Basic concepts of philosophy of science

There is an ancient philosophical problem, discussion of which goes back to the first of the ancient philosophers: how to distinguish a genuine reliable knowledge from changeable opinion or what I know from what I must believe?

Scientific criteria - a set of attributes that specifies scientific knowledge; the number of requirements to which science must satisfy.

Following the wording of the criteria abstracted from vocational and industry-specific and socio-cultural and socio-historical variability.
 

1. The truth. It is impossible to identify the scientific character and truth. Ilyin singled out in the science of three elements: the science of the front edge, designed to play alternatives (creative research, hypotheses); solid - science-neprosmatrivaemye layer of knowledge acting as a Foundation; the history of science -- supplanted by beyond science (obsolete) knowledge may not be completely. Only the core is formed from true knowledge, however, and the core undergoes the change (the scientific revolution). Absolute true knowledge in science does not exist.
2. Problematic: science is the attempt to solve problematic situations. The historian Collingwood: all science begins with the consciousness of ignorance.
3. Validity. Not absolute validity: not every statement must be proven; science is based on unscientific assumptions that are accepted without proof. Over time the evidence of these prerequisites may change; then there is a revision of prerequisites (for example - the emergence of quantum mechanics).
4. Intersubjective verifiability (verifiability). Scientific knowledge is considered valid if there is a principal possibility of checking the entire community.
5. Systematic: scientific knowledge must be logically organized.
6. Progressivism: scientific knowledge must cultivate. For art, this requirement is not applicable - can simultaneously exist in several areas (e.g., realism and surrealism).
7. Falsifiability. For any theory that claims the status of science, there must be many potential disproving of the facts. Private is not enough to confirm a common, but sufficient for its refutation. Science explains the essence, which is not visible. And if the theory is always vindicated, then perhaps it does not describe the essence - there must ever arise a contradiction.

The structure of scientific knowledge includes the manner and method of scientific knowledge. There are the following forms:

• scientific problem
• a scientific hypothesis
• scientific fact
• scientific law,
• the scientific theory.

Scientific fact
Fact - an event, wearing a quite private specific. The fact is not just an event or phenomenon, but also a statement about the event or phenomenon. Scientific knowledge exists in the form of statements, proposals.
Components fact:

• Perceptual (from "perception" - perception)- a sensual image. In the empirical basis enter sensitive data that are reproducible and intersubjective. Science has little interest in what was seen as one consciousness or may not occur again.
• Linguistic statement is articulating the fact.
• Logistical and practical - a set of instruments and actions used to establish fact.
• Views on the relation between theory and fact.
• Naive: the facts are outside the theory and do not depend on it.
• Modern theory - not a direct generalization of the facts. An empirical study is carried out on the basis of the theory. Fact - theoretically interpreted data (theoretical loading of the fact that there is fact in itself does not exist).

The function of fact - checking theory. In this participating and non-empirical criteria (simplicity, coherence (consistency and coherence with the theory with other theories), aesthetics). The same facts, depending on interpretation, can support different scientific theories. Even check theory is also involved in the interpretation of the facts. So in the end, the facts are interpreted in the light of the theory check.

Scientific problem
In its most General form the problem is a question or set of questions, the answers to which we do not have. It is a cognitive obstacle, expressed most often in the form of a question. The answer, usually, is the theory.
Sometimes there are differences between problem and task. Task - a question resolvable existing theories. The problem usually requires the creation theory.
Function issues in scientific research:

• Job purpose: (1) discovery or (2) the reformulation of problem or (3) the inclusion problem is formulated in some system knowledge.
• Job areas of study.
• The division of Sciences. Science may differ on different problematic aspects. Although lately science overlap each other.

The requirements and criteria of statement of scientific problems:

• The presence of pre-scientific knowledge in which the problem can be included.
• The presence of reference to the condition of existence of the solution of the problem.
• The agreement signs acceptable solutions and ways of testing the solution for acceptability.
• Sufficient limitations, and not the magnitude of the problem.
• Syntactic and semantic correctness of the problem.

