In cognition, two levels are distinguished: empirical and theoretical.

The empirical (from the gr. Emreiria - experience) level of knowledge is knowledge obtained directly from experience with some rational processing of the properties and relations of the object being cognized. It is always the basis, the basis for the theoretical level of knowledge.

The theoretical level is knowledge gained through abstract thinking.

A person begins the process of cognizing an object from its external description, fixes its individual properties, aspects. Then he delves into the content of the object, reveals the laws to which it is subjected, proceeds to explain the properties of the object, unites knowledge about the individual aspects of the object into a single, integral system, and the resulting deep versatile concrete knowledge about the object is a theory that has a certain internal logical structure.

It is necessary to distinguish the concept of "sensual" and "rational" from the concepts of "empirical" and "theoretical". "Sensual" and "rational" characterizes the dialectics of the process of reflection in general, while "empirical" and "theoretical" refer to the sphere of only scientific knowledge.

Empirical knowledge is formed in the process of interaction with the object of research, when we directly influence it, interact with it, process the results and draw a conclusion. But obtaining individual empirical facts and laws still does not allow building a system of laws. In order to know the essence, it is imperative to go to the theoretical level of scientific knowledge.

The empirical and theoretical levels of knowledge are always inextricably linked and interdependent on each other. So, empirical research, revealing new facts, new data of observation and experiments, stimulates the development of the theoretical level, sets before it new problems and tasks. In turn, theoretical research, examining and concretizing the theoretical content of science, opens up new perspectives for explaining and predicting facts and thereby orientates and directs empirical knowledge. Empirical knowledge is mediated by theoretical - theoretical knowledge indicates which phenomena and events should be the object of empirical research and in what conditions the experiment should be carried out. In theory, the limits are also found and indicated, within which the results at the empirical level are true, in which empirical knowledge can be used in practice. This is precisely the heuristic function of the theoretical level of scientific knowledge.

The border between the empirical and theoretical levels is rather arbitrary, their independence relative to each other is relative. The empirical passes into the theoretical, and what was once theoretical, at another, higher stage of development, becomes empirically accessible. In any area of ​​scientific knowledge, at all levels, there is a dialectical unity of theoretical and empirical. The leading role in this unity of dependence on the subject, conditions and already existing, obtained scientific results belongs to the empirical, then the theoretical. The basis of the unity of the empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge is the unity of scientific theory and research practice.

Basic methods of scientific knowledge

At each of the levels of scientific knowledge, their own methods are applied. So, at the empirical level, such basic methods as observation, experiment, description, measurement, modeling are used. Theoretically - analysis, synthesis, abstraction, generalization, induction, deduction, idealization, historical and logical methods, and the like.

Observation is a systematic and purposeful perception of objects and phenomena, their properties and connections in natural conditions or under experimental conditions in order to cognize the object under study.

The main functions of surveillance are as follows:

Fixation and registration of facts;

A preliminary classification of facts already recorded on the basis of certain principles formulated on the basis of existing theories;

Comparisons of the recorded facts.

With the increasing complexity of scientific knowledge, the goal, plan, theoretical principles, and comprehension of the results are gaining more and more weight. As a result, the role of theoretical thinking in observation increases.

Observation in social sciences is especially difficult, where its results largely depend on the ideological and methodological attitudes of the observer, his attitude to the object.

The observation method is limited by the method, since with its help it is possible only to fix certain properties and connections of the object, but it is impossible to reveal their essence, nature, development tendencies. Comprehensive observation of the object is the basis for the experiment.

An experiment is the study of any phenomena by actively influencing them by creating new conditions corresponding to the objectives of the study, or by changing the course of the process in a certain direction.

In contrast to simple observation, which does not provide for an active impact on an object, an experiment is an active intrusion of a researcher into natural phenomena, in the course of the processes that are being studied. An experiment is a kind of practice in which practical action is organically combined with the theoretical work of thought.

The significance of the experiment lies not only in the fact that with its help science explains the phenomena of the material world, but also in the fact that science, relying on experience, directly masters certain studied phenomena. Therefore, experiment serves as one of the main means of connecting science with production. After all, it allows you to check the correctness of scientific conclusions and discoveries, new patterns. Experiment serves as a means of research and invention of new devices, machines, materials and processes in industrial production, a necessary stage in the practical testing of new scientific and technical discoveries.

The experiment is widely used not only in natural sciences, but also in social practice, where it plays an important role in the knowledge and management of social processes.

The experiment has its own specific features in comparison with other methods:

The experiment makes it possible to study objects in the so-called pure form;

The experiment allows you to explore the properties of objects in extreme conditions, which contributes to a deeper penetration into their essence;

An important advantage of the experiment is its repeatability, due to which this method acquires special significance and value in scientific knowledge.

Description is an indication of the signs of an object or phenomenon, both essential and insignificant. Description, as a rule, is applied to single, individual objects for a more complete acquaintance with them. Its purpose is to give the most complete information about the object.

Measurement is a specific system for fixing and recording the quantitative characteristics of the object under study using various measuring instruments and apparatus. With the help of measurement, the ratio of one quantitative characteristic of an object to another, homogeneous with it, taken as a unit of measurement, is determined. The main functions of the measurement method are, firstly, the fixation of the quantitative characteristics of the object; secondly, the classification and comparison of measurement results.

Modeling is the study of an object (original) by creating and researching its copy (model), which, by its properties, to a certain extent reproduces the properties of the object under study.

Modeling is used when the direct study of objects for some reason is impossible, difficult or impractical. There are two main types of modeling: physical and mathematical. At the present stage of the development of scientific knowledge, a particularly large role is given to computer modeling. A computer that operates according to a special program is capable of simulating the most real processes: fluctuations in market prices, orbits of spaceships, demographic processes, and other quantitative parameters of the development of nature, society, and an individual.

Methods of the theoretical level of knowledge.

Analysis is the dismemberment of an object into its constituent parts (sides, signs, properties, relationships) with the aim of their comprehensive study.

Synthesis is the unification of previously identified parts (sides, features, properties, relationships) of an object into a single whole.

Analysis and synthesis are dialectically contradictory and interdependent methods of cognition. Cognition of an object in its concrete integrity presupposes its preliminary dismemberment into its components and consideration of each of them. Analysis performs this task. It makes it possible to highlight the essential, that which forms the basis of the connection of all aspects of the object under study. That is, dialectical analysis is a means of penetrating into the essence of things. But, playing an important role in cognition, analysis does not provide knowledge of the concrete, knowledge of the object as a unity of the diverse, the unity of various definitions. Synthesis performs this task. So, analysis and synthesis are organically interconnected and mutually condition each other at each stage of the process of theoretical knowledge.

