Crib
Logic and philosophy
A method in a broad sense is a way of cognition based on a certain set of previously acquired general knowledge principles. Methodology is the study of methods and principles of knowledge. It is possible to distinguish at least two understandings of the methodology being developed: 1 as an understanding of the method in the specified broad sense presented in the reflection of the theory of knowledge and 2 as the doctrine of a system of methods in the narrow sense through which, within the framework of a particular science, in the course of theoretical or theoretical-empirical research, the plausibility or truth...
Ticket 1.
1. concept of scientific methodology
Methodology of science this is a system of knowledge about the principles of construction, forms and methods of organizing scientific knowledge, as well as ways to establish the degree of sufficient validity and verification of knowledge obtained in the process of scientific research of natural and social phenomena.
When the methodological foundations of modern scientific psychology are considered, methodological problems themselves are often confused with theoretical problems, on the one hand, and with methodological problems, on the other hand. It is useful to separate these two groups of problems. Let us indicate the reasons for such breeding.
Methodological problems of psychology,As a rule, they are associated with the search for answers to two questions central to psychology:
What is the subject of research in psychology? What
what is psyche?
How to achieve scientific credibility and objectivity
knowledge gained in the process of researching the psyche
sky phenomena?
Theoretical problems of psychology,like any other science, arise in connection with the construction of specific psychological theories aimed at explaining a certain group of mental phenomena, and with answers to the questions:
How to explain the features of composition, structure, functions,
origin, formation and development of various
psychic phenomena?
What are the natural, cause-and-effect relationships?
lies at the basis of the formation and development of mental phenomena
ny?
Methodological problemsare associated with planning, organizing and analyzing specific ways to obtain new scientific results, with answers to the questions:
What specific ways (methods) exist to obtain
new scientific data?
How specific conditions can be organized and what
funds can be used to obtain new
scientific data?
Typically stands outthree levels of methodological analysis of scientific research and the results obtained scientific knowledge:general philosophical, general scientific and specific scientific.
The general philosophical level of methodological orientation is determined by the philosophical positions that the scientist takes in relation to the phenomena being studied. The range of possible spontaneous or conscious philosophical positions is quite wide, and their consistent analysis or justification requires a high philosophical culture from the researcher.
The general scientific level of methodological orientation provides the substantiation of those criteria according to which the organization of research and the results obtained are recognized as scientific and relatively true for a given level of development of cognitive activity.
The specific scientific level of methodology provides guidance in the organization of scientific activity and in the analysis of scientific knowledge within the framework of each specific science.
In dictionaries and encyclopedias, methodology is usually defined as the doctrine of method, which, in turn, is understood as a set of techniques, methods, and regulatory principles of cognitive activity that provide it with the “right path to the goal,” i.e. to objective knowledge. Conformity, conformity of action to the set goal is the initial meaning of the method in the broad sense as “the path to the goal,” which is often obscured by understanding it as a characteristic of the operational side of the action (method, technique, etc.). Such a broader understanding of the method can be found, for example, in the Philosophical Encyclopedia, where it is defined as “a form of practical and theoretical mastery of reality, based on the laws of movement of the object being studied” [Philosophical Encyclopedia, 1964, vol. 3, p. 309].
Method (in a broad sense) a path of knowledge based on a certain set of previously acquired general knowledge (principles).
Methodology the doctrine of methods and principles of knowledge.
We can distinguish at least two understandings of methodology, developed: 1) as an understanding of the method in the specified broad sense, presented in the reflection of the theory of knowledge, and 2) as a doctrine of a system of methods (in the narrow sense), through which, within the framework of a particular science, in the course of theoretical or theoretical-empirical research, the plausibility (or truth) of a theory (or theoretical hypothesis) is tested.
Thus, the methodology of psychology should contain both a general philosophical understanding of the method and its connection with the principles of knowledge, and a more detailed understanding of methods developed in the methodology of science (or in science studies) as a system of research methods of relating to knowable reality.
A method (in the narrow sense of the word) is the implementation of a certain cognitive attitude towards the reality being studied, guiding the organization of research and presupposing the use of appropriate research techniques and procedures.
Thus, the “passive” method of observation differs from the experimental method as “active” in that with the second method, an active attitude is implemented to test causal hypotheses through intervention in the realities being studied. In psychology, the second understanding of methodology involves identifying a system of methods aimed at achieving the goal of cognition (and reconstruction) of psychological reality. However, let us return to the first of the above-mentioned understandings of the method.
In the general methodology of science, the position is accepted that the method is in inextricable unity with theory: any system of objective knowledge can become a method. Essentially, the method is the theory itself, certified by practice, addressed to the practice of research; any law of science, being known, acts both as a principle and as a method of cognition. In this sense, it is legitimate to talk about the method as theory in action.
Since the method is associated with the use of preliminary knowledge, the methodology can be divided into two parts: the doctrine of the initial foundations (principles) of knowledge and the doctrine of methods and techniques of research based on these foundations.
In the doctrine of the initial foundations of knowledge, those philosophical ideas and views on which the researcher relies in the process of knowledge are analyzed and evaluated. Consequently, this part of the methodology is directly related to philosophy, to the worldview, to the a priori acceptance of certain premises. The doctrine of methods and techniques of research considers common aspects private methods of cognition that make up general methodology research.
This definition removes the extremes of understanding methodology as an exclusively philosophical and ideological basis for knowledge or only as a set technical means, techniques, research procedures. The second of these points of view is characteristic of scientists and philosophers of positivist orientations, who deny the important role of worldview in knowledge.
