What is the difference between the humanities and the natural sciences. Humanities and natural sciences

A person has knowledge about the surrounding nature (the Universe), about himself and his own works. This divides all the information he has into two large sections - natural science (natural in the sense that what is being studied is what exists independently of a person, as opposed to artificial - created by a person) and humanitarian (from "homo" - a person) knowledge, knowledge about man and the spiritual products of his activity. In addition, there is technical knowledge - knowledge about the specific material products of human activity (Table 5.2.).

Typology of sciences

Table 5.2

As follows from the definition, the differences between the natural sciences and the humanities lie in the fact that the former are based on the separation of the subject (human) and the object (the nature that the human-subject cognizes), with predominant attention paid to the object, and the latter are related primarily to the subject itself.

Natural science in the full sense of the word is generally valid and gives a "generic" truth, i.e. truth suitable and accepted by all people. Therefore, it has traditionally been regarded as the standard of scientific objectivity. Another large complex of sciences - the humanities, on the contrary, has always been associated with group values ​​and interests that both the scientist himself and the subject of research have. Therefore, in the methodology of the humanities, along with objective research methods, the experience of the event under study, the subjective attitude towards it, etc., become of great importance.

So, the main differences between the natural, humanitarian and technical sciences are that natural science studies the world as it exists independently of man, the humanities study the spiritual products of human activity, and the technical sciences study the material products of human activity.

However, in principle, it is impossible to draw a clear line between the natural, humanities and technical sciences, since there are a number of disciplines that occupy an intermediate position or are complex in nature. Thus, economic geography is at the intersection of natural and human sciences, bionics is at the intersection of natural and technical sciences, and social ecology is a complex discipline that includes natural, humanitarian, and technical sections.

Separate from the three cycles of sciences, there is mathematics, which is also subdivided into separate disciplines. Of the three cycles, mathematics is closest to natural science, and this connection is manifested in the fact that mathematical methods are widely used in the natural sciences, especially in physics.

The results of scientific research are theories, laws, models, hypotheses, empirical generalizations. All these concepts can be combined in one word - "concepts". Having clarified the main features of modern science, we can define natural science. This is a branch of science based on the reproducible empirical testing of hypotheses and the creation of theories or empirical generalizations that describe natural phenomena.

The subject of natural science is facts and phenomena that are perceived by our senses or devices that are their continuation. The scientist's task is to generalize these facts and create a theoretical model that includes the laws that govern natural phenomena. It is necessary to distinguish: 1) the facts of experience, 2) empirical generalizations, 3) theories that formulate the laws of science. Phenomena, such as gravitation, are directly given in experience; the laws of science, such as the law of universal gravitation, are options for explaining phenomena. The facts of science, once established, retain their permanent significance; laws can be changed in the course of the development of science, as, say, the law of universal gravitation was corrected after the creation of the theory of relativity.

The ratio of feelings and reason in the process of finding the truth is a complex philosophical issue. In science, that position is recognized as true, which is confirmed by reproducible experience. The basic principle of natural science is that knowledge of nature must be subject to empirical verification. Not in the sense that every particular statement must necessarily be empirically verified, but in the sense that experience is ultimately the decisive argument for accepting a given theory.

The first science was astronomy(from the Greek "astron" - star and "nomos" - law) - the science of the structure and development of cosmic bodies and their systems. Let us pay attention to the fact that the second root in the name of this science is nomos, and not logos - knowledge, as is usual in the name of sciences (biology, geology, etc.). This is due to historical reasons. The fact is that in this period there already existed astrology, which was not a science, but was engaged in compiling horoscopes (this continues to be fashionable today, and astrological forecasts are published in many publications). To distinguish the scientific study of the Universe from the non-scientific one, a new name was required, in which the word “law” is present, reflecting the fact that science is aimed at studying the laws of development and functioning of the world. The first truly scientific theory was the heliocentric system of the world, created by the Polish scientist N. Copernicus.

In the 17th century there appeared physics(from the Greek "fusis" - nature). The name is explained by the fact that in ancient Greece, physics was understood as a science that studies all objects of nature. As other natural sciences appeared, the subject of physics was limited. The first of the physical disciplines was mechanics - the science of the movement of natural bodies, and its first major achievements were the laws of motion of the English scientist I. Newton and the law of universal gravitation discovered by him. Also in the 17th century appeared chemistry- the science of the composition and structure of bodies, and in the XVIII century. - biology(from the Greek "bios" - life) as the science of living bodies.