Abstraction is a method of abstraction from certain properties and relationships of an object and at the same time focusing the main attention on those that are the direct subject of scientific research. Abstraction contributes to the penetration of knowledge into the essence of phenomena, the movement of knowledge from phenomenon to essence. It is clear that abstraction dismembers, coarsens, schematizes an integral mobile reality. However, this is precisely what allows a deeper study of individual aspects of the subject "in its pure form". So, and to penetrate into their essence.

Generalization is a method of scientific knowledge that captures the general characteristics and properties of a certain group of objects, makes the transition from the singular to the particular and general, from the less general to the more general.

In the process of cognition, it is often necessary, relying on already existing knowledge, to draw conclusions that are new knowledge about the unknown. This is done using techniques such as induction and deduction.

Induction is a method of scientific cognition, when, on the basis of knowledge about the particular, a conclusion is made about the general. It is a mode of reasoning by which the validity of a hypothesis or hypothesis is established. In real cognition, induction always appears in unity with deduction and is organically linked to it.

Deduction is a method of cognition, when, on the basis of a general principle, a new true knowledge about a separate is necessarily deduced from some positions as true ones. With the help of this method, the individual is cognized on the basis of knowledge of general laws.

Idealization is a method of logical modeling through which idealized objects are created. Idealization focuses on the processes of the conceivable construction of possible objects. The results of idealization are not arbitrary. In the extreme case, they correspond to individual real properties of objects or allow their interpretation based on the data of the empirical level of scientific knowledge. Idealization is associated with a "thought experiment", as a result of which, from a hypothetical minimum of some signs of the behavior of objects, the laws of their functioning are discovered or generalized. The boundaries of the effectiveness of idealization are determined by practice.

Historical and logical methods are organically linked. The historical method presupposes consideration of the objective process of the development of an object, its real history with all its twists and turns, features. This is a certain way of reproducing in thinking the historical process in its chronological sequence and concreteness.

The logical method is a way by which mentally reproduces the real historical process in its theoretical form, in a system of concepts.

The task of historical research is to reveal the specific conditions for the development of certain phenomena. The task of logical research is to reveal the role that individual elements of the system play in the development of the whole.

Empirical knowledge is the establishment of scientific facts and their subjective processing. This is the starting point of the cognitive process, in which sensations and feelings play an important role. Thanks to the sense organs, a human being can be objectively connected with the world around. They give direct primary knowledge about things, phenomena and objects, their functions and properties.

Epistemology of sensations

This branch of science considers the empirical and theoretical levels of knowledge as a superstructure over the sensual. The latter include perception, sensation and presentation. Empirical knowledge is based on sensations. This is a display of the properties of individual objects, things during their impact on the senses. This is elementary knowledge that does not have the structure of a cognitive phenomenon. The information bandwidth of human senses is based on sight, touch, hearing, smell and taste. The sense organs as a means of cognition are formed as a result of the practical direct interaction of nature and man. It is thanks to this practice that empirical knowledge is possible. Representations and images that are created as a result of the acquisition of one or another sensation cannot be separated from the cognitive social actions and addictions of people.

Epistemology of perception

The empirical level of cognition is also built on perception, which is a sensually structured, concrete image. It arises on the basis of a complex of previously received sensations: tactile, visual, and so on. Empirical knowledge starts from perception, which is thinking contemplation. As a result of the perception and sensation of the forms of external nature, an idea of ​​it is created as an image of the cognitive type. Representation is an intermediate link between thinking and perception.

Comprehending

Empirical knowledge appears at the junction of sensory perception and consciousness. Sensations leave a deep imprint on the mind. Processes and events felt subconsciously orient a person in the stream of life events, but he does not always specifically fix them. It is impossible to comprehend all this and penetrate into the essence of things, to find out the causes of phenomena with the help of the senses alone. This can be achieved through mental (rational) cognition, combined with a process such as empirical cognition.

Experienced level

Experience is a higher level in comparison with sensual experience. Empirical and theoretical knowledge (without which the applied use of the experience gained will be impossible) make it possible to describe the experience. They involve the creation of a source of knowledge in the form of rigorous scientific documents. These can be schemes, acts, protocols, and so on. Empirical cognition can be both direct and mediated (through the use of all kinds of instruments and devices).

Historical process

Modern empirical scientific knowledge has a source of observation of things, objects and natural phenomena. Our ancestors observed animals, plants, the sky, other people, the work of the human body. It was the knowledge acquired in this way that formed the basis of astronomy, biology, medicine, physics and other sciences. In the process of the development of civilization, the empirical and theoretical levels of knowledge were improved, the possibilities of perception and observation with the help of instruments and devices increased. Purposeful observation differs from contemplation in the selectivity of the process. Preliminary hypotheses and ideas aim the researcher at specific objects of research, which also determines the set of technical means that are needed to obtain a reliable result.

Methodology

The methods of empirical knowledge are based on living contemplation, sensory perception and the rational moment. Collecting and generalizing facts is the main task of these processes. Empirical cognition methods include observation, measurement, analysis, induction, experiment, comparison, observation.
1. Observation is a passive, purposeful study of an object that relies on the senses. During this process, the researcher receives general information about the object of knowledge, about its properties.

2. An experiment is a purposeful active intervention in the current process under study. It includes a change in the object and the conditions of its functioning, which are determined by the framework of the goals of the experiment. The peculiarities of the experiment are: an active attitude towards the subject of research, the possibility of its transformation, control over its behavior, verification of the result, reproducibility of the experiment in relation to the studied object and conditions, the ability to discover additional properties of phenomena.

3. Comparison is an operation of cognition that reveals the differences or identity of different objects. This process makes sense in one class of homogeneous things and phenomena.

4. Description - a procedure consisting in fixing the result of an experiment (experiment or observation) using the accepted notation systems.

5. Measurement is a set of active actions that are performed with the help of measuring and computing means to find the numerical and quantitative values ​​of the studied quantities.

It should be emphasized that empirical and theoretical knowledge are always realized together, that is, research methods are supported by conceptual theories, hypotheses and ideas.

Technical equipment

Empirical knowledge in science actively uses technical equipment in the process of studying phenomena and things. It can be:

Measuring devices and instruments: scales, rulers, speedometers, radiometers, ammeters and voltmeters, wattmeters and so on, helping the researcher to find out the parameters and characteristics of objects;

Devices that can help in observing things and objects that are virtually invisible to the naked eye (telescopes, microscopes, and the like);

Devices that allow you to analyze the functions and structure of the processes and phenomena under study: oscilloscopes, electrocardiographs, chromatographs, chronometers, etc.