And so, speaking about methodology, we mean a special form of reflection, self-awareness of science (a special kind of knowledge about scientific knowledge), which includes an analysis of the prerequisites and foundations of scientific knowledge (primarily philosophical and ideological), methods, ways of organizing cognitive activity; identification of external and internal determinants of the cognition process, its structure; critical assessment of the knowledge obtained by science, determination of the historically specific boundaries of scientific knowledge with a given method of its organization [Yudin, 1978]. In relation to a specific science, methodological analysis also includes answers to questions about the subject of the science, including the criteria that delimit its subject from the subject of related sciences; about the basic methods of scientific science, about the structure of its conceptual apparatus. The methodology also includes an analysis of the explanatory principles used in science, its connections with other sciences, a critical assessment of the results obtained, a general assessment of the level and prospects for the development of this science, and a number of other issues.
Before considering the structure and functions of methodology in scientific knowledge, it is necessary to discuss the relationship of the concept of methodology with the related concepts of reflection, philosophy, worldview, and science.
2. Psychophysical and psychophysiological problems.
A psychophysiological problem is the problem of the relationship between mental and physiological (nervous) processes.
Problems psychophysical identity in analytical philosophy: A distinctive feature of the development of analytical philosophy is the holding of broad discussions in which dozens and hundreds of researchers take part.
One of these discussions is devoted to the problem of psychophysical identity. The main thesis of the "identity theory" proposed by G.Feiglom , states: mental events are causes and consequences of physical events, and causal relations between them presuppose the existence of general physical laws, therefore, all psychological events are identical to physical events. If any event is predictable as a physical event, then the question arises about the predictability of this event as a psychological one. An affirmative answer to this question is given, in particular, by the Australian philosopher D. Armstrong , who saw in identity theory a means of transforming psychology into a branch of neurophysiology, and in the future even physicists. American philosopher D. Davidson substantiated the thesis about the impossibility of reducing psychology to physics due to the inexpressibility of the general properties of psychological events in physical terms.
This position is calledanomalous monism, since it turned out that the psychological is not consistent with the law, that is, anomalous in relation to the physical description of reality.
The anomaly of the mental becomes for Davidson a necessary condition for considering man as an autonomous being. The subjective basis of a person’s behavior is his specific intentions and beliefs that constitute the motives for action. However, in order for a motive not only to rationally explain an action, but also to have a driving force, it is necessary that its functional characteristics be realized in material structures. This removes the incompatibility of rational and causal explanations, but not their distinguishability. The latter remains valid and can be presented in the form of a dichotomy: either human action is viewed through the prism of intentionality (intentionality), and then the motive appears as the rational meaning of the action, or the action is viewed through the prism of empirical causality, and then thought does not appear here at all. Causal concepts integrate a picture of the world, which would otherwise represent a kind of “diptych” of psychological and physical, literal and metaphysical, rational and irrational.
Modern ideas about the relationship between mental and physiological
Despite many achievements in psychophysiology, especially in recent decades, psychophysiological parallelism as a system of views has not become a thing of the past. It is known that outstanding physiologists of the twentieth century. Sherington, Adrian, Penfield, Eccles adhered to a dualistic solution to the psychophysiological problem. According to their opinion, when studying nervous activity there is no need to take into account mental phenomena, and the brain can be considered as a mechanism, the activity of certain parts of which is at most parallel different forms mental activity. The goal of psychophysiological research, according to their opinion, should be to identify patterns of parallelism in the flow of mental and physiological processes.
The relationship between the psyche and the brain. Numerous clinical and experimental data accumulated in science in recent decades indicate, however, that there is a close and dialectical relationship between the psyche and the brain. By influencing the brain, you can change and even destroy the spirit (self-awareness) of a person, erase your personality, turning a person into a zombie. This can be done chemically, using psychedelic substances (including drugs), “electrically” (using implanted electrodes); anatomically, having operated on the brain. Currently, with the help of electrical or chemical manipulations with certain areas of the human brain, states of consciousness are changed, causing various sensations, hallucinations and emotions.
All of the above irrefutably proves the direct subordination of the psyche to external physical and chemical influences. Moreover, in Lately More and more evidence is accumulating that human psychological states are closely related to the presence or absence of a particular chemical substance in the brain.
On the other hand, everything that deeply affects the psyche also affects the brain and the entire body. It is known that grief or severe depression can lead to physical (psychosomatic) illnesses. Hypnosis can cause various somatic disorders and, conversely, promote healing. The amazing experiments that yogis perform with their bodies are widely known. Moreover, such a psychocultural phenomenon as breaking a “taboo” or witchcraft among primitive peoples can cause death even in a healthy person. There is evidence that religious miracles (appearances of the Mother of God, Holy icons, etc.) contributed to the healing of patients with various symptoms. It is interesting in this regard that the placebo effect, i.e. the effect of a neutral substance, which is used instead of a “state-of-the-art” drug, is effective for one third of patients, regardless of their social status, cultural level, religion or nationality.
In general, the above facts clearly indicate that such a close relationship between the brain and the psyche cannot be explained from the standpoint of physiological parallelism. It is important, however, to emphasize something else. The relationship of the psyche to the brain cannot be understood as the relationship of the product to the manufacturer, the effect to the cause, since the product (psyche) can and often very effectively affects its manufacturer - the brain. Thus, between the psyche and the brain, mental and physiological, there appears to be a dialectical, cause-and-effect relationship that has not yet received a full explanation.
Researchers never give up trying to get to the bottom of the problem, sometimes offering highly unusual solutions. For example, such outstanding physiologists as Eccles and Barth believe that the brain does not “produce spirit,” but “detects it.” The information received by the senses is “materialized” into chemical substances and changes in the state of neurons, which physically accumulate the symbolic meanings of sensory sensations. This is how the interaction of external material reality with the spiritual substrate of the brain occurs. At the same time, however, new questions arise: what is the “carrier” of the spirit outside the brain, with the help of which receptors is the external “spirit” perceived by the human body, etc.
Along with such “extravagant” solutions, new approaches to studying the relationship between physiological and psychological are being developed in the context of domestic science.