Humanities, of which they are social and humanitarian (public) - sciences that study society, began to develop later. The first of them - sociology, whose name was proposed by O. Comte by analogy with the name of the science of living nature - biology. The fact that it was Comte who proposed the new science is not accidental. He was the founder of a new philosophical direction - positivism and believed that human thinking went through three stages in its development - theological, metaphysical and positive (scientific), the latter more fruitful, since it is based on empirical (experimental) testing of hypotheses and theories, discovering the laws of nature. According to Comte, scientific thinking was first established in the study of nature. Natural sciences arose - astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology. Then the scientific approach was to triumph in the study of society, and the science of the laws of social development can be called sociology.

However, if we now define sociology as the science of society, then this will not be accurate. The fact is that in the XIX-XX centuries. other sciences that study individual social phenomena appeared. In the first half of the XIX century. appeared political science, and in the second half of the 19th century. - ethnography, later, in the middle of the 20th century, cultural studies and other humanities. This is a natural process of development of science. Once upon a time, physics arose as a science of nature, but if we now call it a science of nature, then we will be wrong. Now it is one of the sciences of nature, since others have appeared - astronomy, chemistry, biology. In order to distinguish physics from other natural sciences, a more precise definition must be given. The same must be done with respect to sociology.

The difference between the natural sciences and the humanities is deeply rooted in the difference in their methodology. In methodology - the doctrine of methods, approaches, methods of scientific research - it is argued that each science has its own special methodology. The difference between explanation (as the methodology of the natural sciences) and understanding (as the methodology of the humanities) will become clearer if we consider the situation of the formation of methodology in sociology. Sociology, according to Comte, recognizes the priority of the whole over the part and synthesis over analysis. In this, its methodology differs from the methodology of the sciences of inanimate nature, in which, on the contrary, the priority of the part over the whole and of analysis over synthesis takes place.

After the task of creating sociology was formulated, the next step was to introduce into sociological research the scientific method that had been formulated in the natural sciences. What F. Bacon demanded for the development of science in modern times, E. Durkheim repeated for sociology, setting the task of identifying the “foundations of the experimental order”, which should be part of the humanities. It was about the status of the empirical level of research in sociology. In The Method of Sociology, Durkheim for the first time formulated a clear idea of ​​the methodology of sociology, which was contained in general terms in the teachings of Comte, but was not developed with such exhaustive completeness. Durkheim can be considered the founder of the methodology of sociology, since he was the first to determine the conditions under which research becomes scientific.

In his methodological writings, Durkheim emphasized that sociologists should study their subject just as openly as natural scientists. “Thus, our rule ... requires only one thing: that the sociologist plunge into the state of mind in which physicists, chemists, physiologists find themselves when they enter a new, as yet unexplored field of their science.” Durkheim identifies two formulas designed to justify the existence of the subject of sociology and its accessibility to empirical research. First: social facts should be considered as things, i.e. observe social facts from the outside - objectively as existing independently of the consciousness of the researcher. This view is called positivism in sociology.

Durkheim himself preferred the word "rationalism". Social facts, he believed, have properties that are not contained in the human mind, since society is not reduced to the totality of its members. Durkheim argued that society is not just a sum of individuals, but a system created by their union, a special reality with its own characteristics. Therefore, social life must be explained by sociological, and not by psychological or any other reasons. Between psychology and sociology, according to Durkheim, there is the same gap as between biology and the physical and chemical sciences. Thus, Durkheim justified his approach by the presence of special emergent properties of social systems formed due to sociocultural interaction studied by sociology.

Durkheim also formulated the ratio of theoretical research and practical recommendations. “However, we will be able to rise to this ideal only after we observe reality and single out this ideal from it.” In Durkheim's methodology, the classifications that he had after formulating the hypothesis were of great importance.

The positivist approach in sociology was opposed by the approach of M. Weber, who took into account fundamental differences between the subject of the humanities and the natural sciences: 1) the great complexity of social systems; 2) social reality depends on both objective and subjective factors; 3) social research includes personal, group and ideological interests; 4) the possibilities of experiment in the social sciences are limited both in terms of obtaining results and in terms of testing them, and one often has to be content with observation.

