The role of the intelligentsia is that it is the bearer of spirit (culture, knowledge), creating new paradigms and criticizing outdated ones.
Human cognition develops within the framework of a contradiction: sensory perception - abstract thinking, subject to the primacy of sensory perception.
At the first stage of human knowledge - mythological - consciousness first appears as the social consciousness of the community. Individual consciousness is still a cast of social consciousness as a result of the reflection of mythology in consciousness. Mythology is the instrument with the help of which “the objective is for him (that is, for consciousness) the essence” - Hegel’s correct description of the mythological stage of cognition and the consciousness corresponding to it. Thus, human knowledge begins not with abstract thinking, but with the sensory perception of the human community, which exercises primacy in relation to abstract thinking. Cognition at the first stage occurs within the framework of community consciousness and is tested by the practice of the community. The abstract thinking of an individual develops under the control of mythology, which then was not a set of ideas and rules, but a system of social actions that were the justification for a system of ideas (the objective is the essence for him).
But the development of abstract thinking under the control of social practice allowed him, at the second stage of cognition, to break out from under the yoke of the sensory perception of the community and raise consciousness to self-awareness. The first negation in the development of human knowledge occurred. Abstract thinking escapes from the control of the sensory perception of the community and acquires a certain freedom within the individual, although the individual is forced to be part of the community. Therefore, the primacy of sensory perception over abstract thinking becomes an indirect primacy through a worldview in the form of a conscious mythology, that is, a religious worldview. In this contradiction, self-awareness and the religious stage of cognition arise. Apparently, it continues to this day within the framework of the exploitative system. Sensory perception occupies the position of indirect primacy relative to abstract thinking through the medium of a religious worldview.
At the first stage of the second stage of cognition, the emerging self-consciousness as a negation of the consciousness of the community is based on the liberated abstract thinking of the individual, but still located in the system of concepts of mythology, which develops into religion. Freedom of abstract thinking, in addition to any mysticism, finds expression in the construction of abstract schemes of reality. The desire for the primacy of abstract thinking even within the framework of mythology leads to the search for the first causes or fundamental principles of the world among the ancient Greeks in the form of elements or parts of nature and receives its highest expression in Pythogoreanism (the whole world is a number) and in Platonism. It should be noted that there was the so-called line of Democritus or natural philosophy, as a continuation of the reliance on sensory perception, but it turned out to be just the forerunner of determinism. The limitations of the latter were understood by Epicurus and suggested, along with the law, the existence of chance, which was a revolution in knowledge, since before him it was accepted by default that everything that happens occurs according to the will of the gods, etc. Recognition of the existence of chance along with law undermines the claims of abstract thinking, operating on the basis of formal logic, to primacy over sensory perception. The highest achievement of the first stage of the religious stage of knowledge was Aristotle’s system, built on giving the phenomenon the properties of an essence, with the latter having primacy. Aristotle's teaching is a synthesis of the so-called natural philosophy and Platonism, with primacy belonging to Platonism.
The second stage of the religious stage of cognition manifested itself in the form of scholasticism - freedom of abstract thinking, but in the sphere of a religious worldview, through which the primacy of the sensory perception of society over individual abstract thinking was achieved. In this way, the first negation appeared within the framework of the religious stage of cognition. In the origins of scholasticism and its foundations we find Christianity and the teachings of Jesus - a call for a conscious striving for good, a call for freedom of abstract thinking, but within the framework of worship of God, who turned out to be essentially the personified Law. Preaching a conscious desire for good, for the knowledge of God, Jesus thereby revealed the subjectivity of abstract knowledge in relation to social practice (Marx: philosophers must change the world).
So, philosophy developed as abstract knowledge. For example, Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) said: “Philosophy is knowledge, achieved by right reasoning, and explaining actions or phenomena from causes or productive reasons known to us, and, conversely, possible productive reasons from actions known to us.” Although the role of the philosophy of scholasticism was to create a theory of knowledge, and not to know. This subjectivity of abstract knowledge culminated within the framework of scholasticism with the construction of Hegel's system - an abstract theory of knowledge of abstract thinking. To explain, or rather to illustrate, the development of consciousness, Hegel was forced to supplement formal logic with dialectics, the transition of the object of study into its opposite, that is, the negation of itself. However, the desire to remain within the framework of formal logic forced Hegel to subordinate negation to identity, that is, to reduce development to simple repetition, which confused both himself and his epigones. While the practice of knowledge required subordinating formal logic to the dialectic of negation, which is what Marx later did.
