Features of scientific knowledge. empirical and theoretical levels of scientific knowledge

In science, there are empirical and theoretical levels of research. Empirical research is aimed directly at the object being studied and is implemented through observation and experiment. Theoretical research is concentrated around generalizing ideas, hypotheses, laws, principles. Data from both empirical and theoretical research are recorded in the form of statements containing empirical and theoretical terms. Empirical terms are statements whose truth can be tested experimentally. This is, for example, the statement: “The resistance of a given conductor increases when heated from 5 to 10 °C.” The truth of statements containing theoretical terms cannot be established experimentally. To confirm the truth of the statement “The resistance of conductors increases when heated from 5 to 10 °C,” an infinite number of experiments would have to be carried out, which is impossible in principle. "The resistance of a given conductor" is an empirical term, an observational term. “Conductor resistance” is a theoretical term, a concept obtained as a result of generalization. Statements with theoretical concepts are unverifiable, but, according to Popper, they are falsifiable.

The most important feature of scientific research is the interplay of empirical and theoretical data. In principle, it is impossible to absolutely separate empirical and theoretical facts. In the above statement with an empirical term, the concepts of temperature and number were used, and these are theoretical concepts. The person measuring the resistance of conductors understands what is happening because he has theoretical knowledge. On the other hand, theoretical knowledge without experimental data has no scientific force and turns into groundless speculation. Coherence and mutual loading of the empirical and theoretical is the most important feature of science. If the specified harmonic agreement is violated, then in order to restore it, a search for new theoretical concepts begins. Of course, the experimental data are also clarified. Let us consider in the light of the unity of the empirical and theoretical the main methods of empirical research.

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

The components of the experiment are: experimenter; phenomenon being studied; devices. In the case of instruments, we are not talking about technical devices such as computers, micro- and telescopes, designed to enhance the sensory and rational capabilities of a person, but about detector devices, intermediary devices that record experimental data and are directly influenced by the phenomena being studied. As we see, the experimenter is “fully armed”; on his side, among other things, is professional experience and, most importantly, knowledge of theory. In modern conditions, an experiment is most often carried out by a group of researchers who act in concert, measuring their efforts and abilities.

The phenomenon being studied is experimentally placed in conditions where it responds to detector devices (if there is no special detector device, then the sensory organs of the experimenter himself act as such: his eyes, ears, fingers). This reaction depends on the condition and characteristics of the device. Due to this circumstance, the experimenter cannot obtain information about the phenomenon being studied as such, that is, in isolation from all other processes and objects. Thus, observation tools are involved in the formation of experimental data. In physics, this phenomenon remained unknown until experiments in the field of quantum physics, and its discovery in the 20s - 30s of the XX century. was a sensation. N. Bohr’s explanation for a long time that observation means influence the results of the experiment, was received with hostility. Bohr's opponents believed that the experiment could be cleared of the disturbing influence of the device, but this turned out to be impossible. The researcher's task is not to present the object as such, but to explain its behavior in all kinds of situations.

It should be noted that in social experiments the situation is also not simple, because the subjects react to the feelings, thoughts, and spiritual world of the researcher. When summarizing experimental data, the researcher must not abstract from his own influence, but rather, taking it into account, be able to identify the general, essential.

The experimental data must somehow be communicated to known human receptors, for example, this happens when the experimenter reads the readings of measuring instruments. The experimenter has the opportunity and at the same time is forced to use his inherent (all or some) forms of sensory cognition. However, sensory cognition is just one of the moments of a complex cognitive process carried out by the experimenter. It is wrong to reduce empirical knowledge to sensory knowledge.

Among the methods of empirical knowledge, they are often called observation, which is sometimes even opposed to the method of experimentation. This does not mean observation as a stage of any experiment, but observation as a special, holistic way of studying phenomena, observation of astronomical, biological, social and other processes. The difference between experimentation and observation basically comes down to one point: in an experiment, its conditions are controlled, while in observation, the processes are left to the natural course of events. From a theoretical point of view, the structure of experiment and observation is the same: the phenomenon being studied - the device - the experimenter (or observer). Therefore, making sense of an observation is not much different from making sense of an experiment. Observation can be considered a unique case of experiment.

