Chapter i. social and humanitarian knowledge and professional activities

Seminar No. 1

Topic: Humanities: features, development and significance of humanitarian knowledge.

Question No. 1. Content and development of humanitarian knowledge. The process and reasons for expanding humanities knowledge.

Humanities- this is the world of immediate human life, both past and present, and in some respects, future.

Humanitarian knowledge is the ability to navigate the world, in terms of what is happening, it is the ability to understand what is happening to us and why we need certain reforms, why we need certain innovations. Humanitarian knowledge changes a person’s consciousness, as it shapes his attitude to the world and allows him to look at it in a new way. The problem of self-determination is the most important humanitarian problem for humans

, because the method of self-determination organizes the whole life, and self-determination is a condition for a person to become successful.

The peculiarity of humanitarian knowledge is that it does not exist independently of a person, since a person himself develops it, rethinking what exists in the outside world, in culture (i.e. in all human experience). For example, he passes ideas or cultural values ​​through his “I” - his individual, and then they become his own, his individual concepts. Individuality here serves as a criterion. Humanitarian knowledge speaks of what was created by man throughout his history, and not of what arose naturally. The object of the humanities is the individual

The humanities include psychology (personality psychology, psychology of emotions, social psychology), civil history (here humanitarian knowledge is combined with social science), sociology, literary criticism, linguistics, etc. They study the spiritual world of man through text. A person always expresses himself (speaks), that is, he creates a text (even a potential one). Where a person is studied outside the text and independently of it, these are no longer the humanities (human anatomy and physiology, etc.

Humanitarian knowledge, just like natural scientific knowledge, strives to achieve truth, that is, to ensure that information about social phenomena is not simply accumulated, different ideas and views on the nature of man and society are not simply summarized, so that these ideas are not erroneous , were not delusions. It has always been important for humanity to understand itself, to understand a person, his actions and thoughts, the nature of his life and the changes that occur in it. Therefore, the problem of truth in humanitarian knowledge is of fundamental importance. Achieving truth in the humanities is achieved in many ways in specific, complex ways. The relationship between truth and error occurs in difficult conditions for a person to choose his life position. But the search for truth is concentrated primarily in humanitarian knowledge. And therefore, the formation of a worldview is greatly influenced by the level of a person’s humanitarian education. All humanitarian knowledge is permeated with worldview ideas. Knowledge about society

– history, jurisprudence, social psychology, sociology, etc. – is not just a collection of information obtained about the development of society and peoples, but at the same time their understanding from one point or another. The same completely applies to the sciences about man, for example, psychology, pedagogy. In society, a person always faces the problem of choice, and then humanitarian education, the level of this education creates the prerequisites for this choice to be made in the most civilized form, since humanitarian education allows a person not to start from scratch, but to use conscious universal human experience.

Question No. 2. Science as a form of knowledge, its features and significance. The science

Classifications of sciences:

on the subject and method of cognition : natural, social and humanitarian, about cognition and thinking, technical and mathematical;

by distance from practice : fundamental and applied.

Functions of science:

cultural and ideological,

cognitive-explanatory,

prognostic,

social (social forecasting, management and development).

Scientific knowledge– a special type of cognitive activity aimed at developing objective, systematically organized and substantiated knowledge about nature, man and society.

The main features of scientific knowledge are the following:

1. The main task of scientific knowledge is the discovery of objective laws of reality - natural, social, laws of knowledge itself, etc.

2. Science carries out the study not only of objects used in today's practice, but also of those that may become the subject of practical development in the future. Science deals, among other things, with predicting the future;

3. Science is characterized by objectivity, since the main goal of scientific knowledge is objective truth.

4. An essential feature of cognition is its systematic nature. Knowledge is transformed into scientific knowledge when the description and generalization of facts are brought to their inclusion in the theory;

5. Scientific knowledge is characterized by strict evidence, validity of the results obtained, reliability of the conclusions;

6. Verifiability of knowledge through experience and practice.

7. Use of scientific equipment.

There are two levels of scientific knowledge: empirical and theoretical.