These differences in the subject determine the specifics of the humanities. It is characterized by the following features: 1) historicity - when a person becomes an object of knowledge, it is quite natural to show interest in the special features of an individual, community, era; 2) connection with culture - the need to understand the values ​​that guide people who create culture (value judgment is subjective, but consideration of values ​​is necessary in humanitarian research for their organization and selection of facts); 3) in the humanities we are talking not about a hypothetical-deductive system, as in natural ones, but about a set of interpretations, each of which is based on a selection of facts and is inextricably linked with a system of values; 4) if in the natural sciences it is possible to explain the observed phenomena by means of premises that are mathematical in form and nature, and understanding is thus of an indirect nature, then in the humanities, understanding turns out to be direct, since human behavior is an outwardly manifested meaningfulness of individuals endowed with reason.

The specificity of sociology as a science led M. Weber to the conclusion that while the natural sciences are aimed at explanations, the social sciences at understanding.“All social, meaningful human behavior is an expression of motivated mental states, that consequently the social scientist cannot be satisfied with observing social processes simply as a sequence of 'outwardly related' events, and that the establishment of correlations or even universal connections in this sequence of events cannot be on the contrary, he must construct "ideal types" or "models of motivation", terms in which he seeks to "understand" overt social behavior. According to Weber, the search for truth in sociology is impossible without a sensual attitude to the object of study, experience and "getting used" to it. M. Weber called sociology an "understanding" science, i.e. searching for the meaning of social actions of people. An "understanding sociology" looks at phenomena from within, not in terms of their physical or psychological properties, but in terms of their meaning.

The goal of the humanities, according to Weber, is twofold: to provide an explanation of causal relationships, as well as an understanding interpretation of the behavior of human communities. At the beginning of humanitarian research, one should build an ideal-typical construction of an individual historical event. M. Weber introduced a methodologically important concept in sociology "ideal type". The ideal type is associated with the category of understanding, since any ideal type is the establishment of meaningful connections inherent in any historical integrity or sequence of events. In the ideal type, not features common to all historical individuals and not average characteristics are singled out, but typical features of the phenomenon as such. An ideal type should not be confused with an ideal. The ideal type relates to reality, while the ideal leads to a value judgment. There can be an ideal type of any phenomenon, including a negative one.

To make it easier to understand what the ideal type is, it is useful to compare it with the types depicted in works of art: the type of a superfluous person, a landowner, a Turgenev girl, etc. It is only necessary to keep in mind that the creation of types in works of art is the ultimate goal, while in sociological research it is only a means of constructing a theory. Weber especially emphasized, in contrast to positivism, that "ideal types" are not derived from empirical reality, but are constructed theoretically. They are a special kind of empirical generalizations. Thus, the humanities are both understanding and causal at the same time. Thus, the two goals of humanitarian research are combined - to explain and understand. If Comte substantiated the need for sociology as a science, Durkheim - its irreducibility to other sciences, its independent status, then Weber substantiated the specifics of sociology.

It can be considered that in modern sociology both approaches complement each other. It is recognized that sociology “is both understanding and explanatory. Understanding because it brings out the logic or implied rationality of individual or collective actions. Explanatory - because it builds patterns and includes private, individual actions in integrity, which give them meaning. Thus, in a full-fledged humanitarian research, the positive (rational) position of the scientist does not necessarily have to resist the inclusion of his feelings. A holistic study can only be carried out by a holistic person. Therefore, both methodological approaches can be used together.

• Durkheim E. Sociology. Its subject, method, purpose. S. 13.
• Durkheim E. On the division of social labor. S. 41.
• American sociological thought. M., 1996. S. 528.
• Aron R. Stages of development of sociological thought. M.: Progress, 1993. S. 595.

The sciences of man, his life in society. They arose during the times and within the framework of scholasticism. Philosophy was defined first as the science of human actions. The source and means of knowledge in such sciences was the word and thoughts and their interpretation. Now to…… Fundamentals of spiritual culture (encyclopedic dictionary of a teacher)

Encyclopedia of Sociology

HUMANITARIAN SCIENCES- see Human knowledge. Big psychological dictionary. Moscow: Prime EUROZNAK. Ed. B.G. Meshcheryakova, acad. V.P. Zinchenko. 2003 ... Great Psychological Encyclopedia

HUMANISM, HUMANITARIAN SCIENCES The sciences and arts, the study of which leads to the harmonious development of a person's mental and moral powers. In the Middle Ages, classical languages ​​\u200b\u200band their literatures were revered as such, to which mainly ... ... Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language

Humanitarian sciences- social sciences (history, political economy, philology, etc.) in contrast to the natural and technical sciences. Oddly enough, the humanities for the most part study predominantly non-humanoid processes ... Theoretical aspects and foundations of the ecological problem: interpreter of words and idiomatic expressions