Modern options for solving the psychophysiological problem can be systematized as follows:
- The mental is identical to the physiological, representing nothing more than the physiological activity of the brain. Currently, this point of view is formulated as the identity of the mental not with any physiological activity, but only with the processes of higher nervous activity. In this logic, the mental acts as a special aspect, a property of the physiological processes of the brain or the processes of higher nervous activity
- Mental is a special (highest) class or type of nervous processes that has properties not inherent in all other processes in the nervous system, including VND processes. Mental these are such special (psycho-nervous) processes that are associated with the reflection of objective reality and are distinguished by a subjective component (the presence internal images and their experience).
- The mental, although determined by the physiological (higher nervous) activity of the brain, is nevertheless NOT identical to it. The mental cannot be reduced to the physiological as the ideal to the material or as the social to the biological.
None of the above solutions have received general acceptance, and work in this direction continues. Most significant changes in the logic of analyzing the problem “brain psyche” entailed the introduction of a systems approach into psychophysiology.
Psychophysiological (psychophysical) problemis actualized when the question is raised about the essence of mental phenomena. Initially, this problem was considered as a problem of the relationship between two substances: the soul, psyche and the physical, material world. Problem
was called psychophysical.The development of natural scientific directions in the study of living phenomena: anatomy and physiology, evolutionary biology, ethology gradually led to the fact that the psyche began to be considered as a result of evolutionary development in animal organisms of a numberspecial functions that provide orientation in environment, construction of complex forms of behaviorbased on such orientation, as well as the acquisition of life experience learning. Let us note that learning consists of acquiring new forms and methods of orientation and organization of behavior, activity, and communication. Today, scientists have established that the evolutionary and ontogenetic development of such functions in animals is ensured by: a) complication of motor activity, b) the formation of sensorimotor and perceptual-motor capabilities of animals, which depend on the structure of the neuromuscular system and sensory organs. Therefore, at present, the psychophysical problem in scientific psychology is considered aspsychophysiological problem.
What areas of research into psychophysiological problems exist in science?
With the formation and development of indicative operations and actions in living organisms, a special mental formation developssubjective image of the objective world,which represents the central mental formation (Leontyev A.N., 1983, 2000). Currently, there are several interrelated areas of research into the psychophysiological problem (Lomov, 1984, 1996; Petrovsky, 1994).
Study relationship between the mental image of the world and the object,between reflection, the subjective image of the world and the real objective world. The central question here is to find out how reliable and true knowledge and ideas about reality are. To what extent do the results of directly sensory and rational cognition correctly reflect the properties of objects? This question is a traditional subject of consideration not only for psychology, but also for epistemology (epistemology, theory and logic of scientific knowledge).
Study relations between the mental image of the world and its bearer - the subject.At the same time, the psychological image of the world is considered: a) in relation to the brain and neurophysiological processes; b) in relation to the objective perceptual-motor and orientation-exploratory activity of a living organism in the environment.
The relationship between image and brain, nervous system, neurophysiological processes.In the history of psychology, there were two hypotheses about the nature of this relationship: a) the idea of narrow localization each part of the brain determines the course of a strictly defined mental process; b) the idea of equipotentialism all parts of the brain equally predetermine the course of each mental process. It has now been established that mental processes, mental reflection (image of the world) are provided by the complex functional organization of neuro-dynamic processes that take shape in the processes of individual maturation and development of the brain in specific conditions of the life of the organism (Luria, 2000). At the same time, the emerging neurophysiological processes and functions are only one of the necessary conditions for the formation of an image of the world. Another necessary condition andthe main reason for the formation of a mental image of the worldis the active orientation and research activity of a living organism in the external world (Leontyev A. N., 2000).
Physiological processes in the human brain can potentially ensure the implementation of a wide variety of orienting and executive operations and actions in the composition various types activities, behavior, but do not give them ready-made forms. The specific forms of the subject’s psyche are initially determined by joint orienting activity with other people and activity in the external world. Each63 new action of the subject in the external world determines the formation of a new functional system of neurophysiological processes that ensure the effective implementation of the orienting and executive components of the action (Galperin, 2002).
The relationship between the image and the orienting-exploratory behavior and activity of the subject. Currently, there is more and more evidence that mental reflection is determined by the method of active interaction of the subject with the environment - indicative and exploratory actions. The content of the mental image depends primarily on what objective-practical and orientation-research influences on the part of the animal, its motor organs and sensory organs, will be exerted on the object. Wherein nervous system and the way neurodynamics are organized do not serve as root causes, but act necessary conditions and the result of image formation in the process of orientation-research activity of a living organism (Leontiev A. N., 2000; Galperin, 2002).