An interesting possibility for developing the experimental method is the so-called model experimentation. Sometimes they experiment not on the original, but on its model, that is, on another entity similar to the original. The model can be physical, mathematical or some other nature. It is important that manipulations with it make it possible to transmit the received information to the original. This is not always possible, but only when the properties of the model are relevant, that is, they really correspond to the properties of the original. A complete coincidence of the properties of the model and the original is never achieved, and for a very simple reason: the model is not the original. As A. Rosenbluth and N. Wiener joked, the best material model of a cat will be another cat, but it is preferable that it be exactly the same cat. One of the meanings of the joke is this: it is impossible to obtain as comprehensive knowledge from a model as in the process of experimenting with the original. But sometimes one can be content with partial success, especially if the object being studied is inaccessible to a non-model experiment. Before building a dam across a stormy river, hydraulic engineers will conduct a model experiment within the walls of their institute. As for mathematical modeling, it allows you to relatively quickly “play out” various options for the development of the processes being studied. Mathematical modeling- a method located at the intersection of empirical and theoretical. The same applies to so-called thought experiments, when possible situations and their consequences are considered.

The most important aspect of the experiment is measurements; they allow one to obtain quantitative data. When measuring, qualitatively identical characteristics are compared. Here we are faced with a situation quite typical for scientific research. The measurement process itself is undoubtedly an experimental operation. But the establishment of qualitative similarity of characteristics compared in the measurement process already relates to the theoretical level of cognition. To choose a standard unit of quantity, you need to know which phenomena are equivalent to each other; in this case, preference will be given to the standard that is applicable to the largest possible number of processes. Length was measured using elbows, feet, steps, a wooden meter, a platinum meter, and now they are guided by the lengths of electromagnetic waves in a vacuum. Time was measured by the movement of the stars, the Earth, the Moon, pulses, and pendulums. Time is now measured according to the accepted standard of the second. One second is equal to 9,192,631,770 periods of radiation of the corresponding transition between two specific levels of the hyperfine structure of the ground state of the cesium atom. Both in the case of measuring lengths and in the case of measuring physical time, electromagnetic oscillations were chosen as measurement standards. This choice is explained by the content of the theory, namely quantum electrodynamics. As you can see, the measurement is theoretically loaded. Measurement can only be carried out effectively after identifying the meaning of what is being measured and how it is being measured. To better explain the essence of the measurement process, consider the situation with assessing students’ knowledge, say, on a ten-point scale.

The teacher talks with many students and gives them grades - 5 points, 7 points, 10 points. Students answer different questions, but the teacher brings all the answers “to a common denominator.” If the test taker informs someone about his grade, then from this brief information it is impossible to determine what was the subject of the conversation between the teacher and the student. Scholarship commissions are not interested in examination specifics either. Measurement, and assessment of students' knowledge is a special case of this process, fixes quantitative gradations only within the framework of a given quality. The teacher “subsumes” different student responses under the same quality, and only then establishes the difference. 5 and 7 points are equivalent in terms of points; in the first case, these points are simply less than in the second. The teacher, assessing the knowledge of students, proceeds from his ideas about the essence of this academic discipline. The student also knows how to generalize; he mentally counts his failures and successes. In the end, however, the teacher and the student may come to different conclusions. Why? First of all, due to the fact that the student and the teacher have different understandings of the issue of assessing knowledge, they both generalize, but one of them succeeds in this mental operation better. The measurement, as already noted, is theoretically loaded.

Let us summarize the above. Measuring A and B involves: a) establishing the qualitative identity of A and B; b) introduction of a unit of value (second, meter, kilogram, point); c) interaction of A and B with a device that has the same qualitative characteristic as A and B; d) reading the instrument readings. The given measurement rules are used in the study of physical, biological and social processes. In the case of physical processes, the measuring device is often a well-defined technical device. These are thermometers, voltmeters, quartz watches. In the case of biological and social processes, the situation is more complicated - in accordance with their systemic-symbolic nature. Its supraphysical meaning means that the device must also have this meaning. But technical devices have only a physical, and not a systemic-symbolic nature. If so, then they are not suitable for directly measuring biological and social characteristics. But the latter are measurable, and they are actually measured. Along with the examples already given, the commodity-money market mechanism by which the value of goods is measured is very indicative in this regard. There is no technical device that does not measure the value of goods directly, but indirectly, taking into account all the activities of buyers and sellers, this can be done.

After analyzing the empirical level of research, we have to consider the organically connected theoretical level of research.