The empirical level of scientific knowledge is characterized by direct research of actually existing objects. At this level of research, we are dealing with direct human interaction with the natural or social objects being studied; the process of accumulating information about the objects under study is carried out through observations, measurements, and experiments.

The primary systematization of the obtained factual data in the form of tables, diagrams, graphs, etc. is also carried out here.

The theoretical level of scientific knowledge is characterized by the predominance of the rational element - concepts, theories, laws and other forms and “mental operations”. There is no practical interaction with objects. The theoretical level is a higher level in scientific knowledge. The results of theoretical knowledge become hypotheses, theories, laws.

Humanitarian sciences- disciplines that study man in the sphere of his spiritual, mental, moral, cultural and social activities.

To date, the problem of classifying the social sciences and humanities has not been resolved. Some authors do not divide sciences into social and humanities, others do. The difference lies in the subject of study. For social sciences, this is society as a whole or its spheres (political, legal, economic, etc.). For the humanities, the subject of study is man and the spiritual products of his activity . In this regard, social sciences include social philosophy, history, sociology, economics, jurisprudence, and political science. The humanities can include cultural studies, religious studies, art history, psychology, linguistics, pedagogy, philosophical anthropology

.

The similarities between the social and human sciences are very great, so we can talk about the social and human sciences as a single science. Social sciences and humanities have their own specifics.. 1) the need to take into account the phenomenon

freedom Natural sciences study natural processes. 3) These processes just happen. Social sciences and humanities study human activity in the economic, legal, political, and artistic spheres. Human activity does not happen, but is accomplished. The processes of nature do not have freedom. Human activity is free (not absolutely, of course, but relatively). Therefore, it is less predictable than natural processes. In this regard, in the social sciences and humanities there is less certainty and more unpredictability.

2) high degree of uniqueness of the objects being studied very large. They not only broaden their horizons, but also accumulate experience and skills.

Studying social -humanist science, a person joins society, gets to know it, and forms his attitude towards others.

By delving into the study of at least one of the humanities, a person reveals himself and his potential. Humanities education helps a person find himself, defend his right to self-realization, self-determination, creates his cultural field, that is, takes on the burden of problems of ideological, general cultural, spiritual and intellectual development of the individual. Question No. 4. General characteristics of the social worldview. The role of the scientific study of society, its functioning and development.

Man is a rational social being. His activities are expedient. And in order to act expediently in the complex real world, he must not only know a lot, but also be able to do so. Be able to choose goals, be able to make this or that decision. To do this, he needs, first of all, a deep and correct understanding of the world. – – worldview.

Worldview

This is a system of views on the objective world and man’s place in it, on man’s relationship to the reality around him and to himself, as well as beliefs, ideals, principles of cognition and activity, and value orientations formed on the basis of these views. The classification of worldviews considers three main types of worldviews from the point of view of its socio-historical features:

Mythological type of worldview formed during the times of primitive people. Then people did not recognize themselves as individuals, did not distinguish themselves from the world around them, and saw the will of the gods in everything.

Paganism is the main element of the mythological type of worldview. Religious type of worldview just like mythological, it is based on belief in supernatural forces. A huge number of moral norms (commandments) and examples of correct behavior keeps society within certain limits and unites people of the same faith.

Worldview plays a significant role in a person’s life: it gives a person guidelines and goals for his activities; allows people to understand how best to achieve their goals, equips them with methods of cognition and activity; makes it possible to determine the true values ​​of life and culture.

Nowadays, society in its past and present is studying a whole complex of social sciences: history, sociology, philosophy, anthropology, political science, economics, cultural studies, etc. Each of these sciences examines certain aspects of social life. Social philosophy and sociology strive to embrace society as a whole, therefore they are given the most important role in the study of society. Sociology is a generalizing science in relation to other sciences that study society and man.

On the other hand, sociology depends on discoveries in other sciences, such as history, economics, and political science. All social sciences are interconnected and constitute one comprehensive science of society; they complement each other, although they highlight different aspects of the study.