As well as other works that may interest you |
|||
| 54519. | Economic benefits and their classification | 18.69 KB | |
| Good serves to satisfy people's needs. Good is a means of satisfying human needs. It is for the sake of meeting the specific needs of people for goods that economic activity is carried out in any country. | |||
| 54520. | tell me a story | 48 KB | |
| Who composes them What names of composers do you know And what musical fairy tales do you know? You know that Pushkin wrote The Tale of Tsar Sultan and Rimsky Korsakov wrote a musical fairy tale about Tsar Sultan But today we will talk about S. Conversation Let's start today's fairy tale lesson by listening to the fairy tale Prokofiev. We listen carefully and then you will tell us what kind of fairy tale the music painted. Is it a funny fairy tale or a sad one Who are the main characters? The nanny began to tell the story from the very beginning or later. So kind it is... | |||
| 54521. | From the symphony to sculpture | 2.43 MB | |
| It is possible to confirm the same type of mystique of paintings, music, literature, sculpture, and, briefly, a conversation with vicarious illustrations from different types of mystique of paintings: It is impossible to do the same: Painting sculpture will reliably depict It’s a subject Literature reveals the place of songs to understand Music conveys the spiritual state of a person’s mood Everything You see the mystique to reinforce one another powerfully... | |||
| 54523. | My favorite film | 272 KB | |
| What do we usually do in our free time? Well, yes, we read books and magazines, listen to music, walk with our friends and watch TV. So, out lesson will be connected with TV programs, especially with films. We’ll speak about types of films, work over some texts, do different tasks, speak about your favorite films and present your project works. | |||
| 54524. | Meet My Friend | 96 KB | |
| Brother Rabbit took the two carrots to Brother Goat’s house. Brother Goat was not at home. Brother Rabbit put the carrots on the table and went away. Brother Goat saw the carrots on the table and thought; “Oh, what a good friend I have. I should be a good friend too. It's winter now. Brother Rabbit has not got any food to eat. I must help him.” So he ate one carrot, took the other and ran to Brother Rabbit’s house. | |||
| 54525. | My Land | 50 KB | |
| Objectives: to expand students’ vocabulary to involve students into reading, writing, communicative activities, to develop students’ thinking | |||
| 54526. | MY NATIVE LAND-OUR GLORIOUS DONBAS | 1.37 MB | |
| To begin with, I want to draw your attention to the quotation on the blackboard: He, who loves not his land, can love nothing. These wonderful words belong to the great poet G.G. Byron. His love to his land was deep and passionate. He could not imagine his life without his Highlands. He was so devoted to it, for him there was nothing like his Homeland. I think these Byron's words can be the motto of our lesson. | |||
| 54527. | MY SCHOOL LIFE | 66.5 KB | |
| Do you know what schools are in Great Britain. Let`s watch the video about schools in England and while watching write down the number of the pictures 1-7 in the order that you see them and write a subject under each picture. | |||
“Methodology” acts as one of the most vague, ambiguous and sometimes controversial concepts. The ambiguity begins with the very concept of “methodology.” Often it is derived not so much from an analysis of the real needs and trends in the development of education and the science that studies it, but rather from general philosophical foundations that do not provide an unambiguous understanding. The very word “methodology” is associated in the minds of many with something abstract, far from life, reduced to quotations from philosophical texts. It's not like that at all. Depending on the level of consideration, methodology is understood differently.
IN in a broad sense methodology interpreted as a system of principles and methods for constructing theoretical and practical activities, as well as a doctrine about this system. According to another, also broad, definition, this is the doctrine of the method of scientific knowledge and transformation of the world.
In modern literature we are talking primarily about the methodology of scientific knowledge, which is understood as the doctrine of the principles of construction, forms and methods of organizing scientific research activities and the doctrine of them. The vagueness of ideas about methodology is generated by the direct transfer of one or another definition to reality without taking into account the characteristics of a particular science.
The confusion of different concepts - philosophical, administrative and especially methodological - is to a large extent due to the fact that for decades researchers, especially in the humanitarian sphere of scientific knowledge, had to scientifically “mix” the instructions of higher authorities. This led to a decrease in interest in methodological and theoretical problems. However, despite everything, it is in recent decades that the methodology has undergone significant development. First of all, its focus on helping the researcher and developing his special skills in the field of research work has increased. Thus, the methodology acquires a normative orientation and its important task is to provide methodological support for research work.
To understand the nature of changes in this area of science, it is necessary to consider general progress development of the methodology of scientific knowledge.
Distinguish two types of methodology, united by one common function - to serve as a guide and guide in scientific work. This, in fact, is its purpose. But methodological knowledge can appear either in descriptive (descriptive) or prescriptive (normative) form, i.e. in the form of instructions, direct instructions for activities. Speaking about the descriptive form, we mean a scientific-cognitive description - a body of knowledge about a given area of phenomena, including here also a theoretical explanation, when we are talking not only about this experience, but also about the internal content (essence) of the processes being studied. Descriptive methodological knowledge (about the structure scientific knowledge, laws of scientific knowledge), of course, can serve as a guide in the research process. But normative (non-scriptive) knowledge is directly aimed at regulating activity. In normative methodological analysis, constructive tasks related to the development of recommendations and rules for carrying out scientific activities predominate. Descriptive analysis deals with the description of already completed processes of scientific knowledge.
Levels of methodology. To determine the place of methodology in common system methodological knowledge, it is necessary to take into account that there are several levels of methodology. The content of the first of them is philosophical knowledge. Second level - general scientific methodology(system approach, activity approach, characteristics of different types of scientific research, their stages and elements: hypothesis, object and subject of research, goal, objectives, etc.). Third level - concrete scientific methodology, i.e. a set of methods, research principles and procedures used in a particular scientific discipline, for example, in pedagogy. The methodology of science as such includes both problems specific to scientific knowledge in a given field (for example, the relationship between pedagogy and psychology), and issues of previous levels, for example, a systems approach or modeling in their application to a given scientific discipline. Some scientists also identify a fourth level, formed research methodology and technology.
The need for knowledge of methodology is obvious: without methodological knowledge it is impossible to competently conduct research. Therefore, it is very important to master a methodological culture, the content of which includes: methodological reflection (the ability to analyze one’s own scientific activity); ability to scientific justification, critical understanding and creative application of certain concepts, forms and methods of cognition, management, design.
The disadvantage of many works on the methodology of a special scientific discipline, in particular pedagogy, is that they only talk about methodological knowledge (the doctrine of...). Meanwhile, science has long been no longer identified with systematized knowledge. The validity of the idea of science as an activity is confirmed by many researchers of the methodology of science. A. I. Rakitov gives a figurative definition of the activity aspect of science: “Science is not only an arsenal of ready-made weapons, but to a much greater extent a forge where new things are forged.” Science is interpreted in a similar way in other works: “Science is not only the sum of knowledge, so to speak, the totality of the fruits of the tree of knowledge, but also the tree itself on which they grow”; “Science is not only knowledge, and especially not only ready-made knowledge, but also activity aimed at achieving knowledge.” I. A. Maisel notes that knowledge does not at all conceal within itself the source of its own existence, but is an imprinted cross-section of a non-stop cognitive process, an ideal clot of people’s cognitive efforts. Scientific activity generates knowledge, or more precisely, a special type of knowledge called scientific knowledge. Thanks to it, science is a dynamic functioning organism that exists to the extent that the generation of knowledge, its creation, and production take place. In other words, science should be seen as a special branch spiritual production- production of scientific knowledge.
