechanical causes and substances - carriers of forces that determine observed phenomena. The understanding of justification included the idea of reducing knowledge about nature to the fundamental principles and ideas of mechanics.

In accordance with these guidelines, a mechanical picture of nature was built and developed, which acted simultaneously as a picture of reality, in relation to the sphere of physical knowledge, and as a general scientific picture of the world.

Finally, the ideals, norms and ontological principles of natural science of the 17th-18th centuries were based on a specific system of philosophical foundations in which the ideas of mechanism played a dominant role.

Radical changes in this holistic and relatively stable system of foundations of natural science occurred at the end of the 18th - first half of the 19th centuries. They can be regarded as the second global scientific revolution, which determined the transition to a new state of natural science - a disciplinary organized science.

At this time, the mechanical picture of the world loses its general scientific status. In biology, chemistry and other fields of knowledge, specific pictures of reality are formed that are irreducible to the mechanical.

At the same time, there is a differentiation of disciplinary ideals and norms of research. For example, in biology and geology the ideals of evolutionary explanation arise, while physics continues to build its knowledge, abstracting from the idea of development. But even here, with the development of field theory, the previously dominant norms of mechanical explanation begin to gradually erode. All these changes affected mainly the third layer of organization of ideals and norms of research, expressing the specifics of the objects being studied. As for the general cognitive attitudes of classical science, they are still preserved in this historical period.

The problem of the relationship between various methods of science, the synthesis of knowledge and the classification of sciences becomes central. Its advancement to the forefront is associated with the loss of the previous integrity of the scientific picture of the world, as well as with the emergence of specific regulatory structures in various areas of scientific research. The search for ways to unify science, the problem of differentiation and integration of knowledge turns into one of the fundamental philosophical problems, maintaining its acuteness throughout the subsequent development of science.

The first and second global revolutions in natural science proceeded as the formation and development of classical science and its style of thinking.

The third global scientific revolution was associated with the transformation of this style and the formation of a new, non-classical natural science. It covers the period from the end of the 19th to the middle of the 20th century. In this era, a kind of chain reaction of revolutionary changes occurs in various fields of knowledge: in physics (the discovery of the divisibility of the atom, the formation of relativistic and quantum theory), in cosmology (the concept of a non-stationary Universe), and in chemistry (quantum chemistry), in biology (the formation of genetics). Cybernetics and systems theory emerged, which played a crucial role in the development of the modern scientific picture of the world.

In the process of all these revolutionary transformations, the ideals and norms of a new, non-classical science were formed. They were characterized by a rejection of straightforward ontology and an understanding of the relative truth of theories and pictures of nature developed at one or another stage in the development of natural science. In contrast to the ideal of the only true theory that “photographs” the objects under study, the truth of several different specific theoretical descriptions of the same reality is allowed, since each of them may contain a moment of objectively true knowledge.

The correlations between the ontological postulates of science and the characteristics of the method through which the object is mastered are comprehended. In this regard, types of explanation and description are accepted that explicitly contain references to the means and operations of cognitive activity. The most striking example of this approach were the ideals and norms of explanation, description and evidence of knowledge, established in quantum relativistic physics.

If in classical physics the ideal of explanation and description presupposed the characteristic of an object “in itself”, without indicating the means of its study, then in quantum relativistic physics, as a necessary condition for the objectivity of explanation and description, the requirement is put forward for a clear fixation of the features of the means of observation that interact with the object (the classical method of explanation and description can be presented as an idealization, the rational aspects of which are generalized within the framework of a new approach).

The ideals and norms of evidence and substantiation of knowledge are changing. In contrast to classical examples, the substantiation of theories in quantum relativistic physics presupposed the explication, when presenting the theory, of the operational basis of the introduced system of concepts (the principle of observability) and the clarification of connections between the new and previous theories (the principle of correspondence).

The transition from classical to non-classical natural science was prepared by a change in the structures of spiritual production in European culture of the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries, the crisis of the ideological principles of classical rationalism, the formation in various spheres of spiritual culture of a new understanding of rationality, when consciousness, comprehending reality, constantly encounters situations their immersion in this reality itself, feeling their dependence on social circumstances, which largely determine the attitudes of cognition, its value and goal orientations.

In the modern era, in the last third of our century, we are witnessing new radical changes in the foundations of science. These changes can be characterized as the fourth global scientific revolution, during which a new post-non-classical science is born.

Intensive application of scientific knowledge in almost all spheres of social life, a change in the very nature of scientific activity associated with a revolution in the means of storing and obtaining knowledge (computerization of science, the emergence of complex and expensive instrument systems that serve research teams and function similarly to means of industrial production, etc.) d.) changes the nature of scientific activity.

Along with disciplinary research, interdisciplinary and problem-oriented forms of research activity are increasingly coming to the fore. If classical science was focused on comprehending an increasingly narrowing, isolated fragment of reality, which acted as the subject of one or another scientific discipline, then the specifics of modern science at the end of the 20th century are determined by complex research programs in which specialists from various fields of knowledge take part. The organization of such research largely depends on the determination of priority areas, their financing, personnel training, etc. In the process of determining research priorities, along with educational goals, goals of an economic and socio-political nature begin to play an increasingly important role.

The implementation of complex programs gives rise to a special situation of merging theoretical and experimental research, applied and fundamental knowledge into a single system of activity, and intensifying direct and feedback connections between them. As a result, the processes of interaction between the principles and representations of pictures of reality that are formed in various sciences are intensifying. Increasingly, changes in these pictures occur not so much under the influence of intradisciplinary factors, but rather through the “paradigmatic grafting” of ideas transmitted from other sciences. In this process, the rigid dividing lines between the pictures of reality that determine the vision of the subject of a particular science are gradually erased. They become interdependent and appear as fragments of an integral general scientific picture of the world.

Its development is influenced not only by the achievements of fundamental sciences, but also by the results of interdisciplinary applied research. In this regard, it is appropriate, for example, to recall that the ideas of synergetics, causing a revolution in the system of our ideas about nature, arose and were developed in the course of numerous applied studies that revealed the effects of phase transitions and the formation of dissipative structures (structures in liquids, chemical waves, laser beams, plasma instability, exhaust and flutter phenomena).

In interdisciplinary research, science, as a rule, is faced with such complex system objects, which in individual disciplines are often studied only fragmentarily, therefore the effects of their systematic nature may not be detected at all with a narrow disciplinary approach, but are revealed only by synthesizing fundamental and applied problems in a problem-oriented approach. search.

The objects of modern interdisciplinary research are increasingly becoming unique systems characterized by openness and self-development. Objects of this type gradually begin to determine the nature of the subject areas of the main fundamental sciences, determining the appearance of modern, post-non-classical science.

Historically developing systems are a more complex type of object, even compared to self-regulating systems. The latter act as a special state of the dynamics of a historical object, a kind of cross-section, a stable stage of its evolution. Historical evolution itself is characterized by a transition from one relatively stable system to another system with a new level organization of elements and self-regulation. A historically developing system forms over time more and more new levels of its organization, and the emergence of each new level affects the previously formed ones, changing the connections and composition of their elements.