The structure of modern scientific knowledge is formed by two types of sciences: 1) natural, or sciences about nature; 2) social and humanitarian, or spiritual sciences, the object of study of which is man and society. This division of sciences, proposed by the German philosopher, is based on V. Dilthey (1833-1911), lies the difference between the objects of natural science and social and humanitarian types of knowledge. Subsequently, German philosophers V. Windelband (1848-1915) and G. Rickert (1863-1936) made a distinction between natural science and social-humanitarian types of knowledge based on the methods they used. According to V. Windelband, natural science uses the nomothetic method (Greek nomos - law; tetio - establish), i.e. law-establishing; Social and humanitarian knowledge is characterized by the idiographic method (Greek idios - special, unusual; grapho - I write), i.e., describing the singular, individual. Natural science, V. Windelband believed, has as its goal the identification and formulation of general laws expressing stable and repeating connections between phenomena; Humanitarian knowledge (primarily history) sees its goal in recording and explaining specific, individual facts. According to G. Rickert, There is a generalizing (generalizing) method, with the help of which the researcher selects from the diversity of nature only repeating facts that indicate the presence of constant, stable connections between phenomena. Accordingly, in spiritual sciences an individualizing method is used, which consists in recording and explaining individual phenomena. Considering these methods as complementary, German philosophers, however, believed that the nomothetic, or generalizing, method in the European cultural tradition is perceived as a universal method of scientific knowledge, and its use acts as a criterion for the scientific nature of cognitive activity in general.

The authority of the natural sciences and the spiritual sciences, as well as the interpretation of their specific features, varies in the classical, non-classical and post-non-classical types of scientific rationality. Classical European science historically formed as experimental and mathematical natural science; she absolutized the generalizing method, considering it as the only method of scientific knowledge. Classical natural science was characterized by a focus on searching for a single, universal law of existence, embracing particular laws and expressing the presumption (assumption) of the universal harmony of nature. The law of universal gravitation discovered by I. Newton, which formed the basis of the classical mechanistic picture of nature, acted as such a universal law of the universe. The very idea of ​​the individual, individual, unique, not fitting into the framework of rigid laws, was rejected by classical natural science, declaring it the prerogative of the humanities, which - precisely because of this circumstance - were practically denied scientific status. Thus, the differences between the natural scientific and social-humanitarian types of knowledge are considered in the classical type of scientific rationality as differences, respectively, between scientific and non-scientific knowledge.

The absolutization of the natural scientific ideal of rationality, characteristic of classical science, with its desire to reduce (reduce) the diversity of real life to a finite number of the most general laws that fix repeating connections between phenomena, found its expression in the expansion of natural scientific methods into the social sciences and the formation of a nomothetic tradition in them. The mechanistic methodology of classical natural science was considered as a universal scientific methodology suitable for explaining not only nature, but also man and society. Emergence and disciplinary organization in the 19th century. such social and humanitarian sciences as sociology and psychology were associated with an orientation towards the natural scientific ideal of rationality, i.e. with the desire to explain social and humanitarian reality by analogy with natural reality, by seeing in it cause-and-effect relationships fixed in laws. An example of this, in particular, can be the Marxist interpretation of history, which tried to see the action of universal laws in the historical process and consider history in the form of a strictly determined, invariant cause-and-effect relationship of events.

The features of humanitarian knowledge can be most clearly demonstrated when it is compared with the classical type of natural science knowledge. The differences between natural science and social and humanitarian types of knowledge are due, firstly, to the specifics of the object of scientific research; secondly, the relationship of the cognizing subject to the cognized object; thirdly, the research methodology.

1. Nature as an object of natural scientific knowledge is not created by man, does not need him for its existence, and exists independently of his will and consciousness. In this sense, we can say that nature as an object of study is an objective reality, that is, existing without humans, reality. In the natural world there are laws of existence, laws of existence, which man has no power to change, but can only cognize.

Society, the social world, which is the object of social and humanitarian knowledge, is created by the person himself in the process of intersubjective interaction, i.e. communications, and exists thanks to the constant reproduction of acts of communication. At the same time, in the process of intersubjective interaction, socially significant acts of communication give rise to social institutions (an example of such an institution is the rule of law), which, being the result of human activity, begin to be perceived by a person as having the property of objectivity, that is, independence from him. The social, as it were, “envelops” a person, including him in the sphere of its energetic influence.