The empirical level of knowledge in science to a certain extent corresponds to the sensory stage of research, while the theoretical level corresponds to the rational or logical level. Of course, there is no absolute correspondence between them. It has been established that the empirical level of knowledge includes not only sensory, but also logical research. In this case, information received by a sensory method is subjected to primary processing by conceptual (rational) means.

Empirical knowledge, therefore, is not only a reflection of reality, formed experimentally. They represent a specific unity of mental and sensory expression of reality. In this case, sensory reflection comes first, and thinking plays a subordinate, auxiliary role to observation.

Empirical data provide science with facts. Their establishment is an integral part of any research. Thus, the empirical level of knowledge contributes to the establishment and accumulation

A fact is a reliably established event, a non-fictional incident. This recorded empirical knowledge is synonymous with such concepts as “results” and “events”.

It should be noted that facts act not only as an information source and “sensory” reasoning. They are also a criterion of truth and reliability.

The empirical level of knowledge allows one to establish facts using various methods. These methods, in particular, include observation, experiment, comparison, measurement.

Observation is the purposeful and systematic perception of phenomena and objects. The purpose of this perception is to determine the relationships and properties of the phenomena or objects being studied. Observation can be carried out both directly and indirectly (using instruments - a microscope, a camera, and others). It should be noted that for modern science such research becomes more complicated and more indirect over time.

Comparison is a cognitive procedure. It is the basis according to which the difference or similarity of objects is realized. Comparison allows us to identify quantitative and qualitative properties and characteristics of objects.

It should be said that the comparison method is appropriate when determining the characteristics of homogeneous phenomena or objects that form classes. Just like observation, this can be carried out indirectly or directly. In the first case, comparison is made by correlating two objects with a third, which is a standard.

Measurement is the establishment of a numerical indicator of a certain value using a specific unit (watts, centimeters, kilograms, etc.). This method has been used since the emergence of new European science. Due to its wide application, measurement has become an organic element

All of the above methods can be used either independently or in combination. Together, observation, measurement and comparison are part of a more complex empirical method of cognition - experiment.

This research technique involves placing an object in clearly taken into account conditions or reproducing it in an artificial way to identify certain characteristics. An experiment is a way of carrying out an active activity. Activity in this case presupposes the ability of the subject to intervene during the process or phenomenon being studied.

A person, when in contact with the world around him, cannot use only scientific facts and insensitive logical judgment. Much more often he needs empirical knowledge for living contemplation and the work of the senses - sight, hearing, taste, smell and touch.

What does empirical knowledge mean?

The entire process of cognition is usually divided into two parts: theoretical and empirical. The first is considered the highest, based on the fact that it is built on problems and laws that are their solution. Judging it as an ideal is controversial: the theory is good for already studied processes, the signs of which have long been considered and described by someone else. Empirical knowledge is a completely different form of knowledge. It is initial because a theory cannot be created without analyzing one’s own feelings from the object of research. It is also called sensory contemplation, which means:

Primary processing of knowledge about an object. The example is primitive: humanity would never have known that fire was hot if one day its flame had not burned someone.
The starting point of the general cognitive process. During it, a person’s all senses are activated. For example, having discovered a new species, a scientist uses empirical knowledge and monitors it and records all changes in the behavior, weight, and color of the individual.
Interaction of the individual with the outside world. Man is still a mammal himself, and therefore, in the process of sensory learning, he relies on instincts.

Empirical knowledge in philosophy

Each science has a unique perspective on the need to use the senses in the process of studying the environment and society. Philosophy believes that the empirical level of knowledge is a category that serves to strengthen connections in society. By developing observational abilities and skills, a person shares his experience with others and develops thinking contemplation - a constructive perception that arises from the symbiosis of feelings and the inner gaze (point of view).

Signs of empirical knowledge

The features characteristic of any studied process are called its features. In philosophy they use a similar concept - signs that reveal the characteristics of the ongoing process. Features of empirical cognition include:

gathering facts;
their primary generalization;
description of observed data;
description of information acquired during the experiment;
systematization and classification of information.

Methods of empirical knowledge

It is impossible to understand the mechanism of a philosophical or sociological category without first developing the rules for conducting research. The empirical path of knowledge requires methods such as:

Observation– third-party study of an object, relying on data from the senses.
Experiment– targeted intervention in the process or its reproduction in the laboratory.
Measurement– giving the experimental results a statistical form.
Description– fixation of ideas received from the senses.
Comparison– analysis of two similar objects in order to identify their similarities or differences.