The second negation opens the third stage of the religious stage of knowledge. Scholasticism experienced a bifurcation with the separation of scientific knowledge from it, which is a synthesis of scholasticism and natural philosophy, that is, the first and second stages of the religious stage of knowledge, subject to the primacy of the first stage. Thus, within the framework of the second stage of human knowledge, a contradiction between scholasticism and scientific knowledge arose. The emerging scientific knowledge as a theory of knowledge and as a negation of scholasticism adopted the philosophy of positivism, which is based on reliance on so-called scientific facts. However, this does not take into account the fact that these facts themselves are a derivative of abstract thinking, the result of the work of abstract thinking, which remains in the sphere of a religious worldview. Therefore, such scientific knowledge remains captive of determinism and, therefore, anything new for it becomes a miracle. The Hegelian dialectic of negation was rejected (I do not invent hypotheses - said the empiricists). However, the transition to the third stage of the religious stage of human knowledge occurred not so much on the initiative of the practice of knowledge, but under the pressure of the social practice of developing capitalism. This capital control of scientific knowledge has now reached perfection within the framework of the scientific grant system.
Thus, human knowledge at the third stage of the religious stage of knowledge bifurcated into scholasticism and scientific knowledge - the scientific picture of the world is opposed to the religious picture of the world and there is a constant struggle between them. From the 19th century until now, the scientific picture of the world has been a mosaic of disparate facts and theories, which can only be united by taking the position of development, that is, by accepting development as a primacy in relation to the universal connection. This broken scientific picture of the world cannot successfully resist the religious picture of the world simply because it rejects development. At the same time, the spontaneous development of capitalism showed the insufficiency of spontaneous development and the need for the conscious development of society, the conscious management of social processes.
Therefore, the need arose for a second negation within the framework of human cognition - a transition to the third stage of cognition through the bifurcation of scientific knowledge, with the formation of a new third stage, which should be called the technological stage of human cognition. It represents a synthesis of the first, mythological, and second, religious stages, subject to the primacy of the mythological stage, and the leading feature of this second negation will be the acceptance of development as the starting point of knowledge. As a result, a contradiction has arisen within human cognition - the technological stage versus the religious stage, and it is precisely thanks to this contradiction that scientific knowledge within the framework of the religious stage of cognition retains its primacy relative to scholasticism. Marx began the second negation within the framework of human knowledge, creating an economic theory of the development of capitalist production and showing the need to replace it with communist production with the help of the dictatorship of the proletariat. However, it should be noted that Marx assumed a simple negation of capitalism, that is, in the image of the first negation, as, say, feudal relations replaced slave relations. In fact, the transition from capitalism to communism is a second negation, that is, not a replacement with a transition to the opposite, as in the first negation, but a synthesis. Similarly, in the sphere of cognition, the second negation with the formation of the third stage means the synthesis of the first and second stages. The emerging contradiction between the technological and religious stages of cognition is manifested by the contradiction of formal logic and dialectics, determinism and development, permeating the practice of cognition. Any new knowledge refutes the formal logical system of scientific knowledge, therefore knowledge is promoted by enthusiasts who are forced to create a new picture of the world as opposed to established prevailing ideas and who are forced to accept development, rather than determinism, as the starting point of research.
During the bifurcation of the religious stage of cognition, self-consciousness will also experience a bifurcation with the emergence of reason as a synthesis of self-awareness and consciousness, subject to the primacy of consciousness. A new contradiction arises in society - reason versus self-awareness, subject to the primacy of reason. At the technological stage of cognition, the mind uses concepts that arise in self-consciousness in the system of formal logic in order to create a picture of the world using the theory of development. This can be called a synthesis of knowledge. Consequently, reason presupposes the subordination of formal logic to dialectics (theory of development), and self-consciousness is limited by formal logic and, therefore, is forced to absolutize it. Apparently, such a difference is determined by the organic structure of the brain, which allows one to rise to the understanding of a single consciousness not only of oneself (self-consciousness), but also to understand oneself as part of a developing society, a developing social consciousness in the case of reason, and the organic impossibility of such an elevation in the case of self-consciousness , for which development is organically unacceptable. The formation of the brain structure necessary for reasonable enthusiasm must begin with educating people in the developmental worldview system, that is, organizing in society a system for the development of people’s personality. Intelligent enthusiasts must create an environment for their functioning - a worldview of development. Through intelligent enthusiasm the problem of free will will eventually be solved. In a consumer society, the majority belongs to consumers, but since the growth of the level of consumption and personal development can only be ensured by the development of society, consumers depend on reasonable enthusiasts. Consumers, in principle, are not able to raise their self-awareness to reason, since they are only able to consume the knowledge or lies offered to them. These include the characteristic: fear of reality, fear of the truth, that is, intellectual cowardice (http://saint-juste.narod.ru/ne_spravka.html). Whereas reasonable enthusiasts, based on existing knowledge, create a picture of the developing world and obtain new knowledge. The synthesis of knowledge makes the practice of knowledge a subject of social development.