Syntactic correctness - compliance with the syntactic rules of the language in which the problem is formulated. For the natural language characteristic semantic vagueness of the guidelines, but the syntactic form often affects the way decisions are made. The same problem can be formulated in different ways. Semantically correct is a problem, all the premise that true at the time of the problem. The semantic context of the problem relative (semantics-the study of how signs relate to reality).
Classification of scientific problems.
According to the object.

• Subject - object is the knowledge of objects.

Empirical - search data. The answer can be given on the basis of experiment, measurement, observation.
Conceptual organization and interpretation of available data.

• The procedural object is a method for producing or assessing knowledge about objects.

Methodological planning of scientific research.
Evaluation - evaluation of experimental data and theories.
For the correctness and solvability:

• soluble (solutions them: a true, approximately true, false),
• insoluble (tasks related to the reconstruction of certain situations or objects: the object has disappeared or is in the distant past),
• incorrect (imaginary: distinguished from an impossible premise - the alleged problems the premise is false, and insoluble true).

The correctness of the problem of the absolute, and relative decidability. Insoluble can be problems associated with reconstruction objects. Incorrect problems can have a positive impact on the development of science, for example, the problem of the elixir of life led to the development of chemistry, and the problem of perpetual motion - birth to the concept of energy. In empirical Sciences it is more important than solution accuracy, and the presence of a refiner.

A scientific hypothesis
Hypothesis - an assumption or guess, based on the obtained or existing data. I mean the truth of it is probabilistic in nature. That is, the truth or falsity of the hypothesis is currently not installed.
The functions of hypotheses: generalization of experience, the starting point of the reasoning task goal (orientation studies), interpretation of data, protection of any other hypothesis before the onslaught of new facts.
The classification of scientific hypotheses.
For the purpose:

• Explaining - claimed to be true;
• Workers are not claimed to be true; used to categorize.

Content:

• hypotheses-facts - assumptions about the existence of certain facts;
• hypothesis-laws - assumptions about the existence of laws (steady, regular, repeated relationships between facts).

There are two fundamental points of view on a hypothesis as the subject of philosophical research: neopositivist (20-30 years of XX century) and postpositivists (the second half of the 50 years of XX century). The first is that philosophy of science considers the context of confirmation (or justifications) and the context of discovery - the prerogative of the psychology of science.
Verification of the hypothesis is the following:
1. The significance of hypothesis:

• the explanation hypothesis the whole range of phenomena, for understanding of which it is advanced;
• the consistency of the hypothesis to the available knowledge (not always: for example, the quantum Planck's hypothesis, which he called an "act of desperation", contrary to classical physics);
• experimental testability of the hypothesis;
• the fundamental simplicity of the hypothesis.

2. Conclusion consequences.
3. Comparison of the effect with experimental knowledge.

A scientific theory
Theory - a set of beliefs, perceptions and ideas aimed at the interpretation and explanation of phenomena. Gives a comprehensive idea about the laws in the field of reality. In the narrow sense, theory is the highest form of organization of knowledge.
Any theory describes reality indirectly through a system of abstract objects. All taken, it is impossible and unnecessary. Rudolf Karnap introduced the concept of matching rules - interpretations linking abstract objects and empirical phenomena.

Types of scientific theories:
1. Logical-mathematical - not based on experience. In particular, reinterpretion axiomatic theory nothing about the world claim.
2. Empirical - based on experience.

• The descriptive ordering, systematization of facts.
• Hypothetical-deductive - based on the General provisions which contain private.

Function of scientific theories: explanation, classification, prediction.

Reasoning as a rational form of persuasion
It is so called because it is a belief based on reason and logic, not on emotions, feelings and especially not on a volitional and otherwise influence or coercion. Usually the argument takes the logical character, because in judgment of logic expresses the relationship of our thoughts to reality and they are characterized as true and false. Of course, the most convincing arguments in the argument in the end are facts, but they must be properly ordered and systematized, and this can only be achieved through logical judgment and reasoning. In the end, a reasonable belief is achieved by using logically correct reasoning, in which conclusions are derived or confirmed using true premises.

The argument can take various forms, depending on the usage of those methods of reasoning that apply to beliefs. Namely. In the case where the conclusion follows from the premises by the rules of logical inference, called deductive reasoning. If the report only confirmed and justified assumptions, the reasoning is not deductive, for example the conclusion by induction, analogy, or statistical information.