When studying “human-sized” objects, the search for truth turns out to be associated with determining the strategy and possible directions for transforming such an object, which directly affects humanistic values. Systems of this type cannot be freely experimented with. In the process of their research and practical development, knowledge of prohibitions on certain interaction strategies, potentially containing catastrophic consequences, begins to play a special role.

In the ontological component of the philosophical foundations of science, the “categorical matrix” begins to dominate, providing understanding and knowledge of developing objects. New understandings of the categories of space and time arise (accounting for the historical time of the system, the hierarchy of space-time forms).

So, in the historical development of science, starting from the 17th century, three types of scientific rationality arose and, accordingly, three major stages in the evolution of science, replacing each other within the framework of the development of technogenic civilization: 1) classical science (in its two states, pre-disciplinary and disciplinary organized science); 2) non-classical science; 3) post-non-classical science. There are peculiar “overlaps” between these stages, and the emergence of each new stage did not discard previous achievements, but only outlined the scope of their action, their applicability to certain types of problems.

Each stage is characterized by a special state of scientific activity aimed at the constant growth of objectively true knowledge. If we schematically represent this activity as a “subject-means-object” relationship (including in the subject’s understanding the value-goal structures of the activity, knowledge and skills in using methods and means), then the described stages of the evolution of science act as different types of scientific rationality, characterized by different depths reflection in relation to scientific activity itself.

The classical type of scientific rationality, focusing attention on the object, strives to eliminate everything that relates to the subject, means and operations of its activity during theoretical explanation and description. Such elimination is considered as a necessary condition for obtaining objectively true knowledge about the world. The goals and values of science, which determine research strategies and ways of fragmenting the world, at this stage, as at all others, are determined by the worldviews and value orientations that dominate the culture. But classical science does not comprehend these determinations.

The post-non-classical type of rationality expands the field of reflection on activity. It takes into account the correlation of the acquired knowledge about an object not only with the characteristics of the means and operations of the activity, but also with value-goal structures. Moreover, the connection between intrascientific goals and extrascientific, social values and goals is made explicit.

Each new type of scientific rationality is characterized by special, inherent foundations of science, which make it possible to identify and study the corresponding types of system objects in the world (simple, complex, self-developing systems). At the same time, the emergence of a new type of rationality and a new image of science should not be understood simplistically in the sense that each new stage leads to the complete disappearance of the ideas and methodological settings of the previous stage. On the contrary, there is continuity between them. Non-classical science did not destroy classical rationality at all, but only limited the scope of its action. When solving a number of problems, non-classical ideas about the world and knowledge turned out to be redundant, and the researcher could focus on traditionally classical models (for example, when solving a number of problems in celestial mechanics, it was not necessary to involve the norms of quantum relativistic description, but it was enough to limit ourselves to the classical standards of research). In the same way, the formation of post-non-classical science does not lead to the destruction of all ideas and cognitive attitudes of non-classical and classical research. They will be used in some cognitive situations, but will only lose their status as dominant and defining the face of science.

When modern science, at the forefront of its search, has placed at the center of its research unique, historically developing systems, in which man himself is included as a special component, then the requirement for the explication of values in this situation not only does not contradict the traditional focus on obtaining objectively true knowledge about the world, but also acts as a prerequisite for the implementation of this installation. There is every reason to believe that as modern science develops, these processes will intensify. Technogenic civilization is now entering a period of a special type of progress, when humanistic guidelines become the starting point in determining the strategies of scientific research.

4 . Main directions of “philosophy of science”

In modern philosophy, a “philosophy of science” has been formed, which studies the features of scientific knowledge, the dynamics of scientific knowledge and the patterns of development of science. Within the philosophy of science, there are a number of large schools:

· neo-Kantianism;

Positivism and neopositivism;

· critical rationalism;

· philosophy and methodology of scientific knowledge.

Neo-Kantianism(end of the 19th century - beginning of the 20th century) considers knowledge not as a reflection of reality, but as an activity to create the subject of knowledge in general, and science in particular. The source of scientific knowledge, according to neo-Kantians, is not the structure of consciousness of the cognizing person, but the logical structure of science. The ultimate goal of philosophy is declared to be the study of the logical foundations of the exact sciences. Logic explores only correctness, regularity and the necessity of knowledge, but not truth.

Positivism(emerged in the 19th century, founder Auguste Comte) and neopositivism (in the 20th century) call on philosophy to abandon metaphysical abstractions, unclear, complicated reasoning, transform itself in the spirit of the requirements of the natural sciences and study positive knowledge, that which can be verified by empirical or logical-mathematical means.

The sciences do not need a metaphysical philosophy standing above them, but must rely on themselves. Sciences should not look for the causes of phenomena and answer the question “why?”, but only describe “how” phenomena occur. The new philosophy must reveal the connections between individual sciences, systematize private knowledge, recognize general laws, create a system of scientific knowledge, and develop general scientific methods of cognition.

Critical rationalism(in the 20th century, scientists K. Popper, I. Lakatos, T. Kuhn) began to study not scientific statements, but science as an integral, dynamic, developing system. It is impossible to separate the empirical and theoretical levels of science. Any empirical statement is conditioned by some theory. Science as an integral phenomenon requires diverse approaches: historical-scientific, methodological, logical, psychological, etc. Scientific laws are not reducible to observations, therefore it is not always possible to test their truth experimentally and the principle of verification is not suitable for testing truth. Therefore, a scientific statement that has not been refuted by experience can be considered true (the principle of falsification). If conditions are found under which at least some basic statements of the theory are false, then this theory or hypothesis is refutable. If there is no experimental refutation of the hypothesis, then the hypothesis can be considered true or justified.

The development of science is presented by Kuhn as a spasmodic revolutionary process, the essence of which is expressed in a change in scientific paradigms. At each historical period, a certain paradigm develops within the community of scientists, and the development of science at some period proceeds within the framework of this paradigm (there is an accumulation of empirical material - the period of “normal science”). Gradually, reasons arise to doubt the clarity and validity of generally accepted theoretical positions, the paradigm is shaken, and a crisis of the original concepts in this paradigm occurs. Thus, science is a constant critical revision of knowledge, it is a change of paradigms, it is a revolution in changing the style of thinking, methodology and methods of scientific research.

If a research program can theoretically predict new facts, can explain more than a competing scientific program, then it displaces the latter from the community of scientists. The history of the development of science is a history of struggle and change of competing research programs.

In Russian philosophy, the concept of “methodology of scientific knowledge” is being developed (V. S. Stepin, V. S. Shvyrev, P. F. Yudin, etc.). Scientific knowledge is considered as a historically changing activity that is determined by the nature of research objects, as well as by social conditions characteristic of a historically specific stage in the development of civilization. Modern science consists of various fields of knowledge that interact with each other, and at the same time have relative independence. Science is a complex self-organizing system, which in its development gives rise to new relatively autonomous subsystems and new integrative connections.

5 . Scientific knowledge: features, structure, methods and forms

Scientific knowledge differs from all other types of knowledge by the use of specially developed methods.

Method- this is a method of activity, a set of techniques used by a researcher to obtain a certain result.

When we talk about scientific methods, we primarily mean those techniques and methods that help to obtain true knowledge.

Only through the use of scientifically based methods can human activity be effective. Bacon compared the method to a lamp illuminating the way for a traveler in the dark. He noticed that even a lame person walking on the road will outstrip someone walking off-road.