So, the pinnacle of human knowledge will be the third stage - the stage of synthesis of knowledge based on the theory of development as a theory of knowledge. But the third stage is formed as a result of the negation of the negation and is not a simple negation of the second stage, but a synthesis of the first and second stages. Therefore, scientific knowledge of the second stage will remain a necessary basis for the synthesis of knowledge.
Application. About personality development (https://langobard.livejournal.com/7962073.html)
(qt.) “After all his heartfelt arguments with the young arrested Zubatov comes to the conclusion that most of the revolutionaries are not fanatics at all, THEY simply HAVE NO OTHER OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW THEMSELVES other than to join the underground.”
I share my views on the life of Mr. Zubatov - a man, as I understand it, not a very good man, but very smart.
It's not about ideas, values and ideals. Not in the “material interests” of social groups. And not even in the holy of holies for political historians - not in “ripening contradictions”!
Namely, that Zubatov saw the light. When people reach the age at which they passionately want to “invent and build themselves,” they should have some satisfying opportunities for this. Consumption in a consumer society, interesting work and career advancement in a society of social mobility, creativity for the creative, science for the scientific...
If these opportunities to “invent and make yourself” are not there, then... then it will be “that’s it.”
It is probably impossible to come up with such possibilities that it would be possible to completely do without conflict, rebellion, revolution and other “punk”. You can't do without it completely.
There are simple natural rules. You want to live your youth in an interesting way. Interestingly, this means taking part in something new, so that the “ancestors” can be told: “But you didn’t have this!” Well, if you create something new, it will be super cool.
Youth differs from childhood in that, in contrast to the desire to play with interesting toys and slightly “lead the nose” of adults, a severe impulse-desire arises - to become someone. Make yourself someone.
This is not exactly a career and career advancement, which involves playing by someone else’s rules, without an element of self-creativity. This is precisely self-creativity, invention and production of oneself, self-realization.
Sometimes this is called the desire for freedom, without specifying what kind of freedom this is? Freedom is essentially just independence. I did something myself, thought it myself, came up with it myself, felt it myself, made a choice myself. If not absolute, then the most effective form of freedom is independent action.
It doesn’t matter that sometimes the meaning of this action is simply a break with the environment or some kind of action against the environment. Such a “punk” is not always considered independent and free, because she is reactive, not active. Dependent on the negated object. But this is still not that important. It is important that this is still your own action, conceived and carried out in isolation from the environment, and not in accordance with it.
Definition 1
Human cognition- This is one of the most important integral aspects of the formation of a human worldview and worldview. Speaking in general terms, cognition is a phenomenon, the process of a person acquiring knowledge. It is, first of all, a process of reflection and explanation of visible and invisible reality and reality.
Object of knowledge- a very flexible element, since it can be everything that exists, which is even beyond the control of human knowledge or reason. The source and method of knowledge are human feelings, intuition and reason. It is these three forms of knowledge that make up the modern concept of epistemology - the theory of knowledge. Thus, rational and empirical knowledge arises, which can either coexist in harmony or oppose each other.
Picture 1.
Sensory cognition
Definition 2
Sensory cognition is the starting point for mastering reality, since this is the initial form of human cognition. All our ideas, images and concepts are formed through sensory reflection, the main object of which is the empirical world of processes, phenomena and things.
However, each person, based on personal life experience, can independently verify that the sensory aspect of cognition is not always true, since emotions are not always able to adequately reflect our surrounding world. For example, you can dip a spoon into a glass of tea or a stick into water. Our visual perception will tell us that the stick is broken, but it will remain unchanged, only the “translation” of these elements will change. What then can be said about the diversity of opinions based on the auditory, taste perceptions and sensations of different people.