Logic helps not only to convert existing information and keep its truth value, but also to seek new information through particular forms of reasoning, unlike deductive reasoning, we call a heuristic.

Accordingly, heuristic methods include those methods of reasoning which are based, first, on adeduction the ways of reasoning, and secondly, using certain heuristic principles to the search for truth. A common feature characteristic of all heuristic methods of reasoning, is the probability of their findings and believable character used reasoning.

The most common way of such reasoning, known since ancient times, is induction, which is based on the research of a number of elements of a certain set of objects, a conclusion about the entire set or at least on some of its unexplored subsets or elements. In science such a process of transfer known knowledge to unknown cases is called extrapolation.
Another type of heuristic, or probabilistic reasoning is the analogy based on the similarity of some characteristics of two or more objects, and this similarity is used to extrapolate certain characteristics of one or more objects to another object. Obviously, the conclusion, analogy, in principle, also be always only probable, but not certain to be true. The same should be said about statistical generalizations.

There are several types of arguments:

1. Certified by isolated facts. To such arguments is the so-called factual material, that is, scientific data and scientific facts. The role of facts in justification of extended positions, including scientific, is very large.
2. Determine how the arguments of the proof. The definitions are formulated in the science. Their definitions exist in chemistry, mathematics, physics, etc.
3. Axioms and postulates. More characteristic of mathematics, mechanics, theoretical physics, mathematical logic, etc.
4. Previously proven laws and theorems as arguments and evidence. As arguments of the proof can be previously proven laws of physics, chemistry, biology and other Sciences, the laws of mathematics.

The requirements for the argument:

• The arguments for the proof of the thesis, must be true.
• Arguments should be sufficient to prove the thesis.
• Arguments must be judgments whose truth is proved independently from the thesis.

But the whole vast amount of information on the subject of "Philosophy of science" in a small article don't fit. Therefore, for self-study offers a sample list of recommended books on the subject "History and philosophy of science":

The main
1. Berkov V. F. the Philosophy and methodology of science. M., 2004.
2. Voitov A. G. History and philosophy of science. M., 2005.
3. Kanke V. A. the Main philosophical trends and concepts of science. M., 2004.
4. Kochanowski V. P. Philosophical problems of the social Sciences and Humanities. Rostov-on-don, 2005.
5. Kochanowski V. P., Leshkevich T. G., Matyash T. P., Fathi T. B. Foundations of the philosophy of science. Rostov-on-don, 2005.
6. Lebedev A. S., Il'in V. V., Lazarev F. V., Leskov, L. V., Introduction to the history and philosophy of science. M., 2005.
7. Leshkevich T. G. Philosophy of science. M., 2005.
8. Marshev V. I. History of management thought. M., 2005.
9. Los V. A. the History and philosophy of science. M., 2004.
10. Mikeshin L. A. Philosophy of science. M., 2005.
11. G. I. ruzavin, state restoration Institute Philosophy of science. M., 2005.
12. Modern philosophical problems of natural, technical and social Sciences and Humanities / ed. by V. G. Gorokhov. M., 2005.
13. Modern philosophical problems of natural, technical and social Sciences and Humanities / ed. by V. V. Mironov, M., 2006.
14. Stepin V. S. Philosophy of science. Common problems. M., 2006.
15. Tompson M. Philosophy of science. M., 2003.
16. Ushakov E. V. Introduction into philosophy and methodology of science. M., 2005.
17. Philosophy of science / ed. by S. A. Lebedev. M., 2005.
18. Shapovalov V. F. Philosophy of science and technology. M., 2004.

Additional
1. Gaidenko P. evolution of the notion of science (XVII - XIII centuries). M., 1987.
2. Zotov A. F. Modern Western philosophy. M., 2005.
3. Kesin A. V. Science in the mirror of philosophy. M., 1990.
4. Lecture V. A. Epistemology classical and nonclassical. M., 2000.
5. Moiseev N. N. Modern rationalism. M., 1995.
6. Modern philosophy of science: a reader / sost. A. Alexankin. M., 1996.
7. Stepin V. S. Theoretical knowledge. M., 2003.
8. Feyerabend P. Selected works on the methodology of science. M., 1986.

Translated by «Yandex.Translator»