HUMANITARIAN SCIENCES- in a broad sense, the science of all products of human activity (the science of culture). In a more special sense, the science of the products of the spiritual creative activity of man (the science of the spirit). They are distinguished from the natural sciences that study nature, ... ... Philosophy of Science: Glossary of Basic Terms

Humanitarian sciences- (from Latin humanitas human nature, education) social sciences that study a person and his culture (as opposed to natural and technical sciences) ... Research activity. Vocabulary

HUMANITARIAN SCIENCES- English. humanities; German Humanwissenschaften. Sciences that study the phenomena of culture in their various manifestations and development (for example, literature); G. n., with an emphasis on social. the nature of human activity and his works, are societies, sciences ... ... Explanatory Dictionary of Sociology

Humanitarian sciences- Philosophy, art criticism, literary criticism ... Sociology: a dictionary

division of social and human sciences into social and human sciences- DIVISION OF THE SOCIAL HUMANITIES INTO SOCIAL AND HUMANITIES A methodological approach based on the heterogeneity of the sciences of man and society and problematizing the concept of "social humanities". On the one hand, there is... ... Encyclopedia of Epistemology and Philosophy of Science

Books

• Russian professorship (XVIII - early XX century). Humanitarian sciences. Biographical Sciences. Volume 1. A-I, V. A. Volkov, M. V. Kulikova, V. S. Loginov. The volume contains biographies of professors who occupied humanities departments in higher educational institutions of Russia - theologians, historians, philologists, philosophers, economists and linguists. Peculiarity…
• Humanities Univ. enc. schoolboy, Arranged in alphabetical order, encyclopedic articles on history, regional studies, art, social sciences and other humanities will not only help schoolchildren ...

Natural and human sciences. What is more important for humanity?

Round table " The image of science through the eyes of natural scientists and the humanities»

Topic Discussion:
Is there a confrontation between the naturalists and the humanities in science?

Is there a skeptical attitude towards the activities of the humanities among natural scientists? With what it can be connected?
Among postmodern philosophers and culturologists, statements are increasingly heard about the surrender of their positions by natural science, that the natural sciences have ceased to be leaders of scientific knowledge in the face of the existential problems of man. Is it possible to speak of a conflict between the socio-humanitarian and natural science communities?
What are the standards of evidence in the humanities and sciences?
Are there fundamental differences in the standards of scientific activity, in understanding the reliability of knowledge, methods, methods of verification in the natural and human sciences?
Will the humanities evolve according to the model and standard of the sciences of the natural, mathematical? Is it possible to formalize socio-humanitarian knowledge?

Leading:

Baranets Natalya Grigorievna - Doctor of Philosophy Sciences, Professor of the Department of Philosophy

Members:

Bazhanov Valentin Alexandrovich - Doctor of Philosophy n., professor, head. department of philosophy.

Zubova Irina Lvovna - Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of National History.

Uchaikin Vladimir Vasilievich - Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, Professor, Head. Department of Theoretical Physics.

Zhuravlev Viktor Mikhailovich - Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, Professor of the Department of Theoretical Physics.

Veryovkin Andrey Borisovich - Candidate of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Algebro-Geometric Computing.

I don’t know if there is a confrontation between the naturalists and the humanities. I'll tell you what I know better. Both of them work in our department, but there is neither cooperation nor clash. Everyone has his own clearing, which he develops, and so it is in all science. In this discussion, they try to find some connecting bridges, but it seems to me that this rarely happens in life, indifference prevails.

More realistic, I think, is the confrontation between science and rationalism in general with a wave of mysticism and religiosity.

Dear Alexey!

You probably rightly described the current situation in. But still, it was at your department that the construction of connecting bridges between teachers of various departments and faculties of the university began. And suddenly it will be possible to create science community like-minded people? While the process of formation is going on, and the number of participants is not very large, and few people know about it, but there are definitely no indifferent among them.

On the other hand, NITI is gaining strength, connecting theorists and experimenters of several faculties. Perhaps this is a ripe need, since the initiative arose "from below" without instructions from the leadership.

Recently, on television (the TV worked in the background), a short phrase from one of the interlocutors made a vivid impression. Among the lengthy, unintelligible arguments, overloaded with specific terms, a calm, quiet voice suddenly sounded, so convincing that it involuntarily made me listen. Only at the end was it possible to read in the credits what he said Mezhuev Vadim Mikhailovich, doctor of philosophical science. Here is roughly his statement:

Religion is responsible for we were kind.