Thus, all problems of cognition, which is based on sensory data, arise immediately as soon as we begin to begin it, even if we are talking about inanimate nature. However, they increase to a much greater extent with knowledge of the person himself and society as a whole.
The phenomena and processes that take place here quite often simply cannot be depicted through the senses.
Figure 2.
Note 1
It is also important to note that regarding the biological component, the organs of sensory perception and reflection in humans are weaker than in animals, which have improved hearing, vision and smell than humans. That is why, if human knowledge were based only on sensory perception, all information about the representation of the world and the world order would be much weaker than that of the animal world.
Rational cognition
However, unlike animals, man has reason and intelligence, on which rational knowledge is based. At this level we are dealing with conceptual reflection, abstractions, and theoretical thinking. It is at this level that general concepts, principles, laws are formulated, and theoretical models and concepts are built that provide a deeper explanation of the world. Moreover, the cognitive process is carried out not only in the form in which it exists in the thoughts of an individual, but mainly in the form of a general socio-historical process of the development of knowledge.
Individual human cognition is conditioned and mediated by social cognition, the world-historical process of the development of knowledge.
Unity of knowledge
But sensory and rational knowledge are not in irreconcilable contradiction; they do not deny, but dialectically complement each other. Initial knowledge about the world, obtained through the senses, contains those images and ideas that constitute the initial level of the cognitive process.
Nevertheless, the mind produces the formation of these sensory images and ideas. Thus, in knowledge there is a dialectical interaction between its rational and sensory forms. At the same time, it is important to keep in mind that human needs and requirements are one of the most important driving forces in the development of knowledge, and the socio-historical practice of people serves as the most important criterion of its truth, as well as the basis and main goal of knowledge.
Figure 3.
In their dialectical unity, sensory and rational knowledge is capable of penetrating quite deeply into the world of objective truth. However, neither the feelings nor the mind should be particularly deluded with their capabilities and abilities in their claims to knowledge and explanation of the world and man.
In the structure of the nature of cognition, the lion's share of healthy cognitive skepticism is settled, since the greater the increase in the volume and scope of human knowledge, the more clearly the awareness and expansion of the circle of the unknown occurs. In other words, the growth of knowledge implies the growth of its problem area.
Note 2
All new discoveries reveal not only the power, but at the same time the limited abilities of the human mind and prove that error and truth are inextricably interconnected in the holistic process of developing knowledge. In addition, it is necessary to turn your attention to the fact that the procedure of cognition is endless, that this process can never be completed, since the world has no boundaries and it is diverse in its changes and development.
Theory of knowledge was first mentioned by Plato in his book The Republic. Then he identified two types of knowledge - sensory and mental, and this theory has been preserved to this day. Cognition - This is the process of acquiring knowledge about the world around us, its patterns and phenomena.
IN structure of cognition two elements:
- subject(“knower” - person, scientific society);
- an object(“knowable” - nature, its phenomena, social phenomena, people, objects, etc.).
Methods of cognition.
Methods of cognition generalized on two levels: empirical level knowledge and theoretical level.
Empirical methods:
- Observation(studying an object without intervention).
- Experiment(learning takes place in a controlled environment).
- Measurement(measurement of the degree of size of an object, or weight, speed, duration, etc.).
- Comparison(comparison of similarities and differences of objects).
- Analysis. The mental or practical (manual) process of separating an object or phenomenon into its components, disassembling and inspecting the components.
- Synthesis. The reverse process is the combination of components into a whole, identifying connections between them.
- Classification. Decomposition of objects or phenomena into groups according to certain characteristics.
- Comparison. Detecting differences and similarities in compared elements.
- Generalization. A less detailed synthesis is a combination of common characteristics without identifying connections. This process is not always separated from synthesis.
- Specification. The process of extracting the particular from the general, clarifying for better understanding.
- Abstraction. Consideration of only one side of an object or phenomenon, since the rest are not of interest.
- Analogy(identification of similar phenomena, similarities), a more advanced method of cognition than comparison, since it includes the search for similar phenomena in a time period.
- Deduction(movement from the general to the particular, a method of cognition in which a logical conclusion emerges from a whole chain of conclusions) - in life, this type of logic became popular thanks to Arthur Conan Doyle.
- Induction- movement from facts to the general.