The importance of experiment

Empirical knowledge and its results today directly depend on experimental data. If they are not obtained or are impossible at this stage, then the theory is considered "bare" - impractical and unconfirmed. Correctly conducting an experiment is a responsible task of constructing a theory. It is only through this process that hypotheses can be tested, and hypothetical connections can be established. Experiment differs qualitatively from observation in three conditions:

1. During the experiment, the phenomena occur in conditions previously created by the researcher. When observing - only registration of a phenomenon in its natural environment.

2. The researcher freely intervenes in events and phenomena within the framework of the rules of the experiment. The observer does not have the right and cannot regulate the object of research and its conditions.

3. During the experiment, the researcher has the right to exclude or include various parameters. The observer, however, only fixes possible new parameters in natural conditions.

Experiment types

The empirical level of knowledge is based on different types of experiments:

Physical - the study of the diversity of natural phenomena;

Psychological - the study of the vital activity of the subject of research and related circumstances;

Mental - is carried out exclusively in the imagination;

Critical - it is necessary to check the data according to various criteria;

Computer mathematical modeling.

Scientific knowledge has 2 levels: empirical and theoretical.

Empirical level cognition is associated with the subject of scientific research, includes 2 components - sensory experience (sensation, perception, representation) and their primary theoretical understanding.

For empirical cognition, factor-fixing activity is characteristic.

Theoretical level consists in further processing of empirical material. Theoretical cognition is essential cognition carried out at the level of high-order abstractions.

The positions of empiricism: on the first plane - the role of sensation, direct observation in cognition and denial of the role of theoretical thinking. The position of rationalism: on the first plane - the activity of reason, ascribes to it the role of the unity of the power of cognition and ignoring the meaning of sensory cognition.

The empirical level of scientific knowledge is characterized by direct research of real-life, sensually perceived objects. At this level, the process of accumulating information about the objects and phenomena under study is carried out by means of observations, performing various measurements, and delivering experiments. Here, the primary systematization of the obtained factual data in the form of tables, diagrams, graphs, etc. is also carried out. In addition, already at the second level of scientific knowledge - as a consequence of the generalization of scientific facts - it is possible to formulate some empirical laws.

The theoretical level of scientific research is carried out at the rational (logical) level of cognition. At this level, the scientist operates only with theoretical (ideal, symbolic) objects. Also at this level there is a disclosure of the deepest essential sides, connections, patterns inherent in the studied objects, phenomena. Theoretical level - a higher level in scientific knowledge

Considering theoretical knowledge as the highest and most developed, one should first of all determine its structural components. The main ones include: problem, hypothesis and theory.

A problem is a form of knowledge, the content of which is something that has not yet been cognized by man, but that needs to be cognized. In other words, this is knowledge of ignorance, a question that arose in the course of cognition and requires an answer. solutions.

Scientific problems should be distinguished from unscientific (pseudo-problems), for example, the problem of creating a perpetual motion machine. The solution to a specific problem is an essential moment in the development of knowledge, during which new problems arise, and new problems are put forward, certain conceptual ideas, including hypotheses.

Hypothesis - a form of knowledge containing an assumption formulated on the basis of a number of facts, the true value of which is uncertain and needs to be proven. Hypothetical knowledge is probable, not reliable, and requires verification and justification. In the course of proving the hypotheses put forward, some of them become a true theory, others are modified, refined and concretized, turn into delusions if the test gives a negative result.

The decisive test of the truth of the hypothesis is practice (the logical criterion of truth plays an auxiliary role in this). A tested and proven hypothesis becomes a reliable truth and becomes a scientific theory.

Theory - the most developed form of scientific knowledge, which gives a holistic reflection of the natural and essential connections of a certain area of ​​reality. Examples of this form of knowledge are classical Newtonian mechanics, Darwin's evolutionary theory, Einstein's theory of relativity, the theory of self-organizing integral systems (synergetics), etc.

In practice, scientific knowledge is successfully implemented only when people are convinced of its truth. Without the transformation of an idea into a personal belief, a person's faith, successful practical implementation of theoretical ideas is impossible.

The general methods of cognition of reality include: induction, deduction, analogy, comparison, generalization, abstraction, etc.

Specific methods of theoretical knowledge in science include: idealization, interpretation, thought experiment, machine computational experiment, axiomatic method and genetic method for constructing a theory, etc.

In scientific knowledge, for example, abstractions of identification and isolating abstractions are widely used. The abstraction of identification is a concept that is obtained as a result of the identification of a certain set of objects (in this case, they are distracted from a number of individual properties, attributes of these objects) and combining them into a special group. An example is the grouping of the entire multitude of plants and animals living on our planet into special species, genera, orders, etc. An isolating abstraction is obtained by separating certain properties, relations inextricably linked with objects of the material world, into independent entities (“stability "," Solubility "," electrical conductivity ", etc.).

The formation of scientific abstractions, general theoretical positions is not the ultimate goal of cognition, but is only a means of deeper, more versatile cognition of the concrete. Therefore, further movement (ascent) of cognition is necessary from the achieved abstract again to the concrete. The knowledge about the concrete obtained at this stage of research will be qualitatively different in comparison with that which was available at the stage of sensory cognition. In other words, the concrete at the beginning of the cognitive process (the sensually-concrete, which is its initial moment) and the concrete, comprehended at the end of the cognitive process (it is called logically-concrete, emphasizing the role of abstract thinking in its comprehension), are fundamentally different from each other.

Forms and methods of scientific knowledge.

Cognition - This is a specific type of human activity aimed at comprehending the surrounding world and oneself in this world. “Cognition is, primarily due to socio-historical practice, the process of acquiring and developing knowledge, its constant deepening, expansion, and improvement

A person comprehends the world around him, masters it in various ways, among which two main ones can be distinguished. The first (genetically original) - material and technical - the production of livelihoods, labor, practice. The second is spiritual (ideal), within which the cognitive relationship between subject and object is just one of many others. In turn, the process of cognition and the knowledge obtained in it in the course of the historical development of practice and cognition itself is increasingly differentiated and embodied in its various forms. Every form of social consciousness: science, philosophy, mythology, politics, religion, etc. specific forms of cognition correspond. Usually, the following are distinguished: ordinary, playful, mythological, artistic-figurative, philosophical, religious, personal, scientific. Although the latter are related, they are not identical to one another, each of them has its own specifics. We will not dwell on each of the forms of cognition. The subject of our research is scientific knowledge. In this regard, it is advisable to consider the features of only the latter.