The science is responsible for we were strong, it equips us with knowledge and technology.

BUT philosophy is responsible for we were free. Philosophy there is bundle, which allows combine faith in higher values ​​and scientific knowledge.

Yes, Mezhuev Vadim Mikhailovich, a wise man. From his scientific paper (written no later than 2008):

The modern world is the ultimate informatized world, in which the extended reproduction information technologies becomes the main source of progress. It is no longer possible to manage such a world as it was done in industrial societies. An economy based on information technology is transforming person with information and capable of generating new knowledge, in main capital, the main productive force of society.

EdwardSnowden- definitely capital.

Uchaikin Vladimir Vasilievich has a formula that allows describing a chaotic process in which the participants in the process have a memory of the events of the past (have a memory). If I somewhat distorted the thought of the respected Uchaikin V.V. please excuse me. Let's assume that the formula is applicable to similar processes. Suppose, too, that he discussed his formula with two economists. A very famous economist P. And another famous "economist" and mathematician M. Economist P. most likely (given his previous views on the role of mathematics in the economy) Uchaikina V.V. will criticize. But M. is likely to be very interested in the formula, especially the chaotic process of objects with memory is his concern today. In my opinion, M. will begin to refine the formulas of Uchaikin V.V. taking into account human psychology. He will certainly make it more professional. And I will explain this with the help of the heroes of a series of fairy tales about Dunno. Moreover, psychologists sometimes use these images. Dunno has a very short memory, and will fit into a new adventure. The astronomer Steklyashkin, on the contrary, will not lend himself and dissuade others. Znaek will need to be divided into those who will not show decisiveness and those who think that he has calculated everything. It will be possible to approximately calculate the proportions of types of behavior. Taking into account the poet Tsvetik, the doctor Pilyulkin, etc.

P. is Gavriil Popov. A fierce opponent of the supremacy of mathematics in economics. The man who coined the expression "mathematical fascism".

M. - Mavrodi, creator of "MMM" and "MMM"2. However, mathematics can be used not only to build pyramids, but also to fight them.

Mathematics, and most importantly,attitude towards her , is the boundary along which the visible boundary passes in science, the control system, and understanding of the world.

There are two opposite processes. On the one hand, there is an attack on the role of science, which has been especially noticeable in our country over the past 20 years. The victory of G. Popov was at the same time the defeat of the mathematician N.N. Moiseeva and cybernetics M.M. Botvinnik. On the other hand, the application of mathematical methods is inevitable, although slowly spreading. Because it is strongly required by practice. After all, it is no coincidence that the most successful financial pyramid was headed by a mathematician.

Why is this happening? Take, for example, a psychoanalyst. As long as he sees patients one at a time, he can work successfully without even knowing the multiplication table. But as soon as we send him, for example, to the military enlistment office for the distribution of conscripts according to military specialties, he will be forced to formalize the process, paving the way for the creation of mathematical models. That is, as soon as we begin to operate with large and partially impersonal arrays of information, the use of mathematics is inevitable.

I do not know how to draw the boundary between the sciences where mathematics dominates and where it is only present. Since this border is purely one-sided. There are physicists who have entered economics and received the Nobel Prize in Economics. But there are no economists who won the Nobel Prize in Physics. There are mathematicians and physicists who are known as historians. But there are no historians known as physicists or mathematicians. At the same time, a mathematician-economist (risk theory) and a mathematician-demographer (marriage market theory) may be understood by a physicist. Because their mathematical apparatus comes from physics.

and G.G. Malinetsky with his understanding of synergetics have a chance to understand correctly. And here's the way back until I meet ..

To put it more vividly, there is a humorist M. Zadornov who came to the colloquial genre after the Moscow Aviation Institute. But there are no comedians who came to aircraft designers directly from the stage.

Moreover, mathematization affects all sciences. V. A. Steklov, being a great mathematician, probably could not even imagine that mathematical models would be used in the LITERARY analysis of the text.

Only philosophy rises like an impregnable fortress. The only science that does not accept the instructions of mathematics, but individual philosophers try to show mathematics the true place. But although this fortress looks impregnable (especially if you read M. Heideger), one wall does not seem so indestructible. This is the part of philosophy that deals with worldview. The fact is that for the most part the mathematical offensive is poorly perceived by liberals. The same G. Popov. And positively the majority of statesmen.