- Idealization- creation of concepts for phenomena and objects that do not exist in reality, but there are similarities (for example, an ideal fluid in hydrodynamics).
- Modeling- creating and then studying a model of something (for example, a computer model of the solar system).
- Formalization- image of an object in the form of signs, symbols (chemical formulas).
Forms of knowledge.
Forms of knowledge(some psychological schools are simply called types of cognition) there are the following:
- Scientific knowledge. A type of knowledge based on logic, scientific approach, conclusions; also called rational cognition.
- Creative or artistic knowledge. (It's the same - art). This type of cognition reflects the world around us with the help of artistic images and symbols.
- Philosophical knowledge. It lies in the desire to explain the surrounding reality, the place that a person occupies in it, and what it should be.
- Religious knowledge. Religious knowledge is often classified as a type of self-knowledge. The object of study is God and his connection with man, the influence of God on man, as well as the moral principles characteristic of this religion. An interesting paradox of religious knowledge: the subject (man) studies the object (God), which acts as the subject (God) who created the object (man and the whole world in general).
- Mythological knowledge. Cognition characteristic of primitive cultures. A way of cognition among people who had not yet begun to separate themselves from the world around them, who identified complex phenomena and concepts with gods and higher powers.
- Self-knowledge. Knowledge of one’s own mental and physical properties, self-awareness. The main methods are introspection, introspection, formation of one’s own personality, comparison of oneself with other people.
To summarize: cognition is a person’s ability to mentally perceive external information, process it and draw conclusions from it. The main goal of knowledge is both to master nature and to improve man himself. In addition, many authors see the goal of knowledge in a person’s desire for
Briefly and clearly about philosophy: the main and most important thing about philosophy and philosophers
Basic approaches to the problem of cognition
Epistemology is a branch of philosophy that studies the nature of knowledge, the ways, sources and methods of knowledge, as well as the relationship between knowledge and reality.
There are two main approaches to the problem of cognition.
1. Epistemological optimism, whose supporters recognize that the world is knowable regardless of whether we can currently explain some phenomena or not.
This position is adhered to by all materialists and some consistent idealists, although their methods of cognition are different.
The basis of cognition is the ability of consciousness to reproduce (reflect) to a certain degree of completeness and accuracy an object existing outside it.
The main premises of the theory of knowledge of dialectical materialism are the following:
1) the source of our knowledge is outside of us, it is objective in relation to us;
2) there is no fundamental difference between “phenomenon” and “thing in itself”, but there is a difference between what is known and what is not yet known;
3) cognition is a continuous process of deepening and even changing our knowledge based on the transformation of reality.
2. Epistemological pessimism. Its essence is doubt in the possibility of knowability of the world.
Types of epistemological pessimism:
1) skepticism - a direction that questions the possibility of knowing objective reality (Diogenes, Sextus Empiricus). Philosophical skepticism turns doubt into a principle of knowledge (David Hume);
2) agnosticism - a movement that denies the possibility of reliable knowledge of the essence of the world (I. Kant). The source of knowledge is the external world, the essence of which is unknowable. Any object is a “thing in itself”. We cognize only phenomena with the help of innate a priori forms (space, time, categories of reason), and we organize our experience of sensation.
At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, a type of agnosticism was formed - conventionalism. This is the concept that scientific theories and concepts are not a reflection of the objective world, but the product of agreement between scientists.
Human cognition
Cognition is the interaction of a subject and an object with the active role of the subject itself, resulting in some kind of knowledge.
The subject of cognition can be an individual, a collective, a class, or society as a whole.
The object of knowledge can be the entire objective reality, and the subject of cognition can be only its part or area directly included in the process of cognition itself.
Cognition is a specific type of human spiritual activity, the process of comprehending the surrounding world. It develops and improves in close connection with social practice.
Cognition is a movement, a transition from ignorance to knowledge, from less knowledge to more knowledge.
In cognitive activity, the concept of truth is central. Truth is the correspondence of our thoughts to objective reality. A lie is a discrepancy between our thoughts and reality. Establishing the truth is the act of transition from ignorance to knowledge, in a particular case - from misconception to knowledge. Knowledge is a thought that corresponds to objective reality and adequately reflects it. A misconception is an idea that does not correspond to reality, a false idea. This is ignorance, presented, accepted as knowledge; a false idea presented or accepted as true.