Thus, the object of classical natural science knowledge is nature as objective, non-human reality; the object of knowledge of social sciences and humanities is society as subjective-objective reality, that is, on the one hand, as a reality created and maintained by a person in the process of intersubjective interaction, on the other hand, as an objective reality, perceived by a person as opposing him.

2. The features of the objects of natural science and humanitarian knowledge determine the second difference between them: the relationship of the knowing subject to the cognizable object. In classical natural science, the relationship between the scientist and the object of research is characterized by a certain distance between them. Here the scientist confronts the world of observable objects as a reality external to him, which he influences using various tools and determining the conditions of the experiment. A natural scientist is never an immanent (integral) part of the object being studied, but observes it from the outside.

In the social and human sciences, the scientist (observer) is not distanced from the object of his research. This is due to the fact that the researcher of social relations himself is their participant, that is, he is included directly or indirectly in the objects and processes that he studies. Consequently, scientific observation in the social and humanities is carried out from within a cognizable object, which is played by society, state, nation, etc. Accordingly, the socio-political, national, confessional and other attachments of the researcher largely determine the choice of scientific problems, strategy and even their results research. Therefore, social and humanitarian knowledge, in contrast to natural science, very often turns out to be influenced by one or another ideology shared by the researcher.

So, natural science knowledge is characterized distance cognizing subject from the cognizable object, and social and humanitarian cognition, on the contrary, is inclusion cognizing subject into a cognizable object.

In addition, in classical natural science, nature is viewed as an object that passively lends itself to the boundless cognitive activity of the subject. In social and humanitarian knowledge, the object of knowledge directly or indirectly reveals itself as an active subject. Consequently, the cognitive activity of the subject in the social sciences is fundamentally limited and is associated with the self-revealing activity of the “object”.

Thus, the cognitive relationship in natural science, being subject-object, has monologue character; cognitive relationship in the social and human sciences, being subject-subjective, has dialogic character.

3. The classical natural scientific method of cognition as a research method is characterized by reductionism, that is, reducing the variety of observed phenomena to a finite set of the most general laws that would make it possible to predict the regular course of any processes in the future. Classical natural science sought to catalog the world, while everything individual, situational, that did not fit into the principles of cataloging accepted by the researcher, was considered as non-existent, as an error that could be neglected. In natural scientific knowledge, the main role is played by a monological explanation of reality in its cause-and-effect conditionality. The humanities, on the contrary, as already noted, are characterized by an appeal to reality in all its completeness and the inexhaustibility of individual manifestations. Here the main importance belongs no longer to a monological explanation, but to an understanding that “captures” in the process of research the individual characteristics of the phenomenon being studied.

Thus, if the most important thing for natural science is the generalizing explanation repeating facts, then for society - knowledge - discriminating understanding social phenomena.

An important feature of understanding, which distinguishes it from explanation, is the inherent human ability for transformation, imagination and intuition, with the help of which the interpreter (the subject of understanding) achieves an understanding of the spiritual world of the Other. To interpret the goals, intentions, motivations of the authors of the texts, as well as any actions of people as conscious beings, it is necessary to understand them (to stand in the place of the Other). The situation is completely different in nature, where blind, unconscious forces operate and where, therefore, there is no deliberate activity as such. It is for this reason that in natural science the main attention was paid to issues of explanation, because they are not associated with the analysis of goal setting and motivation. Explanatory knowledge should not be opposed to understanding. They complement each other. Knowledge is always textual and has a general character, understanding is contextual and therefore has an individual character. But scientific communication includes both the general and the individual.

In non-classical and especially in modern post-non-classical science, a critical revision of the features of classical natural science knowledge was carried out, which led to the emergence of a tendency to remove the strict division between the natural science and humanitarian types of knowledge. Within the framework of synergetics as the leading direction of post-non-classical science, a program for bringing together natural science and humanities types of knowledge is substantiated, which creates ample opportunities for interdisciplinary dialogue.