These definitions reflect the unity of spiritual and material activities, result and process, knowledge and methods of obtaining it.
The main part of the self-awareness of science has become the idea of the nature of the activity aimed at the formation and development of scientific knowledge, and the thesis that scientific knowledge is always the result of the activity of a cognizing subject is the starting point for any methodological work. One from the properties of modern scientific thinking - his methodological - V.S. Shvyrev characterizes it as “a conscious attitude to the means and prerequisites for activities to form and improve scientific knowledge.”
Using the example of existing definitions of pedagogical methodology, it can be shown that from the stated positions, this system of views looks one-sided. However, there is no reason to completely abandon it; it is enough to supplement and clarify it. A clear definition was once given by M. A. Danilov: “The methodology of pedagogy is a system of knowledge about the foundations and structure of pedagogical theory, the principles of the approach and methods of obtaining knowledge that reflect<...>pedagogical reality".
This definition is correct, but it does not reflect the activity aspect of the methodology. It should be added: “...as well as a system of activities for obtaining such knowledge and justifying programs, logic and methods, assessing the quality of special scientific pedagogical research.”
Thus, In the methodology of a particular science, two areas are distinguished. This does not mean that it is bifurcated. Both of its aspects form a single whole in the context of real scientific work.
Subject of methodology. The subject of pedagogy methodology should be defined in such a way that the definition itself does not lose sight of the orientation of any type of methodological activity, ultimately towards transforming practice. In accordance with this task, the subject of pedagogy methodology acts as a relationship between pedagogical reality and its reflection in pedagogical science. Consistent specification of this definition makes it possible to include in it the concept of practical pedagogical activity. Then, at the starting point of constructing a pedagogical theory, an approach from the position of practice will be used, in which, along with the existing characteristics of the object area, trends and possibilities of its change and transformation are also reflected.
- See: Soviet Encyclopedic Dictionary / Ch. rsd. A. M. Prokhorov. 2nd ed. M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1982.
- See: Ozhegov S.I. Dictionary of the Russian language / ed. N. Yu. Shvedova. 20th edition. M.: Russian language, 1988.
- See: Soviet Encyclopedic Dictionary.
- See: Novikov A. M., Novikov D. A. Educational project(methodology of educational activities). M.: Egves, 2004.
- See: Karmin A. S., Bernatsky G. G. Philosophy: a textbook for universities. 2nd ed. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2006.
Bulletin Voronezh Institute Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia No. 4 / 2014
PHILOSOPHICAL SCIENCES
N.M. Morozova,
Doctor of Philosophy, Associate Professor
METHODOLOGY OF SCIENCE AS THE SCIENCE OF KNOWLEDGE METHODS
METHODOLOGY OF SCIENCE AS A STUDY OF THE SCHOLASTIC
The article analyzes the problem of the content of the methodology of science as a doctrine of methods of cognition. The research paper analyzes various aspects of methodology of science as a study of the scholastic achievements.
The problem of the content of scientific methodology has always raised many questions in the scientific community. An analysis of the literature on this issue allows us to state the fact that the methodology of science is usually considered in a narrow and broad sense. In a broad sense, the methodology of science aims to analyze the immediate subject of science, the structure of scientific knowledge, its dynamics, functioning, patterns, etc. In other words, the methodology of science in in this case can be considered, strange as it may sound, as a theory of science itself, a science about science. In this sense, the methodology of science considers such important conceptual characteristics of science as understanding its own existence, its system, laws, categories, functions. Most scientists name the following as the main problems it solves: verifiability scientific theories, the relationship between scientific theories and reality, the patterns of formation of scientific theories, the nature of scientific knowledge, the structure of scientific knowledge, the language of science, the relationship between scientific and natural languages, scientific style of speech, etc. This self-reflection of science testifies to the age-
understanding the role of scientific knowledge in the modern world, the right of scientific activity to exist as an independent activity. In principle, one can agree with this understanding of the content of scientific methodology. But, given the extremely broad meaning of the concept itself, it would be necessary to specify its status as, for example, “theoretical understanding of theory”, as “scientific understanding of science.”
In a narrow sense, the methodology of science is understood as the doctrine of methods of cognition, research methods, and methods of scientific activity. With this approach, many problems find themselves on the periphery of the concept of “methodology of science” (the doctrine of categories and definitions in science, the doctrine of the subject of science, the doctrine of its system, laws, the construction of scientific research, etc.). By the way, many scientists believe that it is more expedient to use the concept of “methodology of science” in this sense, that is, as a doctrine of methods, as a theory of methods. Why? It is known that in the classical understanding in the history and philosophy of science, the methodology of science has always been interpreted as a doctrine of methods.
Methods, methodology, methodology are concepts with which not only
Philosophical Sciences
scientific, but also all organized human activity. And it is not just connected, but aimed at the development of various areas of human activity. There are many definitions of methods and their classifications:
“...a method is a generalized representation of the pattern of interaction between a subject and an object (subject)”, “model of activity”;
“...a method is a system of rules and regulatory principles used to solve a certain range of problems, leading to the achievement of a given goal”;
In philosophy, a method is called “a way of constructing and justifying philosophical knowledge.”
The definition of method as such in the philosophical tradition belongs, as is known, to R. Descartes: “By method I mean precise and simple rules, strict observance of which always prevents the false from being accepted as true, and, without unnecessary waste of mental strength, but gradually and continuously increasing knowledge, contributes to the fact that the mind achieves true knowledge of everything that is available to it...”