A socially significant process of cognition is formed from millions of cognitive efforts of individuals. The process of transforming individual knowledge into universally significant knowledge, recognized by society as the cultural heritage of humanity, is subject to complex sociocultural patterns. The integration of individual knowledge into the commonwealth is carried out through communication between people, critical assimilation and recognition of this knowledge by society. The transfer and transmission of knowledge from generation to generation and the exchange of knowledge between contemporaries are possible thanks to the materialization of subjective images and their expression in language. Thus, cognition is a socio-historical, cumulative process of obtaining and improving knowledge about the world in which a person lives.
Structure and forms of knowledge
The general direction of the process of cognition is expressed in the formula: “From living contemplation to abstract thinking and from it to practice.”
In the process of cognition, stages are distinguished.
1. Sensory cognition is based on sensory sensations that reflect reality. Through feelings a person contacts the outside world. The main forms of sensory cognition include: sensation, perception and representation. Sensation is an elementary subjective image of objective reality. A specific feature of sensations is their homogeneity. Any sensation provides information only about one qualitative aspect of an object.
A person is able to significantly develop the subtlety and acuity of feelings and sensations.
Perception is a holistic reflection, an image of objects and events in the surrounding world.
An idea is a sensory recollection of an object that does not currently affect a person, but once acted on his senses. Because of this, the image of an object in the imagination, on the one hand, is of a poorer character than in sensations and perceptions, and on the other hand, the purposeful nature of human cognition is more strongly manifested in it.
2. Rational knowledge is based on logical thinking, which is carried out in three forms: concepts, judgments, and inferences.
A concept is an elementary form of thought in which objects are reflected in their general and essential properties and features. Concepts are objective in content and source. Specific abstract concepts are identified that differ in degrees of generality.
Judgments reflect connections and relationships between things and their properties and operate with concepts; judgments deny or affirm something.
Inference is a process as a result of which a new judgment is obtained from several judgments with logical necessity.
3. Intuitive knowledge is based on the fact that a sudden decision, the truth, independently comes to a person on an unconscious level, without preliminary logical proof.
Features of everyday and scientific knowledge
Knowledge differs in its depth, level of professionalism, use of sources and means. Everyday and scientific knowledge are distinguished. The former are not the result of professional activity and, in principle, are inherent to one degree or another in any individual. The second type of knowledge arises as a result of deeply specialized activities that require professional training, called scientific knowledge.
Cognition also differs in its subject matter. Knowledge of nature leads to the development of physics, chemistry, geology, etc., which together constitute natural science. Knowledge of man and society determines the formation of humanitarian and social disciplines. There is also artistic and religious knowledge.
Scientific knowledge as a professional type of social activity is carried out according to certain scientific canons accepted by the scientific community. It uses special research methods and also evaluates the quality of the knowledge obtained based on accepted scientific criteria. The process of scientific knowledge includes a number of mutually organized elements: object, subject, knowledge as a result and research method.
The subject of knowledge is the one who realizes it, that is, a creative person who forms new knowledge. The object of knowledge is a fragment of reality that is the focus of the researcher’s attention. The object is mediated by the subject of cognition. If the object of science can exist independently of the cognitive goals and consciousness of the scientist, then this cannot be said about the object of knowledge. The subject of knowledge is a certain vision and understanding of the object of study from a certain point of view, in a given theoretical-cognitive perspective.
The cognizing subject is not a passive contemplative being, mechanically reflecting nature, but an active, creative personality. In order to get an answer to the questions posed by scientists about the essence of the object being studied, the cognizing subject has to influence nature and invent complex research methods.
Philosophy of scientific knowledge
The theory of scientific knowledge (epistemology) is one of the areas of philosophical knowledge.
Science is a field of human activity, the essence of which is to obtain knowledge about natural and social phenomena, as well as about man himself.
The driving forces of scientific knowledge are:
1) practical need for knowledge. Most sciences grew out of these needs, although some of them, especially in such areas as mathematics, theoretical physics, cosmology, were born not under the direct influence of practical need, but from the internal logic of the development of knowledge, from contradictions in this knowledge itself;
2) curiosity of scientists. The task of a scientist is to ask nature questions through experiments and get answers to them. An incurious scientist is not a scientist;
3) the intellectual pleasure that a person experiences when discovering something that no one knew before (in the educational process, intellectual pleasure is also present as the student discovering new knowledge “for himself”).