Social sciences, their classification

Society is such a complex object that science alone cannot study it. Only by combining the efforts of many sciences can we fully and consistently describe and study the most complex formation that exists in this world, human society. The totality of all sciences that study society as a whole is called social studies. These include philosophy, history, sociology, economics, political science, psychology and social psychology, anthropology and cultural studies. These are fundamental sciences, consisting of many subdisciplines, sections, directions, and scientific schools.

Social science, having emerged later than many other sciences, incorporates their concepts and specific results, statistics, tabular data, graphs and conceptual diagrams, and theoretical categories.

The entire set of sciences related to social science is divided into two types - social And humanitarian.

If the social sciences are the sciences of human behavior, then the humanities are the sciences of the spirit. It can be said differently, the subject of social sciences is society, the subject of humanities is culture. The main subject of social sciences is study of human behavior.

Sociology, psychology, social psychology, economics, political science, as well as anthropology and ethnography (the science of peoples) belong to social sciences . They have a lot in common, they are closely related and form a kind of scientific union. Adjacent to it is a group of other related disciplines: philosophy, history, art history, cultural studies, literary studies. They are classified as humanitarian knowledge.

Since representatives of neighboring sciences constantly communicate and enrich each other with new knowledge, the boundaries between social philosophy, social psychology, economics, sociology and anthropology can be considered very conditional. At their intersection, interdisciplinary sciences are constantly emerging, for example, social anthropology appeared at the intersection of sociology and anthropology, and economic psychology appeared at the intersection of economics and psychology. In addition, there are such integrative disciplines as legal anthropology, sociology of law, economic sociology, cultural anthropology, psychological and economic anthropology, historical sociology.

Let's get acquainted more thoroughly with the specifics of the leading social sciences:

Economy- a science that studies the principles of organizing the economic activities of people, the relations of production, exchange, distribution and consumption that are formed in every society, formulates the grounds for the rational behavior of producers and consumers of goods. Economics also studies the behavior of large masses of people in a market situation. In small and large - in public and private life - people cannot take a step without affecting economic relations. When negotiating a job, buying goods on the market, counting our income and expenses, demanding payment of wages, and even going on a visit, we - directly or indirectly - take into account the principles of economy.

Sociology– a science that studies the relationships that arise between groups and communities of people, the nature of the structure of society, problems of social inequality and the principles of resolving social conflicts.

Political science– a science that studies the phenomenon of power, the specifics of social management, and the relationships that arise in the process of carrying out government activities.

Psychology- the science of the laws, mechanisms and facts of the mental life of humans and animals. The main theme of psychological thought in antiquity and the Middle Ages is the problem of the soul. Psychologists study stable and repetitive behavior in individual behavior. The focus is on problems of perception, memory, thinking, learning and development of the human personality. There are many branches of knowledge in modern psychology, including psychophysiology, zoopsychology and comparative psychology, social psychology, child psychology and educational psychology, developmental psychology, occupational psychology, creativity psychology, medical psychology, etc.

Anthropology - the science of the origin and evolution of man, the formation of human races, and the normal variations in the physical structure of man. She studies primitive tribes that have survived today from primitive times in the lost corners of the planet: their customs, traditions, culture, behavior patterns.

Social Psychology studies small group(family, group of friends, sports team). Social psychology is a frontier discipline. She was formed at the intersection of sociology and psychology, taking on tasks that her parents were unable to solve. It turned out that a large society does not directly influence the individual, but through an intermediary - small groups. This world of friends, acquaintances and relatives closest to a person plays an exceptional role in our lives. In general, we live in small, not large worlds - in a specific house, in a specific family, in a specific company, etc. The small world sometimes influences us even more than the big one. That is why science appeared, which took it closely and very seriously.

Story- one of the most important sciences in the system of social and humanitarian knowledge. The object of its study is man and his activities throughout the existence of human civilization. The word “history” is of Greek origin and means “research”, “search”. Some scholars believed that the object of studying history is the past. The famous French historian M. Blok categorically objected to this. “The very idea that the past as such can be an object of science is absurd.”