The scientific method must meet certain scientific criteria. The hallmark of the scientific method is its validity. The thoroughness of the method is determined by the depth and adequacy of knowledge about the object.

Knowledge has two functions, firstly, as information about an object, and secondly, as a method of cognition. This function of knowledge is characteristic of any of its forms: concept, law, theory.

The most developed form of knowledge is theory. Theory is a system of basic principles that summarizes experience, practice and reflects the objective laws of the surrounding world.

The rationale for the scientific method cannot be completely derived from a known theory of the object. Method in its manifestation is nothing more than the activity of a cognizing subject with an object. The method includes the following elements: object, subject, goal of cognition, means of cognition, conditions of cognition, result of cognitive activity. These elements cannot be ignored when scientifically substantiating the method.

The theory of the method is called methodology. Methodology is the theory of cognitive activity. It is a theoretical justification for the methods and forms of scientific knowledge.

All methods of scientific knowledge, according to the degree of generality and scope of action, are divided into the following main groups:

I. Philosophical methods, among which the most ancient are dialectical and metaphysical. But philosophical methods are not limited to the two mentioned. These also include analytical (characteristic of modern analytical philosophy), intuitionistic, phenomenological, hermeneutic (understanding), etc. Attempts are being made to combine different philosophical methods.

II. General scientific approaches and research methods, widely developed and used in science in the 20th century. They act as a kind of intermediate methodology between philosophy and the fundamental theoretical and methodological principles of special sciences. General scientific concepts most often include such concepts as information, model, structure, function, element, system, optimality, probability, instability, self-organization, etc.

On the basis of general scientific concepts and concepts, the corresponding methods and principles of cognition are formulated, which provide an indirect connection and optimal interaction of philosophical methodology with special scientific knowledge and its methods. General scientific principles and approaches include: systemic and structural-functional, cybernetic, probabilistic, modeling, formalization, synergetic approach, etc.

III. Private scientific methods, those. a set of methods, principles of knowledge, research techniques and procedures used in one or another branch of science corresponding to a given basic form of motion of matter. These are methods of mechanics, physics, chemistry, biology and humanities (social) sciences.

IV. Disciplinary methods those. a system of techniques used in a particular scientific discipline that is part of a branch of science or that arose at the intersection of sciences. Each fundamental science is a complex of many disciplines that have their own specific subject and their own unique research methods.

V. Methods of interdisciplinary research as a set of a number of synthetic, integrative methods (arising as a result of a combination of elements of various levels of methodology), aimed mainly at the interfaces of scientific disciplines.

Methods of scientific knowledge are diverse and differ from each other. A method always depends on the object it is aimed at studying. Depending on the subject area, physical, chemical, biological, social and other research methods are distinguished.

In scientific knowledge, significantly different tasks are posed at the empirical and theoretical levels, and therefore the methods will differ.

TO empirical methods include: observation, experiment, modeling.

Observation- purposeful, systematic, systematic perception of objects and phenomena of the surrounding reality; observation is always carried out in accordance with certain cognitive tasks. In a sign, it is carried out according to a predetermined plan, carried out in an organized and systematic manner, and requires sufficient time.

Experiment- the core of empirical research. The Latin word "experimentum" literally means trial, experiment. An experiment is a test of the phenomena being studied under controlled and controlled conditions. The experimenter strives to isolate the phenomenon being studied in its pure form, so that there are as few obstacles as possible in obtaining the required information. The setting up of an experiment is preceded by appropriate preparatory work. An experimental program is being developed; If necessary, special instruments and measuring equipment are manufactured.

In contrast to observation, an experiment is an experience based on the researcher’s intervention in the course of phenomena and processes by creating conditions that make it possible to identify certain connections between phenomena and reproduce them many times.

The components of the experiment are: experimenter; phenomenon being studied; devices. In the case of instruments, we are not talking about a technical device such as a computer, microscopes and telescopes, designed to enhance the sensory and rational capabilities of a person, but about detector devices, intermediary devices that record experimental data.

In modern conditions, an experiment is most often carried out by a group of researchers who act in concert.

...

Similar documents

Methodological aspect of the problem of rationality: demarcation of science and non-science; historical change in the ideals of scientific rationality; unity and difference of criteria of rationality in different sciences; perspective on the evolution of modern scientific rationality.

abstract, added 03/31/2009

Problems of philosophy of science, its features in various historical eras. Criteria for scientific character and scientific knowledge. Scientific revolutions as a restructuring of the foundations of science. The essence of the modern stage of development of science. Institutional forms of scientific activity.

abstract, added 12/24/2009

The problem of knowledge in philosophy. The concept and essence of everyday knowledge. Rationality of everyday cognition: common sense and reason. Scientific knowledge its structure and features. Methods and forms of scientific knowledge. Basic criteria of scientific knowledge.

abstract, added 06/15/2017

The role and place of religion in the life of modern society. The phenomenon of philosophical faith in the teachings of K. Jaspers. Common and distinctive features between philosophy and religion. Fundamental features of the religious worldview. New scientific methods for constructing a picture of the world.

article, added 07/29/2013

Facts of the development of the scientific worldview, the formation of a scientific picture of the world. Social functions of modern science. Science as a basis, tool and method for managing and forecasting social development. Epistemological scheme of religious knowledge.

abstract, added 11/12/2010

Historical forms of man's relationship to nature. Components of the environment. Ecological philosophy, philosophical concepts of bioethics and ecohumanism. Historical types of knowledge. The relationship between the philosophical, religious and scientific picture of the world.

abstract, added 01/28/2010

Characteristics of specific forms of knowledge, the main stages of the development of positivism. The problem of the origin of man, the features of his biosocial nature. The culture of rational thinking that philosophy brings with it. Principles of sensationalism and rationalism.

test, added 05/07/2011

Analysis of the views of Imre Lakatos, a Hungarian philosopher and methodologist of science, a prominent representative of “critical rationalism.” Falsificationism as a methodological basis for the theory of scientific rationality. Methodology of research programs by Imre Lakatos.

abstract, added 03/08/2015

The subject of philosophy, its problems, structure, functions and worldview potential. Specifics of the philosophical picture of the world. Principles of dialectics, its laws, categories and meaning. Historical types and prospects of philosophical thought, features of its development in Russia.

tutorial, added 05/14/2009

The concept of being as the foundation of the philosophical picture of the world. Historical awareness of the category of being (from Antiquity to modern times). The concept of matter in the system of categories of dialectical materialism, its structure and properties. Unity of the physical picture of the world.

In the dynamics of scientific knowledge, a special role is played by the stages of development associated with the restructuring of research strategies set by the foundations of science. These stages are called scientific revolutions. The foundations of science ensure the growth of knowledge as long as the general features of the systemic organization of the objects being studied are taken into account in the picture of the world, and the methods of mastering these objects correspond to the established ideals and norms of research. But as science develops, it may encounter fundamentally new types of objects that require a different vision of reality compared to the one assumed by the existing picture of the world. New objects may also require changes in the scheme of the method of cognitive activity, represented by a system of ideals and norms of research. In this situation, the growth of scientific knowledge presupposes a restructuring of the foundations of science. The latter can be carried out in two varieties: a) as a revolution associated with the transformation of a special picture of the world without significant changes in the ideals and norms of research; b) as a revolution, during which, along with the picture of the world, the ideals and norms of science radically change.