The famous modern philosopher F. Bacon compared the method to a lamp illuminating the way for a traveler in the dark.
The heterogeneous, diverse nature of scientific activity also predetermines the diversity of the methods used, which, in turn, constitutes the methodology of scientific activity. A technique is a mechanism for implementing methods. It is with the help of specific methods that the problems of implementing scientific requests in the interests of science are solved. For example, the subjective method orients the researcher to the study of personal, subjective forms of expression and the existence of phenomena of reality. This method is actively used in the humanities. Thus, letters, diaries, notes, questionnaires can serve as rich materials for scientific research. The source of the analyzed material, created by one subject, becomes the subject of study by another subject. The objective method of scientific research is aimed at studying external, material phenomena outside of their relationship to the subject: analysis of works, scientific texts. By the way, all natural scientific methods are objective.
A modern researcher today actively uses the sociological method, when a phenomenon is considered as a social, public phenomenon, social institution, a form of social activity.
One cannot help but recall the classical empirical and theoretical methods, the distinction of which was made by Hegel in relation to aesthetics. Empirical method guides the scientist to
external, factual study of phenomena, their description. Hegel’s theoretical method, opposite the empirical one, is the method of “entirely theoretical reflection.” Being a dialectician, Hegel deeply understood the unity of these methods, noting that philosophical research “must contain indirectly the two above extremes, since it unites metaphysical universality with the certainty of real particularity.” Identification task general patterns scientific activity orients the scientist to the study of the general, necessary, essential, stable, and not the individual, accidental, appearing.
The logical and historical methods have not lost their relevance. These methods are directly related. The objective, real world (real scientific activity, for example) represents the unity of the historical and logical, the unity of its history and logic. In other words, in the real historical existence of scientific activity there is an objective logic of development. The history of scientific activity is a chronicle of the dedicated work of many generations of scientists, scientific schools; it is a chronicle of scientific discoveries, inventions, and fundamentally new ideas. The logic of scientific activity is something general and natural both in the genesis and in the structure of the subject area of research. It is impossible to imagine reality only as chaos, disorder, randomness. But it is also impossible to imagine reality as logos, orderliness, necessity. Even the ancient Greeks drew attention to the unity of “chaos” and “logos,” “immeasurable” and “measure,” “disorder” and “order.” Consideration of reality in the unity of opposing characteristics is the principle of dialectics. Understanding the logic of scientific activity is one of the tasks of scientific methodology.
Methods of abstraction and idealization are also relevant in scientific activity. These methods are, according to scientists, “means of constructivization” of objects of knowledge. The purpose of the indicated methods is to obtain the direct object of scientific research. This object can be either abstract or idealized. But, naturally, they are not identical either in the nature of mental procedures or in the nature of the result obtained. Idealization as a method of constructing an idealized object of study occurs through some significant simplification of the subject, mental exclusion or assumption, again, of certain properties and relationships, which a priori cannot exist in reality. Thus, an idealized object arises, fixed in concepts, models, etc. Ab-
Bulletin of the Voronezh Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia No. 4 / 2014
a abstract object acts as an abstraction of the process, genesis (development of a scientific idea), structure (content and form of scientific research). Abstraction of the process of scientific activity or the structure of scientific activity is based on the reflection of both their genetic and their structural aspects.
The methodology of science, when studying the patterns of scientific activity, produces both abstract and idealized objects (scientific works, style, metalanguage of science, image of science, scientific values, etc.). These objects arise on the basis of empirical objects, which are real scientific phenomena (scientist, dissertation, monograph, article). As a result of abstraction and idealization, abstract and idealized scientific objects arise, which are fixed in metalanguage, which gives them the opportunity to enter into the content of the methodology of science as “some ideal theoretical models empirical objects". In the history of the philosophy of science, scientific activity seems somewhat idealized. In fact, this is an activity that is characterized by deep disappointments, accidents, misunderstandings, non-recognition, etc.
As we see, in philosophy the importance of methods has always been highly valued. All the concepts of the authors mentioned in the article are united by the understanding of the method as a generalized model of scientific activity. It is with the help of specific methods that the problems of implementing scientific requests in the interests of science have always been solved and are being solved. It is known that science is part of the spiritual life of society, a set of ideas, discoveries, inventions, and theories. Each area of knowledge determines a different ratio of methods
knowledge and various forms, techniques, means of their implementation.
LITERATURE
Methodology of science, in the traditional sense, is the doctrine of the methods and procedures of scientific activity, as well as the section general theory knowledge, especially the theory of scientific knowledge (epistemology) and philosophy of science.
Methodology, in an applied sense, is a system (complex, interconnected set) of principles and approaches to research activities on which a researcher (scientist) relies in the process of obtaining and developing knowledge within a specific discipline: physics, chemistry, biology, computer science and other branches of science.
Methodology of science is a philosophical and scientific discipline that studies the system of proven principles, norms and methods of scientific and cognitive activity, the forms, structure and functions of scientific knowledge.
The methodology of science reveals the nature of scientific knowledge through: components of scientific activity (subject, object, means); stages of scientific research (problem statement, empirical stage, description and explanation, verification); levels of scientific knowledge (empirical, theoretical).
The most significant contributions to the development of the methodology of science were made by Plato, Aristotle, Bacon, Descartes, Kant, Hegel and other classics of philosophy. An independent field of research in medical sciences. becomes in the middle of the 19th century. Popper's methodological concepts, Kuhn's theory of scientific revolutions, Toulmin's historical model of the development of scientific knowledge, Lakatos's concept of research programs, etc. are gaining significant influence. These concepts are characterized by a close connection with the history of science and a critical attitude towards the neopositivist model of science.