CONCLUSION: In my opinion, the boundary between the natural sciences and the humanities lies in the degree of their mathematization. So the economy, which used to be quite a humanitarian one, became mathematized to such an extent that it is impossible to print in the West without the use of a mathematical apparatus.

Thank you very much for posting the video!

I watched the conversation of scientists to the end. The content of the discussion is very informative and interesting. I really enjoyed the discussion. I learned a lot while watching the video.

At the time of watching the video of the round table, I had my own opinion. My opinion is natural and humanitarian sciences, in fact, these are different areas of science, but all those and other areas of science binds man. Man it binder, that is, the whole connection of sciences goes through man.

A person can be said to be like a computer that processes the incoming information of one or another area of ​​science. After processing the data decides, which information to take from that science and transfer it to another science for further development in one or another field of science. I took man as a link because he invented all areas of science for understanding and studying the environment. And all branches of science depart from human thinking.

I sketched a simple diagram for clarity.

The video in this report lasts more than an hour and a half. Of course, we understand that not everyone will have a desire to listen to the conversation to the end. But still we put it on the main page of the site as a token of gratitude organizer and the author of the idea creation round table"The Image of Science through the Eyes of Naturalists and the Humanities" Natalya Grigorievna Baranets.

Exactly Natalya Grigorievna"gave" Space Research Laboratories undeservedly forgotten translation from ancient Greek Space is beauty. Laboratory employee Natalie listened to lectures (always very interesting) by Natalia Grigorievna and passed what she heard to the Laboratory. Since then, the head of the Space Research Laboratory has been repeating, during popular science lectures, the truth noticed by the ancient Greeks:

SPACE - This THE BEAUTY!

In the history of the development of philosophical and scientific thought, there have been repeated attempts to combine various knowledge in accordance with a single universal principle. Classifications of various kinds, i.e., the division of things into genera and types, were also applied to the sciences. These include attempts to classify the sciences of Aristotle, F. Bacon, the French Encyclopedists, O. Comte and the positivists of the 19th century, Hegel, as the finalist of German classical idealism, F. Engels and the Marxists, as well as many modern scientists.

Aristotle generally followed the general logic and tradition of ancient philosophy, highlighting the sciences of nature (physics), knowledge and soul (logic) and society (ethics). However, it was Aristotle, as the founder of many new sciences (biology, meteorology, etc.), who proposed an additional, original principle for classifying sciences in accordance with the functions they perform: creative sciences (poetics, rhetoric, dialectics), practical sciences (ethics, politics). , medicine, astronomy) and theoretical sciences (logic, mathematics, physics, first philosophy).

F. Bacon (XVII century) divided the sciences in accordance with the abilities of the human soul: memory, imagination and reason. Historical sciences are associated with memory (natural, civil history, church history); with imagination - poetry, as an image of the world not as it really is, but in accordance with the desires and ideals of man; the sciences about nature, about man and about God, i.e., natural science, theology and what is commonly called extra-scientific, parascientific knowledge (magic, alchemy, astrology, palmistry, etc.) are associated with the mind.

O. Comte (19th century) rejected the principle of dividing the sciences according to the various abilities of the mind. He believed that the principle of classification should be based on the subjects of science and determined by the connections between them. Comte's principle arranged the sciences according to the simplicity and generality of their subjects and their corresponding methods. Thus, mathematics has a universal subject and method, followed by mechanics, the sciences of inorganic bodies, the sciences of organic bodies, and sociology.

In the second half of the XIX century. F. Engels connected the objects of science with the forms of the motion of matter. The positivist principle of the classification of sciences (O. Comte, G. Spencer) was developed by him, since he left open the possibility of the emergence of new sciences on the basis of still unknown forms of the motion of matter.

Modern classifications as a whole are reduced to three blocks: natural and mathematical sciences, philosophical and humanitarian and technical and applied. At the basis of such a classification, the influence of ancient thought (Aristotle), positivism, Marxism, and especially the spiritual situation of the 20th century, the focus of which turned out to be the problem of man, is clearly traced. It is a person who has knowledge about nature (natural science), about himself (humanities) and about the fruits of his activity to transform the world (technical sciences).

Natural Sciences. Knowledge about nature is an integral system, the structural complexity and content depth of which reflects the infinite complexity and depth of nature itself. Knowledge of nature is achieved through practical and theoretical human activity. All knowledge of nature must be subject to empirical verification.