The most common types of scientific revolutions in the history of science:

1) Intradisciplinary scientific revolutions - occurring within individual scientific disciplines. The reasons for such revolutions are most often transitions to the study of new objects and the use of new research methods.

2) Interdisciplinary scientific revolutions - occurring as a result of interaction and exchange of scientific ideas between various scientific disciplines. In the early stages of the history of science, such interaction was carried out by transferring the scientific picture of the world of the most developed scientific discipline to new, still emerging disciplines. In modern science, interdisciplinary interaction is carried out differently. Now each science has an independent picture of the world, so interdisciplinary interaction occurs when analyzing the common features and characteristics of previous theories and concepts.

3) Global scientific revolutions - the most famous of which are revolutions in natural science, leading to a change in scientific rationality.

First revolution

XVII - first half of the XVIII century - the formation of classical natural science. Main characteristics: mechanistic picture of the world as a general scientific picture of reality; object - a small system as a mechanical device with strictly determined connections, the property of the whole is completely determined by the properties of the parts; the subject and the procedures of his cognitive activity are completely excluded from knowledge in order to achieve its objectivity; explanation as a search for mechanical causes and essences, reducing knowledge about nature to the principles and concepts of mechanics.

Second revolution

The end of the 18th - first half of the 19th century, the transition of natural science into a disciplinary organized science. Main characteristics: the mechanical picture of the world ceases to be general scientific, biological, chemical and other pictures of reality are formed that are not reducible to the mechanical picture of the world; the object is understood in accordance with the scientific discipline not only in terms of mechanics, but also such as “thing”, “state”, “process”, which involve the development and change of the object; the subject must be eliminated from the results of cognition; the problem of diversity of methods, unity and synthesis of knowledge, classification of sciences arises; the general cognitive attitudes of classical science and its style of thinking are preserved.

Third revolution

The end of the 19th - mid-20th century, the transformation of the parameters of classical science, the formation of non-classical natural science. Significant revolutionary events: the formation of relativistic and quantum theories in physics, the formation of genetics, quantum chemistry, the concept of a non-stationary Universe, the emergence of cybernetics and systems theory. Main characteristics: HKM - developing, relatively true knowledge; integration of private scientific pictures of reality based on an understanding of nature as a complex dynamic system; an object is not so much a “self-identical thing” as a process with stable states; correlation of the object with the means and operations of the activity; a complex, developing dynamic system, the state of the whole is not reducible to the sum of the states of its parts; probabilistic causality instead of a rigid, unambiguous connection; a new understanding of the subject as being inside, and not outside, the observed world - the need to fix the conditions and means of observation, taking into account the way of asking questions and methods of cognition, dependence on this understanding of truth, objectivity, fact, explanation; instead of the only true theory, several theoretical descriptions of the same empirical basis containing elements of objectivity are allowed.

Fourth revolution

The end of the 20th - the beginning of the 21st century, radical changes in the foundations of scientific knowledge and activity - the birth of a new post-non-classical science. Events - computerization of science, increasing complexity of instrument systems, increasing interdisciplinary research, complex programs, merging empirical and theoretical, applied and fundamental research, developing ideas of synergetics. Main characteristics: NCM - interaction of different pictures of reality; turning them into fragments of a general picture of the world, interaction through “paradigmatic grafting” of ideas from other sciences, erasing rigid dividing lines; unique systems come to the fore - objects characterized by openness and self-development, historically developing and evolutionarily transforming objects, “human-sized” complexes; knowledge about an object correlates not only with means, but also with value-goal structures of activity; the need for the presence of a subject is realized, this is expressed, first of all, in the fact that axiological factors are included in explanations, and scientific knowledge is necessarily considered in the context of social life, culture, history as inseparable from values and ideological attitudes, which in general brings the sciences of nature closer together and cultural sciences. Types of scientific rationality: classical rationality (corresponding to classical science in its two states - pre-disciplinary and disciplinary organized); non-classical rationality (corresponding to non-classical science) and post-non-classical rationality. Between them, as stages in the development of science, there are peculiar “overlaps”, and the emergence of each new type of rationality did not discard the previous one, but only limited the scope of its action, determining its applicability only to certain types of problems and tasks. Each stage is characterized by a special state of scientific activity aimed at the constant growth of objectively true knowledge. If we schematically represent this activity as a “subject-means-object” relationship (including in the subject’s understanding the value-goal structures of the activity, knowledge and skills in using methods and means), then the described stages of the evolution of science, acting as different types of scientific rationality, are characterized by different depth of reflection in relation to scientific activity itself.

Classical rationality С-Ср-(О)

The classical type of scientific rationality, focusing attention on the object, strives in theoretical explanation and description to separate everything that relates to the subject, the means and operations of its activity. Such separation (elimination) is considered as a necessary condition for obtaining objectively true knowledge about the world. The goals and values of science, which determine research strategies and ways of fragmenting the world, at this stage, as at all others, are determined by the worldviews and value orientations that dominate the culture. But classical science does not comprehend these determinations.

Non-classical scientific rationality С-(Ср-О)

The non-classical type of scientific rationality takes into account the connections between knowledge about the object and the nature of the means and operations of the activity. The explication of these connections is considered as conditions for an objectively true description and explanation of the world. But the connections between intrascientific and social values and goals are still not the subject of scientific reflection. Non-classical scientific rationality undertakes to take into account the relationship between the nature of an object and the means and methods of its research. It is no longer the exclusion of all interference, accompanying factors and means of knowledge, but the clarification of their role and influence that becomes an important condition in achieving the truth. These forms of rational consciousness are characterized by the pathos of maximum attention to reality. If, from the point of view of the classical picture of the world, the objectivity of rationality is, first of all, the objectivity of an object given to the subject in the form of a completed, become reality, then the objectivity of non-classical rationality is a plastic, dynamic relationship of a person to the reality in which his activity takes place.

Post-non-classical scientific rationality (S-Sr-O)

The post-non-classical type of scientific rationality expands the field of reflection on activity. It takes into account the correlation of the acquired knowledge about an object not only with the characteristics of the means and operations of the activity, but also with value-goal structures. The post-non-classical image of rationality shows that the concept of rationality is broader than the concept of scientific rationality, since it includes not only logical and methodological standards, but also an analysis of target actions and human behavior. The new post-non-classical type of rationality actively uses new orientations: non-linearity, irreversibility, nonequilibrium, chaos. The new, expanded scope of the concept of rationality includes intuition, uncertainty, heuristics and other pragmatic characteristics that are not traditional for classical rationalism. In the new rationality, the object sphere is expanded by including systems such as: artificial intelligence, virtual reality, which themselves are products of scientific and technological progress. Such a radical expansion of the object sphere goes in parallel with its radical humanization. Therefore, post-non-classical rationality is the unity of subjectivity and objectivity. Sociocultural content also penetrates here. The categories of subject and object form a system, the elements of which acquire meaning only in their mutual dependence on each other and on the system as a whole.

Scientific revolutions and changes in types of rationality.