Functions of empirical knowledge

The functions of any philosophical category mean the goals that can be achieved by its application. They reveal the very necessity of the existence of a concept or phenomenon from the point of view of usefulness. The empirical way of cognition has the following functions:

Educational- and existing skills.
Management- can affect a person’s control of their behavior.
Evaluation-orientation- empirical knowledge of the world contributes to the assessment of the reality of existence and one’s place in it.
Goal-setting– acquiring the right guidelines.

Empirical knowledge - types

The sensory method of acquiring knowledge can belong to one of three varieties. They are all interconnected with each other, and without this unity, an empirical method of knowing the world is impossible. These types include:

Perception- creation of a full-fledged image of an object, synthesis of sensations from contemplation of the totality of all sides of the object. For example, a person perceives an apple not as sour or red, but as a whole object.
Feeling- an empirical type of cognition, reflecting in the human mind the properties of individual aspects of an object and their impact on the senses. Each of the characteristics is felt in isolation from the others - taste, smell, color, size, shape.
Performance- a generalized visual image of an object, the impression of which was formed in the past. Memory and imagination play a big role in this process: they restore memories of an object in its absence.

The empirical level is a reflection of external signs and aspects of connections. Obtaining empirical facts, their description and systematization

Based on experience as the only source of knowledge.

The main task of empirical knowledge is to collect, describe, accumulate facts, perform their primary processing, and answer the questions: what is what? what and how is happening?

This activity is provided by: observation, description, measurement, experiment.

Observation:

This is the deliberate and directed perception of an object of cognition in order to obtain information about its form, properties and relationships.

The process of observation is not passive contemplation. This is an active, directed form of the epistemological relationship of the subject in relation to the object, reinforced by additional means of observation, recording information and its translation.

Requirements: purpose of observation; choice of methodology; observation plan; control over the correctness and reliability of the results obtained; processing, comprehension and interpretation of received information (requires special attention).

Description:

The description, as it were, continues the observation; it is a form of recording observation information, its final stage.

With the help of description, information from the senses is translated into the language of signs, concepts, diagrams, graphs, acquiring a form convenient for subsequent rational processing (systematization, classification, generalization, etc.).

The description is carried out not on the basis of natural language, but on the basis of an artificial language, which is distinguished by logical rigor and unambiguity.

The description can be oriented toward qualitative or quantitative certainty.

Quantitative description requires fixed measurement procedures, which necessitates the expansion of the fact-recording activity of the subject of cognition by including such a cognition operation as measurement.

Dimension:

The qualitative characteristics of an object, as a rule, are recorded by instruments; the quantitative specificity of the object is established using measurements.

a technique in cognition with the help of which a quantitative comparison of quantities of the same quality is carried out.

this is a kind of system for providing cognition.

Its importance was pointed out by D.I. Mendeleev: knowledge of measure and weight is the only way to the discovery of laws.

reveals some common connections between objects.

Experiment:

Unlike ordinary observation, in an experiment the researcher actively intervenes in the course of the process being studied in order to gain additional knowledge.

This is a special technique (method) of cognition, representing a systematic and repeatedly reproduced observation of an object in the process of deliberate and controlled trial influences of the subject on the object of study.

In an experiment, the subject of knowledge studies a problem situation in order to obtain comprehensive information.

the object is controlled under specially specified conditions, which makes it possible to record all properties, connections, relationships by changing the parameters of the conditions.

experiment is the most active form of epistemological relationship in the “subject-object” system at the level of sensory cognition.

8. Levels of scientific knowledge: theoretical level.

The theoretical level of scientific knowledge is characterized by the predominance of the rational element - concepts, theories, laws and other forms of thinking and “mental operations”. Living contemplation, sensory cognition is not eliminated here, but becomes a subordinate (but very important) aspect of the cognitive process. Theoretical knowledge reflects phenomena and processes from their universal internal connections and patterns, comprehended through rational processing of empirical knowledge data.

A characteristic feature of theoretical knowledge is its focus on itself, internal scientific reflection, i.e., the study of the process of knowledge itself, its forms, techniques, methods, conceptual apparatus, etc. On the basis of theoretical explanation and known laws, prediction and scientific foresight of the future is carried out.