In modern M. science. The following problems come to the fore: analysis of the structure of scientific theories and their functions; concept of scientific law; procedures for testing, confirming and refuting scientific theories, laws and hypotheses; scientific research methods; reconstruction of the development of scientific knowledge.
Methodology issues:
1. What is scientific knowledge, what is its specificity and difference from non-scientific (there is always an object (object) of knowledge, aimed at obtaining new knowledge, scientific knowledge is objective, systematic, verifiable);
2. What instrumental tools are used (methods, instruments, etc.);
3. How knowledge arises, where it comes from, how it develops;
4. What factors influence the development of the science of knowledge;
5. Analysis of the structure of the science of knowledge and their interaction (empirical knowledge - observations, experimental facts; theoretical - highlighting the essence of empirical knowledge);
6. Operation n. knowledge.
Methodology is a special section of philosophy, which examines the methods of cognition, their specificity, it is a system of principles, ways and methods of comprehending the truth. Object research f. Science itself, the forms of scientific knowledge, is a methodology. We can say that f. – self-awareness of science. Item philosophy - analysis of scientific knowledge and methods of obtaining it.
In the 20th century Problems have arisen in science due to 1) the complication of the object of study, their lack of visibility, and the abstractness of the description; 2) constant revision of the achieved knowledge. Thus, the need arose for philosophical and methodological analysis, i.e. in general recommendations that would help scientists in their research and serve as a “beacon” for them.
Philosophy gives the scientist initial epistemological guidelines about the essence of the cognitive process, about its forms, levels, initial prerequisites and universal foundations, about the conditions of its reliability and truth, about the socio-historical context of knowledge, etc. Consequently, philosophy formulates certain general principles, which another scientist in explicit or implicit uses in the process of his research.
This also means that philosophy is a universal methodology for economic science as well. That is, for economics, philosophy sets some general regulatory principles that economic science uses in its everyday research, although in most cases economists do not even know that it was philosophy that developed these principles.
General philosophical methods:
Dialectical is a method of understanding reality in its contradiction, integrity and development.
Metaphysical – considers phenomena outside of their mutual connection and development.
The concept of scientific methodology
In dictionaries and encyclopedias, methodology is usually defined as the doctrine of method, which, in turn, is understood as a set of techniques, methods, and regulatory principles of cognitive activity that provide it with the “right path to the goal,” that is, to objective knowledge. Conformity, conformity of action to the set goal is the initial meaning of the method in the broad sense - as a “path to the goal”, which is often obscured by understanding it as a characteristic of the operational side of the action (method, technique, etc.). Such a broader understanding of the method can be found, for example, in the Philosophical Encyclopedia, where it is defined as “a form of practical and theoretical mastery of reality, based on the patterns of movement of the object being studied.”
Method (in a broad sense)– a path of knowledge based on a certain set of previously acquired general knowledge (principles).
Methodology– the doctrine of methods and principles of knowledge.
At least two understandings of the methodology can be distinguished:
1) as an understanding of the method in the specified broad sense presented during reflection on the theory of knowledge;
2) as a doctrine of a system of methods (in the narrow sense), by means of which, within the framework of a particular science, in the course of theoretical or theoretical-empirical research, the plausibility (or truth) of a theory (or theoretical hypothesis) is tested.
Thus, the methodology of psychology should contain both a general philosophical understanding of the method and its connection with the principles of knowledge, and a more detailed understanding of methods developed in the methodology of science (or in science studies) as a system of research methods of relating to knowable reality. A method (in the narrow sense of the word) is the implementation of a certain cognitive attitude towards the reality being studied, guiding the organization of research and presupposing the use of appropriate research techniques and procedures. Thus, the “passive” observation method differs from the experimental method as “active” in that with the second method, an active attitude is implemented to test causal hypotheses - through intervention in the realities being studied. In psychology, the second understanding of methodology involves identifying a system of methods aimed at achieving the goal of cognition (and reconstruction) of psychological reality. However, let us return to the first of the above-mentioned understandings of the method.
In the general methodology of science, the position is accepted that the method is in inextricable unity with theory: any system of objective knowledge can become a method. Essentially, a method is a theory itself, certified by practice, addressed to the practice of research; any law of science, being known, acts both as a principle and as a method of cognition. In this sense, it is legitimate to talk about the method as theory in action.
Since the method is associated with the use of preliminary knowledge, the methodology can be divided into two parts: the doctrine of the initial foundations (principles) of knowledge and the doctrine of methods and techniques of research based on these foundations.
In the doctrine of the initial foundations of knowledge, those philosophical ideas and views on which the researcher relies in the process of knowledge are analyzed and evaluated. Consequently, this part of the methodology is directly related to philosophy, to the worldview, to the a priori acceptance of certain premises. The doctrine of methods and techniques of research examines the general aspects of particular methods of cognition that make up the general research methodology.
This definition removes the extremes of understanding methodology as an exclusively philosophical and ideological basis for knowledge or only as a set of technical means, techniques, and research procedures. The second of these points of view is characteristic of scientists and philosophers of a positivist orientation, who deny the important role of worldview in knowledge.
So, speaking about methodology, we mean a special form of reflection, self-awareness of science (a special kind of knowledge about scientific knowledge), which includes an analysis of the prerequisites and foundations of scientific knowledge (primarily philosophical and ideological), methods, ways of organizing cognitive activity; identification of external and internal determinants of the cognition process, its structure; critical assessment of the knowledge obtained by science, determination of the historically specific boundaries of scientific knowledge with a given method of its organization [Yudin, 1978]. In relation to a specific science, methodological analysis also includes answers to questions about the subject of the science, including the criteria that delimit its subject from the subject of related sciences; about the basic methods of this science, about the structure of its conceptual apparatus. The methodology also includes an analysis of the explanatory principles used in science, its connections with other sciences, a critical assessment of the results obtained, a general assessment of the level and prospects for the development of this science, and a number of other issues. Before considering the structure and functions of methodology in scientific knowledge, it is necessary to discuss the relationship of the concept of methodology with the related concepts of reflection, philosophy, worldview, and science.