Scientific revolutions are characterized by a change in the model for solving research problems, strategies and methods of carrying out scientific research. It is customary to distinguish the following types (V. Kazyutinsky)˸ mini-revolutions related to individual sections of any science; local revolutions affecting a specific science as a whole; global revolutions that embrace all of science and radically change the “picture of the world.”

The main periods of development of science have already been discussed: classical, non-classical, post-non-classical. They are distinguished by revolutionary global transformations of scientific research paradigms, each of which represents a certain type of rationalism. Typological differences in rationality are manifested in the strategic goals of science, methods and norms of knowledge, systems of concepts and languages adopted in a particular scientific community. Accordingly, connections, relationships and interactions are distinguished, which are usually described in the categories of object and subject (objective and subjective), part and whole, thing and process, causality, chance, necessity, possibility, space, time, etc.
Posted on ref.rf
New concepts arise, denoting newly created empirical and theoretical objects.

Classical rationalism proceeded from a strict division of reality into object and subject (R. Descartes). The condition for obtaining sound scientific knowledge was the requirement to eliminate (exclude, remove) everything that does not belong to the subject. Cause and effect laws are characterized by rigid Laplacean determinism. Space and time are considered as an unchanging inert container of interactions and things of the world. The categories listed describe mechanical systems. In technology, these are various mechanisms (machines, machines, devices); in science, these are objects studied by mechanics. The symbol of this class of systems is a mechanical watch. The totality of the properties of the parts constitutes the properties of the whole. From the standpoint of mechanics, not only physical, but biological and social objects are considered. The picture of the world is presented by this type of rationalism as a “mathematical model of the universe” (John Newton).

In non-classical rationalism, the former opposition of subject and object is replaced by understanding the correlation of the explained characteristics of the object with the features of the means and operations of the subject’s activity. The role of subjectivity in cognition and the limitations of the classical subject-object paradigm are clarified. A. Einstein's theory of relativity placed the researcher inside the object. The cognizing person began to form an integral part of reality, to which attention is directed. Objectivity began to be understood not as absolute freedom from the subjective characteristics of the knower, but as the presence of yet unknown qualities and properties of the object, which is increasingly revealed in the cognitive actions of the subject, and independent of him. A clear example of such an approach is the scientific knowledge of the microworld: a device that detects the presence of microparticles and records their parameters itself becomes a significant factor in the behavior of particles. Space and time are now considered not as independent entities, but as a system of relations between objects and processes that does not exist separately from them. In A. Einstein's theory of relativity, a deep, fundamental connection between space, time and various states of matter was theoretically substantiated. The presence of various forms of movement lies at the basis of geological, geographical, chemical, biological, social aspects of space - time. Space and time become a productive force in the development of the world and are the basis for the physical parameters of the visible world. New meanings arise in the description of time and space. What was previously explained as a cause, such as gravity discovered by Newton, is actually a manifestation of a deeper reason - the curvature of space-time.

Scientific revolutions and changes in types of rationality. - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Scientific revolutions and changes in types of rationality." 2015, 2017-2018.

But as science develops, it may encounter fundamentally new types of objects that require a different vision of reality compared to the one assumed by the existing picture of the world. New objects may also require changes in the scheme of the method of cognitive activity, represented by a system of ideals and norms of research. In this situation, the growth of scientific knowledge presupposes a restructuring of the foundations of science. The latter can be carried out in two varieties: a) as a revolution associated with the transformation of a special picture of the world without significant changes in the ideals and norms of research; b) as a revolution, during which, along with the picture of the world, the ideals and norms of science radically change.

The most common types of scientific revolutions in the history of science:

3) Global scientific revolutions - the most famous of which are revolutions in natural science, leading to a change in scientific rationality.

First revolution

Second revolution

Third revolution

Fourth revolution

Scientific revolutions are those stages in the development of science when there is a change in research strategies set by its foundations. The foundations of science have several components.

Chief among them:

Ideals and methods of research (ideas about the goals of scientific activity and ways to achieve them);

Scientific picture of the world (a holistic system of ideas about the world, its general properties and patterns, formed on the basis of scientific concepts and laws);

Philosophical ideas and principles that justify the goals, methods, norms and ideals of scientific research.

For example, in classical science of the 17th-18th centuries. the ideal was to obtain absolutely true knowledge about nature; the method of cognition was reduced to the search for mechanical causes that determine the observed phenomena; the scientific picture of the world was mechanical in nature, since any knowledge about nature and man was reduced to the fundamental laws of mechanics; classical science found its justification in the ideas and principles of materialist philosophy, which viewed knowledge as a reflection in the mind of the knowing subject of the properties of objects that exist outside and independently of the subject.

How and why do scientific revolutions happen? One of the first developers of this problem, the American philosopher T. Kuhn divided the stages of the development of science into periods of “normal science” and scientific revolution. During the period of “normal science,” the overwhelming number of representatives of the scientific community accept certain models of scientific activity or paradigms, in Kuhn’s terminology (paradigm: Greek paradeigma - example, sample), and within their framework they solve all scientific “puzzle problems.” The content of paradigms includes a set of theories, methodological norms, value standards, and worldviews. The period of “normal science” ends when problems and tasks appear that cannot be resolved within the framework of the existing paradigm. Then it “explodes” and is replaced by a new paradigm. This is how a revolution in science occurs.

Four scientific revolutions can be distinguished. The first of these was the revolution of the 17th century, which marked the emergence of classical science. The second occurred at the end of the 18th - first half of the 19th centuries. and its result was a transition from classical science, focused mainly on the study of mechanical and physical phenomena, to a disciplinary organized science. The emergence of such sciences as biology, chemistry, geology, etc., contributes to the fact that the mechanical picture of the world ceases to be general scientific and universal. Biology and geology introduce into the picture of the world the idea of development, which was not present in the mechanical picture of the world.

The specificity of objects studied in biology and geology could not be expressed using the research methods of classical science: new ideals of explanation were needed that took into account the idea of development.

Changes are also taking place in the philosophical foundations of science. The central problems of philosophy during this period: questions of differentiation and integration of scientific knowledge obtained in different scientific disciplines, the relationship between various methods of scientific research, classification of sciences and the search for its criteria.

This revolution was caused by the emergence of fundamentally new objects of research that had no place in classical science, which led to changes in norms, ideals, and methods. As for the cognitive attitudes of classical science, according to the modern Russian philosopher V.S. Stepin, during the formation of disciplinary organized science they did not undergo significant changes.

The third revolution covers the period from the end of the 19th to the middle of the 20th century. Revolutionary transformations took place in many sciences at once: relativistic and quantum theories were developed in physics, genetics in biology, quantum chemistry in chemistry, etc. New branches of scientific knowledge are emerging - cybernetics and systems theory. As a result, a new, non-classical natural science was formed, the foundations of which were radically different from the foundations of classical science.

The ideals and norms of non-classical science were based on the denial of the rational-logical content of ontology, the ability of the mind to build the only true ideal model of reality, which allows us to obtain the only true theory. The possibility of recognizing the truth of several theories at once was allowed.

The ideal of explanation and description changes. If in classical science explanation was credited with the ability to characterize an object as it is “in itself,” then in non-classical science, as a necessary condition for the objectivity of explanation and description, the requirement was put forward to take into account and record the fact of interaction of the object with the instruments with which it was studied. Science has recognized that an object is not given to thinking in its “naturally virgin”, primordial state: it studies not the object as it is “in itself,” but as its interaction with the device appeared in observation.