Analysis - mental or real decomposition of an object into its constituent parts.

Synthesis - unification of the elements learned as a result of the analysis into a single whole.

Generalization - the process of mental transition from the single to the general, from the less general to the more general, for example: the transition from the judgment "this metal conducts electricity" to the judgment "all metals conduct electricity", from the judgment: "the mechanical form of energy turns into heat" to the judgment “every form of energy turns into heat”.

Abstraction (idealization) - the mental introduction of certain changes in the studied object in accordance with the objectives of the study. As a result of idealization, some properties, features of objects that are not essential for this study can be excluded from consideration. An example of such idealization in mechanics is a material point, i.e. a point with mass, but devoid of any size. The same abstract (ideal) object is an absolutely rigid body.

Induction - the process of deriving the general position from the observation of a number of particular individual facts, i.e. knowledge from the particular to the general. In practice, incomplete induction is most often used, which involves a conclusion about all the objects of a set on the basis of knowledge of only a part of the objects. Incomplete induction based on experimental research and including theoretical justification is called scientific induction. The conclusions of such induction are often probabilistic. This is a risky but creative method. With a strict formulation of the experiment, logical consistency and severity of conclusions, it is capable of giving a reliable conclusion. According to the famous French physicist Louis de Broglie, scientific induction is the true source of truly scientific progress.

Deduction - the process of analytical reasoning from general to particular or less general. It is closely related to generalization. If the initial general provisions are an established scientific truth, then by means of deduction a true conclusion will always be obtained. The deductive method is especially important in mathematics. Mathematicians operate with mathematical abstractions and base their reasoning on general principles. These general provisions apply to the solution of particular, specific problems.

In the history of natural science, there have been attempts to absolutize the meaning in science of the inductive method (F. Bacon) or the deductive method (R. Descartes), to give them a universal meaning. However, these methods cannot be applied as stand-alone, isolated from each other. each of them is used at a certain stage of the cognition process.

Analogy - a probable, plausible conclusion about the similarity of two objects or phenomena in any feature, based on their established similarity in other features. The analogy with the simple allows us to understand the more complex. So, by analogy with the artificial selection of the best breeds of domestic animals, Charles Darwin discovered the law of natural selection in the animal and plant world.

Modeling - reproduction of the properties of the object of knowledge on its specially arranged analogue - the model. Models can be real (material), for example, airplane models, building models. photographs, dentures, dolls, etc. and ideal (abstract), created by means of language (both natural human language and special languages, for example, the language of mathematics. In this case, we have a mathematical model. Usually it is a system of equations describing the relationships in the system under study.)

Classification - the distribution of certain objects by classes (departments, categories), depending on their common characteristics, which fixes the regular connections between classes of objects in a single system of a specific branch of knowledge. The formation of each science is associated with the creation of classifications of the studied objects, phenomena.

One of the first classifications in natural science was the classification of flora and fauna by the outstanding Swedish naturalist Karl Linnaeus (1707-1778). For representatives of living nature, he established a certain gradation: class, order, genus, species, variation.

Empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge

Scientific knowledge is a complex evolving system in which, as it evolves, new levels of organization emerge. They have an inverse effect on previously established levels of knowledge and transform them. In this process, new techniques and methods of theoretical research are constantly emerging, the strategy of scientific research is changing. To identify the patterns of this process, it is necessary to first reveal the structure of scientific knowledge. In its developed forms, science appears as disciplinary - organized knowledge, in which individual branches - scientific disciplines (mathematics; natural science disciplines - physics, chemistry, biology, etc.; technical and social sciences) act as relatively autonomous subsystems interacting between yourself. Scientific disciplines arise and develop unevenly. Various types of knowledge are formed in them, and some of the sciences have already passed a fairly long path of theorization and formed samples of developed and mathematized theories, while others are just embarking on this path. The specificity of the subject of each science can lead to the fact that certain types of knowledge, dominant in one science, can play a subordinate role in another. They can also appear in it in a transformed form. Finally, it should be borne in mind that with the emergence of developed forms of theoretical knowledge, earlier forms do not disappear, although they can sharply narrow the scope of their application.
The system of scientific knowledge in each discipline is heterogeneous. Various forms of knowledge can be found in it: empirical facts, laws, principles, hypotheses, theories of various types and degrees of generality, etc. All these forms can be attributed to two main levels of knowledge organization: empirical and theoretical. Until the middle of this century, the so-called "standard approach" prevailed in methodological research, according to which theory and its relationship with experience were chosen as the initial unit of methodological analysis. But then it turned out that the processes of functioning, development and transformation of theories cannot be adequately described, if we abstract from their interaction. It also turned out that empirical research is intricately intertwined with the development of theories and it is impossible to imagine the verification of theory by facts without taking into account the previous influence of theoretical knowledge on the formation of experimental facts of science. But then the problem of the interaction of theory with experience appears as a problem of the relationship with the empirical system of theories that form a scientific discipline. In this regard, a separate theory and its empirical basis can no longer be taken as a unit of methodological analysis. Such a unit is a scientific discipline as a complex interaction of knowledge of the empirical and theoretical level, associated in its development with the interdisciplinary environment (other scientific disciplines). Then the analysis of the structure of scientific research is advisable to begin with such an elucidation of the features of the theoretical and empirical levels of a scientific discipline, in which each of these levels is considered as a complex system that includes a variety of types of knowledge and the cognitive procedures that generate them.
The concepts of empirical and theoretical (main features)
There is an extensive methodological literature on the problem of theoretical and empirical. A fairly clear fixation of these levels was carried out already in the positivism of the 30s, when the analysis of the language of science revealed the difference in the meanings of empirical and theoretical terms. This difference also applies to the means of research. Let's take a closer look at these differences. Let's start with the features of the means of theoretical and empirical research. Empirical research is based on the direct practical interaction of the researcher with the object under study. It involves observation and experimentation. Therefore, the means of empirical research must include instruments, instrumental installations and other means of real observation and experiment. In theoretical research, there is no direct practical interaction with objects. At this level, an object can be studied only indirectly, in a thought experiment, but not in a real one. In addition to the means that are associated with the organization of experiments and observations, conceptual means are also used in empirical research. They function as a special language that is often called the empirical language of science. The meaning of empirical terms are special abstractions that could be called empirical objects.
Empirical objects are abstractions that actually distinguish a certain set of properties and relationships of things. As for theoretical knowledge, other research means are used in it. There are no means of material, practical interaction with the object under study. But the language of theoretical research also differs from the language of empirical descriptions. It is based on theoretical terms, the meaning of which is theoretical ideal objects. They are also called idealized objects, abstract objects, or theoretical constructs. These are special abstractions that are logical reconstructions of reality. No theory is built without the use of such objects. Empirical knowledge can be represented by hypotheses, generalizations, empirical laws, descriptive theories, but they are aimed at an object that is given to the observer directly. The empirical level expresses objective facts revealed as a result of experiments and observations, as a rule, from the side of their external and obvious connections. The theoretical level of knowledge also presupposes a connection with reality, but this connection is not direct, but mediated. At the theoretical level, we will not find a fixation or abbreviated summary of empirical data; theoretical thinking cannot be reduced to the summation of empirically given material. It turns out that theory does not grow out of empiricism, but, as it were, next to it, or rather, above it and in connection with it. And if the empirical level presupposes the generalization of factual data, experimental dependencies, inductive laws, the world of theoretical knowledge is made up of ideas, concepts, ideal objects that are not found anywhere in reality. The activity of the theoretician is based on the creation and study of such ideal theoretical objects.
The empirical and theoretical types of cognition differ not only in means, but also in the methods of research activity. At the empirical level, real experiment and real observation are used as the main methods. An important role is also played by the methods of empirical description, focused on the objective characteristic of the phenomena being studied, which is maximally cleared of subjective layers. As for theoretical research, special methods are used here: idealization (the method of constructing an idealized object); a thought experiment with idealized objects, which, as it were, replaces a real experiment with real objects; special methods of constructing a theory (ascent from the abstract to the concrete, axiomatic and hypothetical-deductive methods); methods of logical and historical research, etc.
Empirical research is basically focused on the study of phenomena and the relationships between them. At this level of cognition, essential connections are not yet distinguished in their pure form, but they seem to be highlighted in phenomena, appear through their concrete shell. At the level of theoretical knowledge, essential relationships are singled out in their pure form. By studying phenomena and the connections between them, empirical knowledge is able to detect the operation of an objective law. But it fixes this action, as a rule, in the form of empirical dependencies, which should be distinguished from the theoretical law as special knowledge obtained as a result of the theoretical study of objects. Empirical dependence is the result of inductive generalization of experience and is probabilistically true knowledge. A theoretical law is always reliable knowledge. Obtaining such knowledge requires special research procedures. So, having singled out empirical and theoretical knowledge as two special types of research activity, we can say that their subject is different, that is, theory and empirical research deal with different sections of the same reality. Empirical research studies phenomena and their correlations; in these correlations, in the relations between phenomena, it can grasp the manifestation of the law. But in its pure form, it is given only as a result of theoretical research. It should be emphasized that an increase in the number of experiments in itself does not make empirical dependence a reliable fact, because induction always deals with unfinished, incomplete experience. No matter how many experiments we do and generalize them, a simple inductive generalization of experimental results does not lead to theoretical knowledge. Theory is not built by inductive generalization of experience. This circumstance in all its depth was realized in science relatively late, when it reached sufficiently high levels of theorization. So, the empirical and theoretical levels of knowledge differ in the subject, means and methods of research. However, the selection and independent consideration of each of them is an abstraction. In reality, these two layers of knowledge always interact.
Empirical research
The structure of empirical research Having singled out the empirical and theoretical levels, we got only a primary and rather rough idea of ​​the anatomy of scientific knowledge. The formation of more detailed ideas about the structure of scientific activity presupposes an analysis of the structure of each of the levels of cognition and the elucidation of their interrelationships. Both the empirical and theoretical levels have a rather complex systemic organization. They can reveal special layers of knowledge and, accordingly, cognitive procedures that generate this knowledge. Let us first consider the internal structure of the empirical level. It is formed by at least two sublevels: a) direct observations and experiments, the result of which is the observation data; b) cognitive procedures through which the transition from observation data to empirical dependencies and facts is carried out.
Experiments and Observation Data