The means of scientific knowledge are:
1) the mind, logical thinking of a scientist, his intellectual and heuristic (creative) abilities;
2) sense organs, in unity with the data of which mental activity is carried out;
3) instruments (appeared since the 17th century), which provide more accurate information about the properties of things.
A device is like one or another organ of the human body that has gone beyond its natural boundaries. The human body distinguishes degrees of temperature, mass, illumination, current, etc., but thermometers, scales, galvanometers, etc. do this much more accurately. With the invention of instruments, human cognitive capabilities have expanded incredibly; Research became available not only at the level of short-range action, but also long-range action (phenomena in the microcosm, astrophysical processes in space). Science begins with measurement. Therefore, the scientist’s motto is: “Measure what can be measured, and find a way to measure what cannot yet be measured.”
Practice and its functions in the process of cognition
Practice and knowledge are closely related to each other: practice has a cognitive side, knowledge has a practical side. As a source of knowledge, practice provides initial information that is generalized and processed by thinking. Theory, in turn, is a generalization of practice. In practice and through practice, the subject learns the laws of reality; without practice there is no knowledge of the essence of objects.
Practice is also the driving force of knowledge. Impulses emanate from it, largely determining the emergence of a new meaning and its transformation.
Practice determines the transition from the sensory reflection of objects to their rational reflection, from one research method to another, from one thinking to another, from empirical thinking to theoretical thinking.
The purpose of knowledge is to achieve true meaning.
Practice is a specific method of development in which the result of an activity is adequate to its purpose.
Practice is a set of all types of socially significant, transformative activities of people, the basis of which is production activity. This is the form in which the interaction of object and subject, society and nature is realized.
The importance of practice for the cognitive process, for the development and development of scientific and other forms of knowledge has been emphasized by many philosophers of different directions.
The main functions of practice in the process of cognition:
1) practice is a source of knowledge because all knowledge is caused in life mainly by its needs;
2) practice acts as the basis of knowledge, its driving force. It permeates all aspects, moments of knowledge from its beginning to its end;
3) practice is directly the goal of knowledge, for it exists not for the sake of simple curiosity, but in order to direct them to correspond to images, to one degree or another regulate the activities of people;
4) practice is the decisive criterion, that is, it allows one to separate true knowledge from misconceptions.
.....................................
Bertrand Russell
Human knowledge of its scope and boundaries
Preface
This work is addressed not only and not primarily to professional philosophers, but also to that wider circle of readers who are interested in philosophical issues and want or have the opportunity to devote very limited time to discussing them. Descartes, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley and Hume wrote precisely for such a reader, and I consider it a sad misunderstanding that during the last hundred and sixty years or so philosophy has been considered as a special science like mathematics. It must be admitted that logic is as specialized as mathematics, but I believe that logic is not a part of philosophy. Philosophy proper deals with subjects of interest to the general educated public, and loses a great deal if only a small circle of professionals are able to understand what it says.
In this book I have tried to discuss, as widely as I could, a very large and important question: how is it that people whose contacts with the world are short-lived, personal and limited, are nevertheless able to know as much as they actually know? Is faith in our knowledge partly illusory? And if not, what can we know otherwise than through the senses? Although I have touched on some aspects of this problem in my other books, I was nevertheless forced to return here, in a broader context, to a discussion of some issues previously considered; and I have kept such repetition to a minimum consistent with my purpose.
One of the difficulties of the question I am considering here is the fact that we are forced to use words common to everyday speech, such as "belief", "truth", "knowledge" and "perception". Since these words in their ordinary use are insufficiently definite and imprecise, and since there are no more precise words to replace them, it is inevitable that everything said in the early stage of our research will be unsatisfactory from the point of view which we hope to achieve at the end. The development of our knowledge, if it is successful, is similar to the approach of a traveler to a mountain through the fog: at first he distinguishes only large features, even if they have not fully defined contours, but gradually he sees more and more details, and the outlines become sharper. Likewise, in our research it is impossible to first clarify one problem and then move on to another, because the fog covers everything equally. At each stage, although only one part of the problem may be the focus, all parts are more or less relevant. All the different keywords we must use are interconnected, and as some of them remain undefined, others must also share their deficiency to a greater or lesser extent. It follows that what was said at first must be corrected later. The Prophet said that if two texts of the Quran are found to be incompatible, the latter should be considered as the most authoritative. I would like the reader to apply a similar principle in interpreting what is said in this book.