A picture of the world corresponding to non-classical natural science emerged, in which the idea of nature as a complex dynamic and hierarchized unity of self-regulating systems appeared.

The philosophical foundations of science have also changed. Philosophy introduced the idea of historical variability of scientific knowledge into the latter’s system of justification, recognized the relativity of truth, and developed the idea of the activity of the subject of knowledge. Thus, in Kant’s philosophy, the activity of the subject was reduced to his ability to himself constitute the world of phenomena, i.e. the world of objects of scientific knowledge. Obviously, there could be no question of any knowledge of the object as it “really is.” Many philosophical categories, with the help of which philosophy solved the problems of scientific knowledge, underwent significant changes.

This applies to the categories part, whole, reason, accident, necessity, etc. The change in their content was due to the discovery in science of the fact that complex systems do not obey, for example, the classical principle, according to which the whole is the sum of its parts, the whole is always greater than its part. It became clear that the whole and the part are in more complex relationships in complex systems. Much attention began to be paid to the category of chance, because science discovered the enormous role of chance in the formation of the laws of necessity.

The fourth scientific revolution began in the last third of the 20th century. and was accompanied by the emergence of post-non-classical science. The objects of research at this stage of the development of science are complex system formations, which are characterized not only by self-regulation (non-classical science also dealt with such objects), but also by self-development. Scientific research of such systems requires fundamentally new strategies, which were partially developed in synergetics.

Scientific revolutions were simultaneously a change in types of rationality. The type of scientific rationality is a state of scientific activity, presented as a relationship “subject - means of research - object” and aimed at obtaining objective truth. At different stages of the historical development of science, coming after scientific revolutions, a specific type of scientific rationality dominated. The scientific revolutions described above correspond, according to V.S. Stepin, to classical, non-classical, post-non-classical types of scientific rationality.

The classical type of rationality in scientific activity, understood as the relationship “subject - means - object,” identifies the object as the main component of this relationship. At the same time, the efforts of the scientist are spent on excluding as completely as possible from the theoretical explanation and description of the object everything that relates to the subject, means and methods of cognition. This is seen as a necessary condition for obtaining objective and true knowledge about an object. At the stage of the classical type of rationality, neither scientists nor philosophers take into account the activity of the subject, the influence of cognitive means on the process of cognition, and also do not realize the sociocultural conditionality of the content of the foundations of science.

The non-classical type of scientific rationality, in contrast to the classical one, is characterized by awareness of the influence of cognitive means on the object. This influence is taken into account and introduced into theoretical explanations and descriptions. That is, in the “subject - means - object” relationship, the researcher’s attention is focused on the object and at the same time on the means. And since the subject uses the means of cognition, his activity begins to be taken into account. But the fact is still not realized that the goals of science, which determine research strategies and methods of forming and highlighting objects, are determined by ideological and value attitudes that dominate the culture.

The post-non-classical type of rationality is reaching the level of awareness of the fact that knowledge about an object correlates not only with the peculiarities of its interaction with means (and therefore also correlates with the subject using these means), but also with the value-goal structures of the subject’s activity. In other words, it is recognized that the subject influences the content of knowledge about the object not only due to the use of special research tools and procedures, but also due to his value-goal attitudes, which are directly related to extra-scientific, social values and goals. In postclassics, social life, its values and goals are recognized as components (explicit or implicit) of scientific knowledge about an object, which inevitably rebuilds the entire categorical apparatus of the philosophy of science and epistemology.

Changing types of rationality is a process of deepening the reflexive work of thinking that accompanies cognitive activity. Its change and complication is due to both internal scientific reasons (accumulation of factors that cannot be explained within the framework of the existing scientific paradigm; the discovery of new types of objects associated, for example, with the improvement of observation instruments and techniques, the emergence of new mathematical methods, etc.), and non-scientific reasons (value and ideological guidelines and attitudes in the culture of a particular era).

Each new type of rationality is “inscribed” into its corresponding scientific paradigm. But there is no deep gap between them: the new type does not destroy the old one, but shows the limits of its applicability. Therefore, when we say that the current era is the era of post-non-classical science, we cannot “write off” the previous types of rationality: classical and non-classical. Their methodological techniques, norms and ideals of scientific knowledge are still in demand when studying objects of low complexity, where the post-non-classical type of rationality often turns out to be redundant.

Predicting the future of science, we can say that the dominant and determining status belongs to the post-non-classical type of rationality. V. S. Stepin writes about it this way: “When modern science, at the forefront of its search, has placed at the center of research unique, historically developing systems, in which man himself is included as a special component, then the requirement for explication (Latin explicatio - interpretation) of values in this situation not only does not contradict the traditional orientation towards obtaining objectively true knowledge about the world, but also acts as a prerequisite for the implementation of this orientation.”

In the era of technogenic civilization, the definition of a scientific research strategy must necessarily include humanistic guidelines, i.e. questions related to man and his life on planet Earth.

Science and technology. The inconsistency of scientific and technological progress. Prerequisites and features of the scientific and technical revolution.

STP (scientific and technological progress) - continuous improvement of all stages of social reproduction, production and non-production spheres through a single, interdependent, progressive development of science, education, technology, technology, organization and management. primarily for the sake of practical solutions to the socio-economic, social and political problems facing society in a given historical period.

STP is a historical category that covers a long period of development of science and industrial production and their influence on human life. The first stage of convergence of progress in science and technical means of production appeared in 16? 18th century (manufacturing production, the needs of trade, and navigation required theoretical and experimental solutions to practical problems). The next stage is associated with the development of machine production from the end of the 18th century (science and technology began to mutually stimulate each other’s development at an accelerating pace). A special historical stage in scientific and technological progress is the period of large-scale machine production, the formation of industrial civilization (the powerful forces and resources of nature were put at the service to man, production from a simple labor process was transformed into a social technological application of the results of scientific work, the results of scientific activity.

STP is aimed, first of all, at the development of the productive forces of society. By the middle of the twentieth century. Is a fundamentally new stage of scientific and technical progress emerging? Scientific and technological revolution, which is a natural step in human history and is global in nature. This means that revolutionary changes covered all sections of science, technology and production, that scientific and technological revolution influenced all aspects of social life, affecting, although to an unequal extent, all regions of the planet and all social systems.

Essential features of scientific and technological revolution that characterize its nature:

a) the merger of the scientific revolution with the technical revolution with the rapid development of science;

b) transformation of science into a direct productive force;

c) organic combination of elements of the production process in a single automated system;

d) formation of a new type of employee;

e) transition from extensive to intensive development of production, etc.

The current stage of scientific and technological progress is characterized by many scientists as preparing the next scientific and technological revolution. Its distinctive features will be the manifold increase in energy saturation of human life, the globalization of all basic processes, a radically transformed technological basis, the transformation of systemic intersectoral technologies into a determining factor in socio-economic development.

The current stage of scientific and technological progress is associated with the transition to post-industrial civilization, with the formation of the special role of scientific knowledge, the results of diversified scientific work in the socio-economic progress of society. The main directions of modern scientific and technological progress: the use of new technologies, space exploration, the creation of rocket technology; production automation; development of the chemical industry and creation of materials with predetermined properties; creation of alternative energy sources, etc.