The difference between observational data and empirical facts as special types of empirical knowledge was recorded in the positivist philosophy of science in the 1930s. At this time, there was a rather tense discussion about what can serve as the empirical basis of science. At first it was assumed that they are the direct results of the experiment - the data of observation. In the language of science, they are expressed in the form of special statements - records in observation protocols, which were called protocol sentences. The observation protocol indicates who was observing, the time of observation, the devices are described, if they were used in the observation. If, for example, a sociological survey was conducted, then a questionnaire with the respondent's answer acts as an observation protocol. If, in the process of observation, measurements were carried out, then each fixation of the measurement result is equivalent to a protocol proposal. Analysis of the meaning of protocol sentences showed that they contain not only information about the phenomena under study, but also, as a rule, include observer errors, layering of external disturbing influences, systematic and random errors of devices, etc. But then it became obvious that these observations, due to the fact that they are burdened with subjective layers, cannot serve as a basis for theoretical constructions. As a result, the problem was posed of identifying such forms of empirical knowledge that would have an intersubjective status, would contain objective and reliable information about the phenomena under study. During the discussions, it was found that empirical facts act as such knowledge. They form the empirical basis on which scientific theories are based. The very nature of the fact-fixing statements emphasizes their special objective status, in comparison with protocol sentences. But then a new problem arises: how is the transition from observational data to empirical facts carried out and what guarantees the objective status of a scientific fact? The statement of this problem was an important step towards clarifying the structure of empirical cognition. This problem was actively developed in the methodology of science of the XX century.
In the competition of various approaches and concepts, it revealed many important characteristics of scientific empiricism, although today the problem is far from being finally solved. A certain contribution to its development was also made by positivism, although it is worth emphasizing that its desire to limit itself only to the study of the internal connections of scientific knowledge and to abstract from the relationship between science and practice sharply narrowed the possibilities of an adequate description of research procedures and methods of forming the empirical basis of science. It is important to immediately understand that scientific observation is of an activity nature, suggesting not just passive contemplation of the processes under study, but their special preliminary organization, which ensures control over their course.
The activity nature of empirical research at the level of observation is most clearly manifested in situations where observation is carried out in the course of a real experiment. The subject structure of experimental practice can be considered in two aspects: firstly, as the interaction of objects proceeding according to natural laws, and, secondly, as an artificial, organized human action. Experimental activity is a specific form of natural interaction, and the most important feature that determines this specificity is precisely the fact that the fragments of nature interacting in an experiment always appear as objects with functionally distinguished properties.
Systematic and random observations
Scientific observations are always purposeful and are carried out as systematic observations, and in systematic observations the subject necessarily constructs an instrumental situation. These observations presuppose a special activity relationship between the subject and the object, which can be regarded as a kind of quasi-experimental practice. As for random observations, they are clearly not enough for research. Accidental observations can become an impetus for discovery if and only when they turn into systematic observations. And since it is assumed that in any systematic observation it is possible to detect the activity of constructing an instrumental situation, the problem can be solved in general terms. Despite the differences between experiment and observation, outside the experiment, both appear as forms of the subject's practically activity relationship to the object. The rigid fixation of the structure of observations makes it possible to single out from the infinite variety of natural interactions precisely those that are of interest to the researcher. The ultimate goal of natural science research is to find the laws (essential relationships of objects) that govern natural processes, and on this basis predict the future possible states of these processes. Therefore, if we proceed from the global goals of cognition, then the subject of research should be considered essential connections and relationships of natural objects.
Random observation is capable of detecting unusual phenomena that correspond to new characteristics of already discovered objects or properties of new, not yet known objects. In this sense, it can serve as the beginning of a scientific discovery. But for this, it must develop into systematic observations carried out within the framework of an experiment or a quasi-experimental study of nature. Such a transition presupposes the construction of an instrumental situation and a clear fixation of the object, the change in the states of which is studied experimentally. Thus, the path from random registration of a new phenomenon to the elucidation of the basic conditions for its occurrence and its nature goes through a series of observations that clearly appear as quasi-experimental activity. It is important to pay attention to the following circumstance. The very implementation of systematic observations presupposes the use of theoretical knowledge. They are used both in determining the objectives of observation and in constructing an instrumental situation.
Theoretical research
The structure of theoretical research Let us now turn to the analysis of the theoretical level of knowledge. Here, too, two sublevels can be distinguished (with a certain degree of convention). The first of them forms particular theoretical models and laws that act as theories related to a fairly limited area of ​​phenomena. The second - are developed scientific theories that include particular theoretical laws as consequences derived from the fundamental laws of the theory. Examples of knowledge of the first sublevel are theoretical models and laws that characterize certain types of mechanical motion: the model and law of oscillation of a pendulum (Huygens' laws), planetary motion around the Sun (Kepler's laws), free fall of bodies (Galileo's laws), etc. They were obtained before of how Newtonian mechanics was built. This theory itself, which has generalized all the theoretical knowledge about certain aspects of mechanical motion that preceded it, is a typical example of developed theories that belong to the second sublevel of theoretical knowledge.
Theoretical models in the structure of theory
A peculiar cell in the organization of theoretical knowledge at each of its sublevels is a two-layer structure - a theoretical model and a theoretical law formulated in relation to it. Let's first consider how the theoretical models work. Their elements are abstract objects (theoretical constructs), which are in strictly defined connections and relationships with each other. Theoretical laws are directly formulated in relation to the abstract objects of the theoretical model. They can be used to describe real situations of experience only if the model is justified as an expression of the essential connections of reality that are manifested in such situations. In theoretically developed disciplines that use quantitative research methods (such as physics), the laws of theory are formulated in the language of mathematics. The attributes of abstract objects that form a theoretical model are expressed in the form of physical quantities, and the relations between these attributes are expressed in the form of connections between the quantities included in the equations. The mathematical formalisms used in theory get their interpretation due to their connections with theoretical models.
The richness of connections and relationships inherent in the theoretical model can be revealed through movement in the mathematical apparatus of the theory. Solving the equations and analyzing the results obtained, the researcher, as it were, develops the content of the theoretical model and in this way receives more and more new knowledge about the reality being investigated. Theoretical models are not something external to theory. They are part of it. At the basis of the developed theory, one can single out a fundamental theoretical scheme, which is built from a small set of basic abstract objects, constructively independent of each other, and in relation to which fundamental theoretical laws are formulated. When these particular theoretical schemes are included in the theory, they are subordinate to the fundamental, but in relation to each other they can have an independent status. The abstract objects that form them are specific. They can be constructed on the basis of abstract objects of a fundamental theoretical scheme and act as a kind of their modification. So, the structure of a developed natural-scientific theory can be depicted as a complex, hierarchically organized system of theoretical schemes and laws, where theoretical schemes form a kind of internal skeleton of the theory. To apply the fundamental laws of a developed theory to experience, it is necessary to obtain consequences from them that are comparable to the results of experiment.
Foundations of Science
At least three main components of the foundations of scientific activity can be distinguished: the ideals and norms of research, the scientific picture of the world and the philosophical foundations of science. Each of them, in turn, is internally structured. Let us characterize each of these components and trace what are their connections between each other and the empirical and theoretical knowledge arising on their basis.
Research ideals and norms
Like any activity, scientific knowledge is governed by certain ideals and standards, which express ideas about the goals of scientific activity and the ways to achieve them. Among the ideals and norms of science, the following can be identified: a) the actual cognitive attitudes that regulate the process of reproducing an object in various forms of scientific knowledge; b) social standards that fix the role of science and its value for public life at a certain stage of historical development, govern the process of communication of researchers, relations of scientific communities and institutions with each other and with society as a whole, etc. These two aspects of ideals and norms of science correspond to two aspects of its functioning: as a cognitive activity and as a social institution. Cognitive ideals of science have a rather complex organization. In their system, the following basic forms can be distinguished: 1) ideals and norms of explanation and description, 2) evidence and validity of knowledge, 3) construction and organization of knowledge. Taken together, they form a kind of scheme for the method of research activity, ensuring the development of objects of a certain type. At different stages of its historical development, science creates different types of such method schemes, represented by a system of ideals and research norms. Comparing them, one can distinguish both general, invariant and special features in the content of cognitive ideals and norms. The first level is represented by features that distinguish science from other forms of cognition (everyday, spontaneous empirical cognition, art, religious and mythological exploration of the world, etc.).