The emergence of historical science dates back to the times of ancient civilizations. The “father of history” is considered to be the ancient Greek historian Herodotus, who compiled a work dedicated to the Greco-Persian wars. However, this is hardly fair, since Herodotus used not so much historical data as legends, legends and myths. And his work cannot be considered completely reliable. There are much more reasons to consider Thucydides, Polybius, Arrian, Publius Cornelius Tacitus, and Ammianus Marcellinus to be considered the fathers of history. These ancient historians used documents, their own observations, and eyewitness accounts to describe events. All ancient peoples considered themselves historiographers and revered history as a teacher of life. Polybius wrote: “lessons drawn from history most surely lead to enlightenment and prepare us for engaging in public affairs; the story of the trials of other people is the most intelligible or the only teacher that teaches us to courageously endure the vicissitudes of fate.”

And although, over time, people began to doubt that history could teach subsequent generations not to repeat the mistakes of previous ones, the importance of studying history was not disputed. The most famous Russian historian V.O. Klyuchevsky wrote in his reflections on history: “History teaches nothing, but only punishes for ignorance of the lessons.”

Culturology I am primarily interested in the world of art - painting, architecture, sculpture, dance, forms of entertainment and mass spectacles, institutions of education and science. The subjects of cultural creativity are a) individuals, b) small groups, c) large groups. In this sense, cultural studies covers all types of associations of people, but only to the extent that it concerns the creation of cultural values.

Demography studies population - the entire multitude of people who make up human society. Demography is primarily interested in how they reproduce, how long they live, why and in what numbers they die, and where large masses of people move. She looks at man partly as a natural, partly as a social being. All living things are born, die and reproduce. These processes are influenced primarily by biological laws. For example, science has proven that a person cannot live more than 110-115 years. This is its biological resource. However, the vast majority of people live to be 60-70 years old. But this is today, and two hundred years ago the average life expectancy did not exceed 30-40 years. Even today, people in poor and underdeveloped countries live less than in rich and highly developed countries. In humans, life expectancy is determined both by biological and hereditary characteristics, and by social conditions (life, work, rest, nutrition).

Social cognition- this is knowledge of society. Understanding society is a very complex process for a number of reasons.

1. Society is the most complex of the objects of knowledge. In social life, all events and phenomena are so complex and diverse, so different from each other and so intricately intertwined that it is very difficult to detect certain patterns in it.

2. In social cognition, not only material (as in natural science), but also ideal, spiritual relationships are studied. These relationships are much more complex, diverse and contradictory than connections in nature.

3. In social cognition, society acts both as an object and as a subject of cognition: people create their own history, and they also know it.

When talking about the specifics of social cognition, extremes should be avoided. On the one hand, it is impossible to explain the reasons for Russia’s historical lag using Einstein’s theory of relativity. On the other hand, one cannot assert that all the methods by which nature is studied are unsuitable for social science.

The primary and elementary method of cognition is observation. But it differs from the observation that is used in natural science when observing the stars. In social science, cognition concerns animate objects endowed with consciousness. And if, for example, the stars, even after many years of observation of them, remain completely unperturbed in relation to the observer and his intentions, then in public life everything is different. As a rule, a reverse reaction is detected on the part of the object being studied, something that makes observation impossible from the very beginning, or interrupts it somewhere in the middle, or introduces interference into it that significantly distorts the results of the study. Therefore, non-participant observation in social science does not provide sufficiently reliable results. Another method is needed, which is called participant observation. It is carried out not from the outside, not from the outside in relation to the object being studied (social group), but from within it.

For all its significance and necessity, observation in social science demonstrates the same fundamental shortcomings as in other sciences. While observing, we cannot change the object in the direction that interests us, regulate the conditions and course of the process being studied, or reproduce it as many times as required to complete the observation. Significant shortcomings of observation are largely overcome in experiment.

The experiment is active and transformative. In an experiment we interfere with the natural course of events. According to V.A. Stoff, an experiment can be defined as a type of activity undertaken for the purpose of scientific knowledge, the discovery of objective laws and consisting of influencing the object (process) under study using special tools and devices. Thanks to the experiment, it is possible to: 1) isolate the object under study from the influence of side, insignificant phenomena that obscure its essence and study it in its “pure” form; 2) repeatedly reproduce the course of the process under strictly fixed, controllable and accountable conditions; 3) systematically change, vary, combine various conditions in order to obtain the desired result.