The book was read in manuscript by my friend and student, Mr. S. C. Hill, and I am indebted to him for many valuable comments, suggestions, and corrections. Much of the manuscript was also read by Mr. Hiram J. McLendon, who made many helpful suggestions.
The fourth chapter of the third part - “Physics and Experience” - is a reprint with minor changes of my small book, published under the same title by Cambridge University Press, to which I am grateful for permission to reprint.
Bertrand Russell
INTRODUCTION
The main purpose of this book is to explore the relationship between individual experience and the general composition of scientific knowledge. It is generally taken for granted that scientific knowledge in its broad outlines should be accepted. Skepticism in relation to it, although logically and irreproachably, is psychologically impossible, and in any philosophy that pretends to such skepticism there is always an element of frivolous insincerity. Moreover, if skepticism wants to defend itself theoretically, it must reject all inferences from what is obtained by experience; partial skepticism, such as the denial of non-experienced physical phenomena, or solipsism, which admits events only in my future or in my past, which I do not remember, has no logical justification, since it must admit principles of inference leading to beliefs which he rejects.
Since the time of Kant, or perhaps more correctly since the time of Berkeley, there has been a mistaken tendency among philosophers to admit descriptions of the world that are unduly influenced by considerations drawn from an inquiry into the nature of human knowledge. It is clear to scientific common sense (which I accept) that only an infinitesimal part of the universe is known, that countless centuries have passed during which there has been no knowledge at all, and that perhaps countless centuries will again come during which there will be no knowledge. From the cosmic and causal point of view, knowledge is an inessential feature of the universe; a science that forgot to mention its presence would suffer, from an impersonal point of view, a very trivial imperfection. In describing the world, subjectivity is a vice. Kant said of himself that he had made a “Copernican revolution,” but he would have been more precise if he had spoken of a “Ptolemaic counter-revolution,” since he put man back at the center, while Copernicus had deposed him.
But when we ask not about “what is the world in which we live”, but about “how we come to know the world,” subjectivity turns out to be completely legitimate. Each person's knowledge depends mainly on his own individual experience: he knows what he has seen and heard, what he has read and what has been reported to him, as well as what he has been able to conclude from these data. The question is about individual, and not about collective experience, since in order to move from my data to the acceptance of any verbal evidence, a conclusion is required. If I believe that there is, for example, a populated area like Semipalatinsk, then I believe in it because something gives me a reason for this; and if I had not accepted certain fundamental principles of inference, I would have to admit that all this could have happened to me without the actual existence of this place.
The desire to avoid subjectivity in describing the world (which I share) leads - at least it seems to me - some modern philosophers down the wrong path regarding the theory of knowledge. Having lost their taste for its problems, they tried to deny the existence of these problems themselves. Since the time of Protagoras, the thesis has been known that the data of experience are personal and private. This thesis was denied because it was believed, as Protagoras himself believed, that if accepted, it would necessarily lead to the conclusion that all knowledge is private and individual. As for me, I accept the thesis, but deny the conclusion; how and why - this should be shown on subsequent pages.
As a result of certain events in my own life, I have certain beliefs about events that I myself have not experienced: the thoughts and feelings of other people, the physical objects around me, the historical and geological past of the earth, and the distant regions of the universe that astronomy studies. For my part, I accept these beliefs as valid, except for errors in detail. Accepting all this, I am forced to come to the view that there are correct processes of inference from some events and phenomena to others - more specifically, from events and phenomena of which I know without the help of inference, to others of which I have no such knowledge. The discovery of these processes is a matter of analyzing the process of scientific and everyday thinking, since such a process is usually considered scientifically correct.
Inference from a group of phenomena to other phenomena can only be justified if the world has certain features that are not logically necessary. As far as deductive logic can show it, any collection of events may be the whole universe; if in such a case I draw any conclusions about events, I must accept principles of inference that lie outside deductive logic. Any conclusion from phenomenon to phenomenon presupposes some kind of relationship between various phenomena. Such a relationship is traditionally affirmed in the principle of causality or natural law. This principle is presupposed, as we shall see, in induction by mere enumeration, whatever limited meaning we may ascribe to it. But the traditional ways of formulating the kind of relationship that must be postulated are largely defective - some are too strict and rigid, while others lack it. Establishing the minimum principles necessary to justify scientific conclusions is one of the main purposes of this book.