The second level of the content of the ideals and norms of research is represented by historically changeable attitudes that characterize the style of thinking that dominates in science at a certain historical stage of its development. Formation of natural science at the end of the 16th - beginning of the 17th century. approved new ideals and norms of the validity of knowledge. In accordance with the new value orientations and ideological attitudes, the main goal of cognition was defined as the study and disclosure of the natural properties and relationships of objects, the discovery of natural causes and laws of nature. Hence, the requirement for its experimental verification was formulated as the main requirement for the validity of knowledge about nature. The experiment began to be considered as the most important criterion for the truth of knowledge. It can be shown, further, that after the formation of theoretical natural science in the 17th century. his ideals and norms underwent a significant restructuring. Finally, in the content of the ideals and norms of scientific research, a third level can be distinguished, in which the settings of the second level are concretized in relation to the specifics of the subject area of ​​each science (mathematics, physics, biology, social sciences, etc.). The historical variability of ideals and norms, the need to develop new regulations for research gives rise to the need for their comprehension and rational explication. The result of this reflection on the normative structures and ideals of science are methodological principles, in the system of which the ideals and norms of research are described.
Scientific picture of the world
The second block of foundations of science is the scientific picture of the world. In the development of modern scientific disciplines, a special role is played by generalized schemes of images of the subject of research, through which the main systemic characteristics of the studied reality are recorded. These images are often referred to as special pictures of the world. The term "world" is used here in a specific sense - as a designation of a certain sphere of reality studied in a given science. A generalized characteristic of the subject of research is introduced into the picture of reality through the representations: 1) about fundamental objects, of which all other objects studied by the corresponding science are assumed to be built; 2) about the typology of the studied objects; 3) about the general laws of their interaction; 4) about the space-time structure of reality. All these ideas can be described in the system of ontological principles, through which the picture of the investigated reality is explicated and which act as the basis of scientific theories of the corresponding discipline. The picture of reality provides the systematization of knowledge within the framework of the relevant science. Various types of theories of a scientific discipline (fundamental and particular) are associated with it, as well as experimental facts, on which the principles of the picture of reality are based and must be coordinated. At the same time, it functions as a research program that focuses on the formulation of problems of both empirical and theoretical search and the choice of means for solving them.
The connection between the picture of the world and situations of real experience is especially clearly manifested when science begins to study objects for which theories have not yet been created and which are investigated by empirical methods. In addition to a direct connection with experience, the picture of the world has indirect connections with it through the foundations of theories, which form theoretical schemes and laws formulated in relation to them. The picture of the world can be considered as some theoretical model of the investigated reality. But this is a special model, different from the models underlying specific theories. It should be borne in mind that new pictures of reality are first put forward as hypotheses. A hypothetical picture goes through the stage of justification and can coexist for a very long time next to the previous picture of reality. Most often, it is affirmed not only as a result of a long-term test of its principles by experience, but also due to the fact that these principles serve as the basis for new fundamental theories. The entry of new ideas about the world, developed in a particular branch of knowledge, into the general scientific picture of the world does not exclude, but presupposes, competition between different ideas about the reality being investigated. The formation of pictures of the investigated reality in each branch of science always proceeds not only as a process of an intrascientific nature, but also as the interaction of science with other areas of culture. At the same time, since the picture of reality should express the main essential characteristics of the investigated subject area, it develops and develops under the direct influence of facts and special theoretical models of science that explain the facts. Due to this, new elements of content constantly arise in it, which may require even a radical revision of previously adopted ontological principles.
Developed science gives a lot of evidence of just such, mainly intrascientific, impulses for the evolution of the picture of the world. Concepts about antiparticles, non-stationary universe, etc. were the result of completely unexpected interpretations of the mathematical conclusions of physical theories and then were included as fundamental concepts in the scientific picture of the world.
Philosophical foundations of science
Let us now consider the third block of foundations of science. The inclusion of scientific knowledge in culture presupposes its philosophical justification. It is carried out through philosophical ideas and principles that substantiate the ontological postulates of science, as well as its ideals and norms. As a rule, in the fundamental fields of research, developed science deals with objects that have not yet been mastered either in production or in everyday experience (sometimes the practical development of such objects is carried out even in a different historical era in which they were discovered). For ordinary common sense, these objects may be unusual and incomprehensible. Knowledge about them and methods of obtaining such knowledge may not substantially coincide with the standards and ideas about the world of everyday knowledge of the corresponding historical era. Therefore, scientific pictures of the world (scheme of an object), as well as ideals and normative structures of science (scheme of a method), not only during the period of their formation, but also in subsequent periods of perestroika, need a kind of alignment with the dominant worldview of a particular historical epoch, with the categories of its culture. ... This “docking” is provided by the philosophical foundations of science. The philosophical foundations of science should not be equated with the general body of philosophical knowledge. From a large field of philosophical problems and options for its solutions that arise in the culture of each historical epoch, science uses only some ideas and principles as substantiating structures. The formation and transformation of the philosophical foundations of science requires not only philosophical, but also special scientific erudition of the researcher (understanding of the features of the subject of the corresponding science, its traditions, its models of activity, etc.).
Conclusion
In the process of scientific cognition, there is not only the unity of empiricism and theory, but also the relationship, the interaction of the latter with practice. Speaking about the mechanism of this interaction, K. Popper rightly points out the inadmissibility of the destruction of the unity of theory and practice, or (as mysticism does) its replacement by the creation of myths. He emphasizes that practice is not the enemy of theoretical knowledge, but "the most significant incentive to it." While a certain amount of indifference to her, Popper notes, is possible and befits a scientist, there are many examples that show that such indifference is not always fruitful for him.
Experience, experiment, observation are the components of the empirical level of knowledge as a result of direct contact with wildlife, where the researcher deals with a real object. Abstractions, ideal objects, concepts, hypothetical-deductive models, formulas and principles are necessary components of the theoretical level. Thinking the movement of ideas and observing different empirical facts are different activities. It would seem that the task of a theoretical scientist is to create a theory or formulate an idea on the basis of the “matter of thought,” while an empiricist is tied to the data of experience and can only afford generalization and classification. It is known, however, that the connections between theoretical and empirical are quite complex and differently directed. The mere opposition of the fact that theories do not have real denotations (representatives) in reality, as this can be fixed in relation to the empirical level (in observation and experiment), is not enough for understanding the essence of the theoretical. These observations are also mediated by theoretical concepts - as they say, any empiricism is loaded with theory.
Changes in the theoretical apparatus can be made without direct stimulation from empiricism. Moreover, theories can stimulate empirical research, tell them where to look, what to observe and record. This, in turn, shows that the empirical level of research does not always have an unconditional primacy, in other words, the primacy and basicity of the empirical is not a necessary and obligatory sign of the development of scientific knowledge. Empirical research is designed to provide a way out of the scientific and theoretical to the real sphere of living contemplation. The theoretical is responsible for the application of the apparatus of abstractions and categorical means for assimilation of the material of "living contemplation" external to it, to activities that lie outside the sphere of development of conceptual means of thought.
The theoretical level cannot be reduced only to the rational way of understanding the world, just as it is impossible to reduce the empirical level only to the sensual, because both thinking and feelings are present at both the empirical and theoretical levels of cognition. Interaction, the unity of the sensual and the rational takes place at both levels of cognition with different degrees of prevalence. Description of perception data, fixation of observation results, i.e. everything that belongs to the empirical level cannot be represented as a purely sensory activity. It needs a certain theoretically loaded language, in specific categories, concepts and principles. Obtaining results at a theoretical level is not the prerogative of a purely rational sphere. The perception of drawings, graphs, diagrams presupposes sensory activity; the processes of imagination are especially significant. Therefore, the substitution of categories theoretical - mental (rational), empirical - sensual (sensitive) is illegal.