Social experiment has a number of significant features.

1. The social experiment is of a concrete historical nature. Experiments in the field of physics, chemistry, biology can be repeated in different eras, in different countries, because the laws of natural development do not depend on the form and type of production relations, or on national and historical characteristics. Social experiments aimed at transforming the economy, the national-state structure, the system of upbringing and education, etc., can give not only different, but also directly opposite results in different historical eras, in different countries.

2. The object of a social experiment has a much lesser degree of isolation from similar objects remaining outside the experiment and from all the influences of a given society as a whole. Here, such reliable isolating devices as vacuum pumps, protective screens, etc., used in the process of a physical experiment, are impossible. This means that a social experiment cannot be carried out with a sufficient degree of approximation to “pure conditions”.

3. A social experiment places increased demands on compliance with “safety precautions” during its implementation compared to natural science experiments, where even experiments carried out by trial and error are acceptable. A social experiment at any point in its course constantly has a direct impact on the well-being, well-being, physical and mental health of the people involved in the “experimental” group. Underestimation of any detail, any failure during the experiment can have a detrimental effect on people and no good intentions of its organizers can justify this.

4. A social experiment may not be conducted for the purpose of obtaining direct theoretical knowledge. Conducting experiments (experiments) on people is inhumane in the name of any theory. A social experiment is an ascertaining, confirming experiment.

One of the theoretical methods of cognition is historical method research, i.e., a method that reveals significant historical facts and stages of development, which ultimately makes it possible to create a theory of the object, revealing the logic and patterns of its development.

Another method is modeling. Modeling is understood as a method of scientific knowledge in which research is carried out not on the object of interest to us (the original), but on its substitute (analogue), similar to it in certain respects. As in other branches of scientific knowledge, modeling in social science is used when the subject itself is not available for direct study (say, does not yet exist at all, for example, in predictive studies), or this direct study requires enormous costs, or it is impossible due to ethical considerations.

In his goal-setting activities, from which history is formed, man has always strived to comprehend the future. Interest in the future has especially intensified in the modern era in connection with the formation of the information and computer society, in connection with those global problems that call into question the very existence of humanity. Foresight came out on top.

Scientific foresight represents such knowledge about the unknown, which is based on already known knowledge about the essence of the phenomena and processes that interest us and about the trends in their further development. Scientific foresight does not claim absolutely accurate and complete knowledge of the future, or its mandatory reliability: even carefully verified and balanced forecasts are justified only with a certain degree of reliability.

100 RUR bonus for first order

Select the type of work Diploma work Course work Abstract Master's thesis Practice report Article Report Review Test work Monograph Problem solving Business plan Answers to questions Creative work Essay Drawing Essays Translation Presentations Typing Other Increasing the uniqueness of the text Master's thesis Laboratory work On-line help

Find out the price

In modern scientific knowledge, the following main types (forms) can be distinguished:

1) Knowledge of nature and the corresponding class of sciences (natural science).

2) Knowledge of man and science – Humanities or Humanities.

3) Knowledge of society – Social science (social sciences).

4) Knowledge of knowledge itself - epistemology and epistemology (studies the sources, methods and forms of scientific knowledge).

5) Knowledge of thinking - logic.

In the structure of modern scientific knowledge, the following classes of sciences are distinguished:

1) Logical and mathematical sciences;

2) Natural sciences;

3) Engineering and technical (technological);

4) Social sciences and humanities

Social sciences and humanities.

Two opposing approaches:

1) There are no social sciences - only humanities, because a person is an object.

2) There is no humanities science, only social sciences and humanities. Because a person in society!

The main goal of the block of social and human sciences is knowledge of man, knowledge of society, culture that serves this process.

Correlation of SGBV with natural scientific knowledge.

1) By their nature, natural science and humanitarian knowledge are identical, only the object is different (positivism). There is the concept of science and the structure of scientific knowledge, respectively, if SGBN is a discipline, then there are no special differences between SGBN and natural science.