Since all sciences arise from the situation of the relationship between the subject and the object (according to I. Kant), it is clear that the sciences of nature pay more attention to the object than to the subject. But for modern natural science it becomes fundamentally important to observe a strict measure of attention not only to the object, but also to the subject. The history of natural science provides an object lesson in this sense. So, for classical natural science, starting from the 17th century. characteristic is the tendency of a complete "exclusion from the description and explanation of everything that relates to the subject and the procedures of his cognitive activity" .

Non-classical natural science (end of the 19th - mid-20th centuries) is characterized by the assumption of correlations between the object and the procedures of cognitive activity, the concept of “an object within the instrumental situation” arises, which can differ significantly from “an object outside the instrumental situation”.

Finally, in the post-nonclassical science of nature, the very subject of research has changed. Now it is not limited only to the object determined by the means of scientific knowledge, but includes its orbit and the subject in - 47. The subject of science is already a subject - an object system in its self-movement and development.

For a long time, the paradigms of natural science determined the course of development of the entire complex of sciences, and even philosophy. Thus, Euclid's geometry is reflected in I. Kant's formulation of the a priori foundations of sensory cognition and human reason - so much its "paradigmality" was convincing for the German philosopher. The same situation developed around the physics of I. Newton (XVII century) and the physics of A. Einstein (early XX century), around the discoveries of G. Mendel (late XIX century), D. Watson and F. Crick (mid-XX century .).

In the XX century. "Palm tree" is gradually moving from the natural sciences to the social sciences and the humanities. The political-economic studies of K. Marx, the sociology of M. Weber become a model of a truly scientific approach for many scientists and scientific schools.

Humanitarian sciences. The very concept of humanitarian, i.e. human, comes from the first humanists of the Renaissance, who in the XV-XVI centuries. took the trouble to revive in the original the legacy of ancient thinkers, primarily poets, writers, philosophers, historians, i.e., those who worked to exalt the human spirit and its power. The humanities are associated with a specific, single, unique subject and his achievements, which have something in common with the spiritual state of other subjects, i.e., causing a certain spiritual resonance in them.

Of the three functions of science listed above, understanding (interpretation) is the most suitable for the humanities. The humanities deal with single, unique facts, events, phenomena of a socio-cultural, spiritual nature, which are least characterized by homogeneity and identical repetition. It is extremely difficult to bring them under general concepts, theories, laws, that is, to explain. As for the function of prediction, it is realized in the humanities, in contrast to the natural sciences, to a rather small extent. Predicting any social event, the further course of history is much more difficult than predicting a solar eclipse or a meteorite approaching the Earth.

Views on the subject of the humanities are extremely contradictory. According to G. Rickert, laws in the humanities are not nomological (reflecting regular, recurring connections between objects or phenomena), but ideographic (interpreting unique single facts and phenomena from the standpoint of specific authors). According to neo-Kantians, in the humanities one should rely not on causal connections and laws, but on the goals, intentions, motives, and interests of people. Marxist point of view

On the other hand, historical regularities "make their way" in society with the necessity of a natural process and operate in spite of the desires and desires of people. Such an antinomy, however, is resolvable within the framework of the humanities itself, although it requires qualified philosophical assistance.

The conscious activity of people, presented here in the form of motives and interests, is always determined by a certain historical situation that has developed in the past, but, in turn, determines the future contours of history, thus becoming, as it were, part of the objective "historical landscape". One goes into the other and back. If we separate the sphere of people's conscious activity from the historical conditions in which it takes place, then we cannot avoid fatalistic or voluntaristic interpretations, subjective-idealistic or objectivist concepts of the philosophy of history.

Comprehension of the subject of the humanities is increasingly associated with hermeneutics, which originally existed as exegesis. Hermeneutics means not only the method of the humanities (art and theory of text interpretation), but also the doctrine of being (ontology). Currently, it traditionally distinguishes two approaches: psychological and theoretical. Psychological understanding refers to understanding based on one person experiencing the spiritual experience of another, his feelings, moods, emotions. To understand the author, one must internally experience what he experienced. The theoretical approach implies revealing the meaning of the ideas, goals, motives of the authors, i.e., it seeks to understand what they wanted to convey to us and how this information conveyed to us can enrich our understanding of life. The writer must be understood better than he understood himself, says the principle of hermeneutics. Another principle is that the understanding of a separate fragment is conditioned by the understanding of the whole (text, document, history) and, conversely, the whole can be comprehended thanks to the achieved understanding of individual fragments (the so-called "hermeneutical circle"). Another important principle of hermeneutics says that to understand means to understand another, that is, to find something in common with him in worldview, culture, rights, language, and so on. . The question arises, is it possible to use hermeneutics to study nature? At first glance, it seems that it is not, because in nature we are dealing with repeating, similar, uniform groups of objects and phenomena. But after all, in nature, scientists also encounter unique, unrepeatable objects and phenomena that do not fit into the framework of known patterns, existing theories. In this case, the scientist also seeks to understand and interpret the nature of such objects and phenomena, to identify patterns or put forward a new hypothesis for their explanation. However, in this case, the natural object inevitably loses its “uniqueness”. Against this background, the example of different interpretations of microworld objects by different scientists and scientific schools is especially clear.