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

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

In theoretical knowledge, forms of rational cognition (concepts, judgments, inferences) dominate, but visual model representations of the type of an ideal ball, an absolutely rigid body are also used. Theory always contains sensory-visual components. Thus, both the senses and the mind function at both levels of cognition.

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

The level of reflection of reality,

The nature of the research subject,

Applied study methods,

Forms of knowledge

Language tools.

table 2

The difference between empirical and theoretical levels of knowledge

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

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

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

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

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

The levels of scientific knowledge also differ in function: at the empirical level, there is a description of reality, at the theoretical level, explanation and prediction.

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

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

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

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

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

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

On the other hand, scientific theories, arising on their own special theoretical basis, are built relatively independently, outside the rigid and unambiguous dependence on empirical knowledge, but obey them, presenting in the final analysis a generalization of the data of experience.

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

Methods of scientific knowledge

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

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

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

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

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

Intentional or purposefulness

Plannedness,

Activity,

Consistency.

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

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

In scientific research, observation has two main functions: providing empirical information about an object and testing hypotheses and theories of science. Observation can often play an important heuristic role in helping to generate new ideas.

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

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

Measurement historically, as a method, it developed from the operation of comparison, but in contrast to it, it is a more powerful and universal cognitive means.

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

Measurements are direct and indirect. With direct measurement, the result is obtained directly from the process itself. In an indirect measurement, the desired value is determined mathematically based on knowledge of other quantities obtained by direct measurement. For example, the determination of the mass of stars, measurements in the microworld. Measurement allows you to find and formulate empirical laws and in some cases serves as a source for the formulation of scientific theories. In particular, the measurement of the atomic weights of elements was one of the prerequisites for the creation of the periodic system by D.I. Mendeleev, which is a theory of the properties of chemical elements. The famous measurements of the speed of light by Mike Kelson subsequently led to a radical breakdown of the concepts established in physics.

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

Improving the quality of measuring instruments operating
based on some well-established principles,

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

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

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

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

What are the advantages that follow from the specific features of the experiment over observation?

In the course of the experiment, it becomes possible to study this
phenomena in "pure form", that is, various side factors are excluded,
obscuring the essence of the main process.

The experiment allows you to study the properties of objects of reality in extreme conditions (with ultra-low or ultra-high
temperatures, at the highest pressure). This can lead to unexpected effects, resulting in new object properties being discovered. This method was used, for example, to discover the properties of superfluidity and
superconductivity.

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

Experiments are classified on various grounds.

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

- research- carried out in order to detect the object is not
previously known properties (a classic example is Rutherford's experiments on

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

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

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

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

According to the method and results of research, experiments can be divided into qualitative and quantitative. The first of them are more likely to be of a research, exploratory nature, while the latter provide an accurate measurement of all significant factors that influence the course of the process under study.

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

The experiment received the greatest application in natural science. Modern science began with the experiments of G. Galileo. However, at the present time, it is getting more and more development in the study of social processes. Such a proliferation of experiment in an increasing number of branches of scientific knowledge speaks of the growing importance of this research method. With its help, the tasks of obtaining the values ​​of the properties of certain objects are solved, an experimental test of hypotheses and theories is carried out, the heuristic significance of the experiment in finding new sides of the phenomena under study is also great. The effectiveness of the experiment also increases in connection with the progress of experimental technology. This feature is also noted: the more an experiment is used in science, the faster it develops. It is no coincidence that textbooks of experimental sciences are aging much faster than descriptive sciences.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Formalization- a method of studying a wide variety of objects by displaying their content and structure in symbolic form and studying the logical structure of the theory. The merit of formalization is as follows:

Providing a complete overview of a certain area of ​​problems, a generalized approach to their solution. A general algorithm for solving problems is created, for example, calculating the areas of various figures using integral calculus;

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

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

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

Axiomatization found wide application in mathematics and mathematized sciences.

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

A number of requirements are imposed on an axiomatically constructed system of knowledge. According to the requirement of consistency in the system of axioms, no sentence and its negation should be deducible at the same time. According to the requirement of completeness, any sentence that can be formulated in a given system of axioms can be proved or refuted in it. According to the requirement of independence of axioms, any of them should not be deducible from other axioms.

What are the advantages of the axiomatic method? First of all, the axiomatization of science requires an accurate definition of the concepts used and compliance with the rigor of the conclusions. In empirical knowledge, both have not been achieved, due to which the application of the axiomatic method requires progress in this area of ​​knowledge in this respect. In addition, axiomatization organizes knowledge, excludes unnecessary elements from it, eliminates ambiguity and contradictions. In other words, axiomatization rationalizes the organization of scientific knowledge.

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

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

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

Abstraction is the most universal in mental activity. The essence of this method consists in mental abstraction from insignificant properties, connections and simultaneous highlighting of one or several aspects of the studied subject that are of interest to the researcher. The abstraction process has a two-stage nature: separation of the essential, revealing the most important; the realization of the possibility of abstraction, that is, the actual act of abstraction or abstraction.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Induction and deduction... The separation of these methods is based on the separation of two types of inference: deductive and inductive. With deductive inference, a conclusion is made about a certain element of a set on the basis of knowledge of the general properties of the entire set.

All fish breathe with gills.

Perch - fish

__________________________

Consequently, the perch breathes with gills.

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

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

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

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

There are the following types of induction:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Method of only difference: if the cases in which the phenomenon
occurs or does not occur, differ only in one previous circumstance, and all other circumstances are identical, then this circumstance is the reason for this phenomenon;

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

Method of concomitant changes: if a change in one circumstance always causes a change in another, then the first circumstance
there is a reason for the second;

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

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

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

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

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

________________

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

consistency of material consideration, analysis of the stages of development of research objects. With the help of the historical method, the entire evolution of the object from its inception to the present state is traced, the genetic relations of the developing object are investigated, the driving forces and conditions for the development of the object are clarified.

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

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