Global problems of our time: their background, significance, prospects for resolution

The eternal problem is the relationship between man and the environment, the development of nature and the mastery of its elemental forces, the problem of establishing lasting peace between peoples, guarantees of socio-economic, political and cultural progress. Many global problems arose initially, others emerged and had been brewing for a long time, but appeared more clearly and at the global level only with the establishment of capitalism, i.e. in the XVIII - XVIIII centuries. The causes of global problems should be sought in the historical process of human development. The history of mankind represents the conjugate development of two types of relationships that determine the entire life activity of people.

The first of them is the relationship between man and his environment (the “man - nature” system): the second is the relationship between people in society, that is, social relations. Developing production, that is, mastering nature, achieving his dominance over it, man gradually increasingly disrupted the natural development of components. Man himself, while remaining a part of nature, has simultaneously become a phenomenon of a fundamentally new type - the embodiment of a set of social relations that have developed in the course of human communication on the basis of production activity, that is, on the basis of fundamentally new relations that have developed between man and the rest of nature.

The harmony between man and nature in the early stages of human development remained unshakable. This was, on the one hand, the result of the underdevelopment of man himself, his means of labor, and, on the other hand, a consequence of the low level of development of social relations achieved by that time. Under the conditions of the collective mode of production, there could not be any acute conflicts between man and the nature around him. The social homogeneity of the society of that time did not create conditions for the irrational use of natural resources to the detriment of nature itself and the people living in its environment.

Thus, at the first stage of society’s interaction with nature, when its economy was still appropriating, when from a social point of view it was homogeneous, both consistency in the social relations themselves and harmony in the relations between man and the natural environment were preserved. As a result of the development of man himself, society gained the opportunity to obtain the basic means of life through transformative activities and material production. Material production has become the main source of people's livelihoods. The transition of mankind from the collective mode of production to agricultural, and then to industrial, led to a significant complication of productive forces.

Slave-owning, feudal and capitalist socio-economic formations corresponded to forms of socio-economic and political relations between people that were adequate to their essence and, naturally, forms and types of relations between society and nature, man and nature. In this aspect, we no longer put in the foreground the relationship between man and nature, but social relationships. Over time, conflicts developed and deepened. By subjugating nature, man entered into numerous conflicts with it and gave rise to contradictions. These contradictions ultimately gave rise to global problems.

Contradictions in the “man-nature” system are not the only source of global problems. Another such source is the system of social relations. The development of human civilization and its material culture objectively gives rise to conflicts between society and the rest of nature. The social prerequisite for the aggravation of global problems of our time, as studies of the history of the capitalist economic system show, are the relations of private ownership of the means of production. The private economy is guided by the main incentive - the desire to obtain maximum profit.

The desire for profit turned out to be divorced from more significant aspirations. The intensive development of global problems occurred in the 60-80s. XX century. It should be noted here that one of the factors that aggravated contradictions on a global scale was the confrontation between two social systems. The global problems of our time do not recognize state borders; they manifest themselves in states of all social systems. Due to their content and the interconnectedness of the process of human development, the resolution of global problems is possible only on a global scale.

"Global Global Problems":

The problem of preventing a world war that threatens the death of civilization and the very existence of life on the planet. It involves a spectrum of subsidiary problems: curbing the arms race; banning new weapons systems; disarmament, establishment of nuclear-free zones, confidence-building measures, etc.

The problem of establishing a new economic international order on the principles of equal and mutually beneficial cooperation to eliminate the backlog of underdeveloped countries. There are also several particular problems here: the problem of overcoming the technological dependence of developing countries on developed Western countries, the problem of restructuring international economic relations, etc. The problem of the struggle for progressive forms of economic integration and internationalization to deepen the international division of labor and equalize the levels of socio-economic development of countries around the globe .

Among the particular problems that make up it, one can highlight the issue of eliminating existing imbalances in world trade and any unfair restrictions in international economic exchange. The problem of managing the development of scientific and technological revolution with its humanistic orientation at the global level. Any scientific and technological revolution always has enormous socio-psychological consequences. Scientific revolutions are associated with the weakening of the limited knowledge of man about nature. Knowledge allows you to use the forces of nature for your own purposes. Scientific revolutions are the harbingers of technological revolutions.

Technological revolutions are leading to the easing of physical limitations. Since often the people into whose hands they fall are not distinguished by purity of intentions, the results are corresponding. The positive results of the technical revolution and its negative aspects are undoubted. Many hopes are pinned on scientific and technological revolution in solving global problems facing humanity, such as ecology, lack of long-term energy reserves of raw materials, overpopulation and hunger, and the very survival of Homo Sapience as a biological species.

The second group of global problems of our time consists of problems of optimization, harmonization and humanization of society’s relationship with nature in order to preserve and increase the resource potential of humanity. They can be defined, for example, as “planetary global problems”, and 8 types can be distinguished. The problem of preventing natural disasters of anthropogenic or mixed origin (soil erosion, desertification, etc.). The problem of rational and economic use of natural raw materials. It is no secret that deforestation is driven by the widespread use of wood as an essential fuel in rural areas.

An equally common reason for deforestation was the need to develop additional areas for agricultural exploitation. The consequence of this was the formation of a circle of dependence: urgent tasks in solving food and energy problems in the conditions of extensive management methods push to deforestation, and this, in turn, leads to soil degradation, which results in the loss of arable areas and the inability to solve the original problems. Demographic problem. Due to the fact that the rate of natural population growth consists of the interaction of two main demographic indicators - fertility and mortality, and the latter, in turn, depend on the level of development of society (economic, social, cultural, etc.), the backwardness of developing countries serves as one of the reasons for the high rate of natural population growth in this zone.

At the same time, in developing countries there is a general pattern of increasing the role of socio-psychological factors against the background of a relative decrease in the role of natural biological factors. Therefore, there is a fairly steady trend towards a decrease in the birth rate as the country reaches a higher level of development. Food problem. Nowadays, various forms of malnutrition in many developing countries are very common among the general population. This is explained by the fact that traditional diets can provide a sufficient amount of calories, but do not contain the required minimum of proteins, fats and microelements.

It is significant that the lack of these essential nutritional components has a negative impact on human health and results in a relatively low quality labor force, which is often unsuitable for use in the modern economy of developing countries. The problem of optimal economic foundation of uninhabited territories. The problem of preventing an energy crisis. Humanity needs energy, and the need for it increases every year. At the same time, the reserves of traditional natural fuels (oil, coal, gas, etc.) are finite. In connection with these and other problems that cause such a phenomenon as the “energy crisis,” it becomes increasingly necessary to find ways to prevent it and eliminate its consequences.

The deepest basis for strengthening the integrity of the world is the growing interdependence of states in the economic sphere, including in matters of the use of energy resources and the prevention of energy disasters. Not a single country in the world can lay claim to full development if it is not drawn into the orbit of world economic relations. The problem of protecting the natural environment and the mechanisms of its self-reproduction. Since the 60s. XX century experts consider the ecological state of our planet as catastrophic. Among the main manifestations of crisis situations that primarily affected the developed zone and then developing countries are soil degradation, deforestation, lack of water for irrigation and domestic needs, air pollution, etc.