1. Formalization - display of content knowledge in a sign-symbolic form (formalized language). When formalizing, reasoning about objects is transferred to the plane of operating with signs (formulas), which is associated with the construction of artificial languages (the language of mathematics, logic, chemistry, etc.).

It is the use of special symbols that makes it possible to eliminate the ambiguity of words in ordinary, natural language. In formalized reasoning, each symbol is strictly unambiguous.

Formalization, therefore, is a generalization of the forms of processes that differ in content, and the abstraction of these forms from their content. It clarifies the content by identifying its form and can be carried out with varying degrees of completeness. But, as the Austrian logician and mathematician Gödel showed, there is always an undetected, unformalizable remainder in the theory. The ever-deepening formalization of the content of knowledge will never reach absolute completeness. This means that formalization is internally limited in its capabilities. It has been proven that there is no universal method that allows any reasoning to be replaced by calculation. Gödel's theorems provided a fairly rigorous justification for the fundamental impossibility of complete formalization of scientific reasoning and scientific knowledge in general.

2. The axiomatic method is a method of constructing a scientific theory in which it is based on certain initial provisions - axioms (postulates), from which all other statements of this theory are deduced from them in a purely logical way, through proof.

3. The hypothetico-deductive method is a method of scientific knowledge, the essence of which is to create a system of deductively interconnected hypotheses, from which statements about empirical facts are ultimately derived. The conclusion obtained on the basis of this method will inevitably be probabilistic in nature.

General structure of the hypothetico-deductive method:

a) familiarization with factual material that requires a theoretical explanation and an attempt to do so with the help of already existing theories and laws. If not, then:

b) putting forward conjectures (hypotheses, assumptions) about the causes and patterns of these phenomena using a variety of logical techniques;

c) assessing the validity and seriousness of assumptions and selecting the most probable from among many of them;

d) deducing consequences from a hypothesis (usually deductively) with clarification of its content;

e) experimental verification of the consequences derived from the hypothesis. Here the hypothesis either receives experimental confirmation or is refuted. However, confirmation of individual consequences does not guarantee its truth (or falsity) as a whole. The best hypothesis based on the test results becomes a theory.

4. Ascent from the abstract to the concrete - a method of theoretical research and presentation, consisting in the movement of scientific thought from the initial abstraction through successive stages of deepening and expanding knowledge to the result - a holistic reproduction of the theory of the subject under study. As its premise, this method includes an ascent from the sensory-concrete to the abstract, to the isolation in thinking of individual aspects of the subject and their “fixation” in the corresponding abstract definitions. The movement of knowledge from the sensory-concrete to the abstract is the movement from the individual to the general; logical techniques such as analysis and induction predominate here. The ascent from the abstract to the mentally-concrete is the process of movement from individual general abstractions to their unity, the concrete-universal; the methods of synthesis and deduction dominate here.

The essence of theoretical knowledge is not only the description and explanation of the variety of facts and patterns identified in the process of empirical research in a certain subject area, based on a small number of laws and principles, it is also expressed in the desire of scientists to reveal the harmony of the universe.

Theories can be presented in a variety of ways. We often encounter the tendency of scientists towards axiomatic construction of theories, which imitates the pattern of organization of knowledge created in geometry by Euclid. However, most often theories are presented genetically, gradually introducing the subject and revealing it sequentially from the simplest to more and more complex aspects.

Regardless of the accepted form of presentation of the theory, its content, of course, is determined by the basic principles that underlie it.

Aimed at explaining objective reality, it directly describes not the surrounding reality, but ideal objects that are characterized not by an infinite, but by a very specific number of properties:

fundamental theories

specific theories

Methods of the theoretical level of knowledge:

Idealization is a special epistemological relationship where the subject mentally constructs an object, the prototype of which is available in the real world.

Axiomatic method - This is a method of producing new knowledge, when it is based on axioms, from which all other statements are derived in a purely logical way, followed by a description of this conclusion.

Hypothetico-deductive method - This is a special technique for producing new but probable knowledge.

Formalization - This technique consists of constructing abstract models with the help of which real objects are studied.

Unity of the historical and logical - Any process of reality breaks down into phenomenon and essence, into its empirical history and the main line of development.

Thought experiment method. A thought experiment is a system of mental procedures carried out on idealized objects.