2) These are generally incomparable things:

Naturalism: these sciences are different, but the methods and methods themselves are identical. The tools are the same.

Humanities: completely different, specific methods, etc. What works in the natural sciences does not work in the social and humanities.

The specifics of any block of sciences are determined by the subject and object of study, but all sciences have something in common: the process of general methodology. General – general scientific methods, tools and techniques (deduction, induction, analysis, synthesis). But each science has a specific picture of the world and specific means and methods of cognition.

Within the framework of the social and humanitarian sciences, we can conditionally distinguish a subtype of the humanities (philosophy, history, psychology, cultural studies, philology, etc.) and social sciences (economics, sociology, political science, jurisprudence, demography, ethnography, etc.)

In the social and humanities one can distinguish fundamental and applied scientific disciplines.

Fundamental:

Philosophy:

History of Philosophy;

Epistemology;

Social philosophy;

Aesthetics, etc.

Recent history;

National history…

Economic:

Political economy;

History of economic thought;

Labor Economics.

Applied:

Sociology – micro- and macrosociology.

Features of social sciences and humanities:

Society, unlike natural science, is an abstract object that cannot be isolated as in natural science. To highlight an object, some theory is used to delineate a person or society, since, for example, a person of the 17th and 19th centuries are different phenomena.

1) The problem of identifying the object and subject of science

The object is reality (a fragment of reality) or theory has a hand

A subject is a transformed object that is transformed based on the goals and means of research. A compressed object to the level of an object is what the nature of the object has been transformed into, and not a cut out piece, a mental construction.

2) Orientation of scientific research in the social sciences and humanities. The orientation says: the principle of historicism is an integral element of the social sciences and humanities; everything is considered only in movement, in dynamics!

3) When studying man and society, the researcher must focus on the nature of these phenomena, the corresponding language, way of life, forms of behavior, historical period of development, etc.

4) In the social and human sciences, the role of understanding is great as the comprehension of reality and as the study of the meaning embedded in reality. Hermeneutics studies the problem of understanding.

5) In the social sciences and humanities there is a specific set of methods, techniques, means, methods, approaches to the study of reality, which is united by the term methodology of the social sciences and humanities. At the same time, general scientific methods undergo purification and appropriate interpretation before their application in social and humanitarian knowledge.

Many people think that social and humanitarian knowledge are the same, because both study, first of all, people. However, this is a misconception - these areas of knowledge still have differences (and quite significant ones).

To better understand the difference between social and humanitarian knowledge, it is necessary to give a clear definition of each of them.

Quick navigation through the article

Humanities

The humanities are often sharply contrasted with the exact or natural sciences. Exact sciences are based on specifics. In the humanities there are also clear definitions of concepts and phenomena, but at the same time they are open to interpretation. The humanities include: history, law, aesthetics, ethics, literature, languages ​​and others.

They represent knowledge about a person: about his spiritual essence, culture, morality, relationship with society and his mentality.

Social knowledge

Social knowledge represents certain aspects of a person’s life that are related to his social life. Social sciences use humanities knowledge from pedagogy, psychology, ethics and other sciences in their research.

Sometimes social sciences are classified as subsections of the humanities, because they equally convey a subjective understanding of reality.

Differences

• Humanitarian knowledge differs from social knowledge in that humanitarian knowledge is often aimed at studying abstract phenomena in which each person must find something of his own.
• Social knowledge is always aimed at a person as a part of society.
• Sociology is also different in that, in addition to theoretical aspects, it also conducts various practical research: surveys and testing.
• Humanitarian knowledge is basically only theoretical.
• Social knowledge is focused on studying not only a person as a part of society, but also the relationships of a person in a team, the structures of society, history and the laws of its development.

Some sciences can be simultaneously classified as sociological and humanitarian. For example, history.

If a historian studies trends in the development of humanity as a whole, then he examines history from a social science point of view. And if a historian analyzes personal factors influencing a particular person, he thinks like a humanist.

It turns out that social and humanitarian knowledge interpenetrate each other. Consequently, social and humanitarian knowledge differ in the projection in which they consider a person.