Modern civilization is constantly expanding the consumption of natural resources against the backdrop of a corresponding increase in production and consumption waste. This cannot but cause an increase in the costs of combating environmental pollution. As a consequence, society must now constantly increase a certain share of national income, which compensates for the costs of extracting natural resources and protecting the human environment. This, in turn, limits the rate of economic growth. Development of the riches of the World Ocean, development of the use of space for peaceful purposes of progress. The third group of global problems reflects the processes of humanization of relations between society and the individual, issues of its liberation and diversified development, guarantees of its better future.

These problems, in particular, can be called “universal” global problems. Removing barriers to the comprehensive and systematic development of scientific and technological progress in the interests of people. The problem of eradicating epidemic diseases, diseases of civilization. The problem of eliminating illiteracy and developing education, i.e. the problem of dynamic multiplication of the intellectual potential of human activity. The problem of guaranteeing human rights, first of all, the right to life, to exist in a healthy environment. So, there are three groups of global problems of our time: global global problems; planetary global problems, universal global problems.

The global problems of our time are of a universal nature in the broadest sense of the word, because they affect the interests of all mankind, influence the future of human civilization, and most immediately, without any temporary delays. The global problems of our time are closely interconnected. Overcoming food or raw materials difficulties involves, in particular, solving the global energy problem, which is associated not only with a more rational use of traditional, but also with the establishment of new energy sources, the practical use of energy resources from outer space and the World Ocean.

If we turn to the problems of scientific and technological progress, it is obvious that the development of science, technology and technology affects not only the progress of material production, but also implies the further development of human potential, related problems of education, culture, health care, etc. Only the aggregate consideration of global problems creates objective preconditions for their analysis. One of the global problems of our time is the issue of war and peace. The arms race has enormous negative consequences for modern humanity.

It impoverishes the world economy, provokes aggressive tendencies in the foreign policy of individual states, and militarizes spiritual culture and political thinking. The problem of lagging development in developing countries is important. Within the framework of the world economy, the division of labor is carried out in such a way that the most economically developed countries are assigned the role of world industrial centers, while developing countries play the role of an agricultural and raw material periphery. Developed countries exploit the natural and labor resources of developing countries using various methods and hinder the creation of an independent economy in them. It is important to note that the beginning of the 21st century has already become critical for humanity in the context of worsening global problems.

Ways and possibilities for solving global problems

The aggravation of global contradictions puts on the agenda the common problem of human survival. Different specialists have different meanings for the concept of survival. For example, the latter is often understood as the blunting of social-class conflicts in order to overcome a nuclear war or environmental disaster. It is also suggested that the concentration of forces of survival and the deployment of their actions will go along with the resolution of socio-economic, moral and ethical conflicts and contradictions, which must be gradually resolved on a humanistic basis. This judgment is closer to the realities of social development, its objective laws.

It is important to note that the very concept of “survival” in relation to human society is not limited to the preservation of optimal physical and natural conditions for the existence of people. And in this sense, the scale of survival measurements presupposes: the continuation of social progress, the further development of civilization; dignified existence of all countries and peoples; guarantee of the natural right to life and development of each individual; priority of the natural and natural beginning over the scientific and technical component. The main of the listed areas of development is ensuring the social progress of mankind.

Thus, the conclusion follows that for the optimal solution of global problems of the current stage of social development, two groups of prerequisites are needed: scientific-technical and socio-political. The content of the first is to ensure scientific and technological progress to the extent necessary to regulate natural processes; secondly, in creating such socio-political conditions that will make it possible to practically solve global problems. The most complete solution to global problems obviously requires a radical transformation of social relations on the scale of the world community.

This means that for the nearest foreseeable period, the only way to solve global problems is the deployment of mutually beneficial, broad international cooperation. To develop a common survival strategy, to harmonize the active activities of humanity with the capabilities of the planet’s biosphere, with the possibility of its development, apparently, extraordinary political decisions and actions will be required. It is quite possible that circumstances will dictate the need not only to create a planetary economic mechanism, collective actions and coordination of the needs of humanity, but also to reorganize the entire way of life and the rules of community life. Life may become harsher, rougher and poorer.

It will require not only deprivation, but also restriction of individual actions for the sake of social necessity. Property relations will change. In any case, the concept of “private property” as property with which its owner can do whatever he pleases will become a clear anachronism. And we see that society is already imposing various restrictions on the use of private property in such forms as state, joint-stock or cooperative forms of ownership. A total rejection of all the benefits of current civilization is impossible, and a system of strict prohibitions will most likely not produce results. Only deep spiritual and material processes within people's life can provide a real way out of the crisis.

One cannot hope for the painlessness of this kind of process, because we are talking about a certain system of restrictions, about the conscious subordination of one’s individuality to a certain social necessity, to new principles of morality. In other words, it is necessary to rethink the entire system of value orientations and change life attitudes, shifting the emphasis from the means of life that people have been busy with for so long, to the goals of life. Perhaps these great trials will lead not only to a transformation of existence, but also to a spiritual transformation. And then the “global catastrophe” will not result in the death of people, but in their ascent to a new level. A feature of the current stage of human development is, in particular, the extreme aggravation of global problems.

The aggravation of global problems has created fundamentally new conditions for the development of humanity, conditions of a constant, real threat to life on Earth. In objective reality, we are dealing not with a totality, but with a system of global problems. Its characteristic feature is that it is extremely complex and multifactorial. And this is manifested, first of all, in the fact that the essential basis of the system of global contradictions are social relationships determined by the fundamental laws of social development. There are no purely social or purely socio-natural global problems.

All of them express one or another aspect of a single process of socio-natural development. A characteristic feature of the global problems of our time is that they, having arisen for social reasons, lead to consequences that are more than social, affecting the biological and physical foundations of human existence. The central link in the strategy for solving global problems is the development of comprehensive international cooperation, the unification of the diverse efforts of all mankind. So, the world community has an objective opportunity to save itself and life on the planet. The problem is: will it be able to take advantage of this opportunity?

The future of humanity. Interaction of civilization and future scenarios (in eschatological ideas and futurological forecasts).

Interaction of civilizations and future scenario The pessimistic prophecies widespread in the first half of the last century regarding the decline of Western European civilization did not come true. At the end of the century, the Western world won several historical victories and is confidently moving towards new frontiers - it managed to achieve unprecedented social harmony and economic well-being, and the political unification of the Old World began. Western countries have essentially seized control of the world's natural resources, and their intellectual and industrial potential is growing faster than ever.

“Fault lines” between civilizations still persist and in some places become deeper. However, the example of Japan, Taiwan and South Korea shows that the difference in civilizations is quite surmountable. Over the past half century, the East has become much more like the West than ever before in world history. This concerns, first of all, the economic structure of Eastern societies. Humanity is integrating.

Optimistic future scenarios suggest that this integration will continue and will end with complete convergence (from the Latin convergo - approaching, converging), i.e. the merging of civilizations into one organic whole; pessimistic ones predict that the process of human integration will be interrupted by some man-made disaster or that the competition of civilizations will eventually prevail over the common interests of mankind.

Scientific revolutions as a change in types of rationality. Global revolutions and changes in types of scientific rationality