Descriptive and normative functions of methodological knowledge
The structural organization of methodological knowledge is directly related to the functions that it performs in the process of scientific knowledge. Reflection on the process of scientific knowledge is not an absolutely necessary component. The bulk of knowledge is applied, so to speak, automatically, without special reflection on its truth, its correspondence to the object. Otherwise, the process of cognition would be completely impossible, because each time it would go into bad infinity. But in the development of every science there are periods when the existing system of knowledge does not provide results adequate to new tasks. The main signal of the need for methodological analysis of a knowledge system is the emergence of various paradoxes, the main one of which is the contradiction between theoretical predictions and actually obtained empirical data.
The above statement applies to situations where reflection is necessary on the categorical structure and explanatory principles of an entire science, that is, on a complex and objectified system of knowledge. But reflection can also be required by cognitive situations of a smaller scale - the failure of one or another particular theory, the impossibility of solving a new problem using existing methods, and finally, unsuccessful attempts to provide a solution to an actual applied problem. If we draw an analogy with the processes of different levels of control of human activity, we can say that scientific reflection of one level or another, as well as a person’s awareness of his own actions, is required where the existing automatisms do not provide the necessary results and need restructuring or addition.
Reflection and awareness are needed when the task is to build new scientific knowledge or form a fundamentally new behavioral act.
How can methodology help here, what are its functions in the process of concrete scientific knowledge? Analyzing the various answers to this question, one can encounter both underestimation and overestimation of the role of methodology. The underestimation of its role is associated with narrowly empirical tendencies that ignore its philosophical and ideological basis. These tendencies are characteristic, as we have already indicated, of positivist-oriented approaches. But even here, in the latest options post-positivist philosophy of science, there has been a shift towards recognizing the importance of philosophy and worldview for scientific research. Growing interest in methodological knowledge and increasing its role in modern science are a completely objective and natural process, which is based on reasons such as the increasing complexity of scientific tasks, the emergence of new organizational forms of scientific activity, an increase in the number of people involved in this activity, rising costs of science, and the complication of the means used. One of the main reasons for the natural growth of “demand for Methodology” is associated with the transformation of scientific activities into a mass profession; in methodology they are beginning to look for a factor that provides heuristic compensation - replenishment of the productive capabilities of the average individual.
At the same time, there is often a naive idea that everything in science comes down to finding suitable methods and procedures, the use of which will automatically provide a significant scientific result. Indeed, often in order to solve a problem it is necessary to find an adequate method, but this, especially if we are talking about a new method, is impossible only by moving “from above.” It is becoming increasingly clear that methodology alone cannot solve meaningful scientific problems. Insufficient awareness of this fact gives rise to a “consumer” attitude towards methodology as a set of recipes that are quite easy to learn and apply in the practice of scientific research. This is precisely the danger of overestimating the role of methodology, which, in turn, according to the law of the pendulum, can lead to its imaginary discredit and, as a consequence, to an underestimation of its importance. The use of methodological principles is a purely creative process. “As the history of science shows, knowledge usually remains surprisingly indifferent to methodological assistance imposed on it from the outside, especially in cases where this latter is offered in the form of detailed, meticulously developed regulations. Therefore, a new conceptual framework can and does arise not as a result of a methodological reform carried out by someone from above, but as a product of internal processes taking place in science itself. As for methodological research in the special sense of the word, they are best case scenario can act as catalysts for these processes, intensifying the self-awareness of science, but in no case replacing it” [Yudin, 1978, p. 122].
So, the first one can be highlighted is the function of catalyzing, stimulating the process of cognition as one of the main functions of methodological analysis. Closely related to it are such functions as problematization and critical understanding of ideas functioning in culture, the formation of the creative personality of a scientist by expanding his horizons, and cultivating a culture of thinking.
The second function of the methodology is associated with the organization and structuring of scientific knowledge as a whole through its integration and synthesis, the development of general scientific means and forms of knowledge - general scientific concepts, categories, methods, approaches, as well as through the identification of unified philosophical and worldview principles of knowledge. One of the consequences of reflecting the methods of a particular science is the possibility of their transfer and use in other sciences, which allows the methodology, under certain conditions, to perform a direct heuristic function.
Methodology plays a certain role in developing a strategy for the development of science, assessing the prospects of a particular scientific direction, especially when planning complex research and justifying target programs. We can say that the methodology here acts as a kind of “foreknowledge”, which should indicate the most likely path to success, anticipating the result that will be obtained in the future. The main place in such justification is occupied by the characteristics of methods and methods of moving towards the goal, their compliance with the general requirements that have developed not only in science, but also in society at the moment.
An important function of methodology (its philosophical level) is the worldview interpretation of the results of science from the point of view of one or another picture of the world.
The listed functions can be attributed to the functions of a methodology of a predominantly descriptive type, i.e., having the form of a retrospective description of already completed processes of scientific knowledge. Even when we choose and justify the direction of scientific research, trying to anticipate future results, we rely on reflection on the previously traveled path to knowledge in the hope of choosing the optimal path for further movement. Normative methodological knowledge, which includes positive recommendations and rules for carrying out scientific activities, has a fundamentally different, constructive character.
Normative methodology– reflection on the formal and organizational side of research activities.
Its result is the construction of regulations and norms, compliance with which is necessary to ensure the correctness of the problem formulation both in terms of its content and form.
Normative methodology provides certain means for solving already posed problems (intellectual technology of scientific activity) and improves the organizational side of research.
Descriptive methodology– reflection of the initial foundations and prerequisites of scientific knowledge, carried out, as a rule, after the fact in relation to newly emerging scientific approaches.