The ideal would be the use of hermeneutics in natural science, if we assume that "nature is a text written by God", which must be deciphered. G. Galileo also thought in this vein: nature is a book written in the language of mathematics, and a person who is not versed in mathematics will not understand it.

The methods of the natural sciences can be used in certain aspects for the knowledge of social phenomena. The experience of studying economic, demographic, ecological processes, for example, in the activities of the Club of Rome, in the calculations of the “nuclear winter” scenario by K. Sagan and N. Moiseev, shows the relative success of such use. The same applies to the justification for the partial application of the historical concept of K. Marx or the concepts of A. Toynbee, O. Spengler (about the isolation and cyclicity of civilizational processes). All these theories have a quite clear and rational, but dry and abstract scheme. The specificity of the very subject of research with its colorfulness, fullness of life, individuality disappears from these schemes, as if they took the life of Russian society in the middle of the last century as an object of study and studied it only in terms of political, economic, demographic, etc. theories, forgetting about JI novels. Tolstoy, F. Dostoevsky. K. Marx himself believed that reading the novels of O. Balzac gives him an understanding of the economic situation in France at the beginning of the 19th century. incomparably more than the most careful study of economic tables and stock reports.

The technical sciences study nature transformed and placed at the service of man. "Techne" in ancient Greek means art. In ancient theatrical performances, the “God from the Machine” often appeared at the climax, driven by an ingeniously designed block mechanism. Thus, technology (art) became a mediator between man and God, man and fate, man and nature. T. Campanella (XVI century) believed that a person in his desires does not stop at the things of this world, but wants even more - to rise above heaven and the world. Not having fast legs like a horse, a man invents a wheel and a wagon, not being able to swim like a fish, he invents ships, and, dreaming of flying, like a bird, he creates aircraft. The phenomenon of technology includes a number of meanings. The first is the instrumental understanding of technology. Technique is understood as a set of artificially created material means of activity or a set of artifacts used as a means of activity. In this sense, technology is always things created by people from an inorganic substrate and used by them. In the second sense, technology is understood as a skillful process of activity or as a skill, for example, the technique of agriculture, navigation, healing, etc. Now, in this sense, the word “technology” is most often used, denoting a set of knowledge and skills for making something. The third meaning of technology is understood extremely broadly as a way of activity, a way of life and a way of thinking, for example, language, first oral and then written, is technology, modern world religions are also technology.

Unlike natural sciences, technical sciences (applied mechanics, radio electronics, mining, agronomy, genetic engineering, pharmacology, etc.) are more specific, because they study specific objects created by man, "second nature", and also utilitarian, since they are focused not on the knowledge of the essence of the phenomenon as such, but on a specific result that has practical application. But technical sciences, in principle, cannot develop without the natural sciences, because the former provide them with a basis, reveal the essence of the processes used in technical systems.

In turn, the humanities also have their influence on the technical ones. Technology is created by man and for his needs. It is included as an integral part in the process of his life and at the same time should not subjugate a person to himself, deprive him of freedom and creativity. The technical and engineering ethics that arose on this basis is designed to prevent the distortions of society in the direction of technism.

Technical sciences tend to progress, which is due to the social need for practical scientific achievements used in production. However, there is a limit here and a transition into its opposite: progress in one respect is regression in another. No wonder it has long been believed that technology as a "gift of the gods" can turn out to be "Pandora's box".

Science is one of the most important areas of human activity at the present stage of development of world civilization. Today there are hundreds of different disciplines: technical, social, humanitarian, natural sciences. What are they studying? How did natural science develop in the historical aspect?

Natural science is...

What is natural science? When did it originate and what directions does it consist of?

Natural science is a discipline that studies natural phenomena and phenomena that are external to the subject of research (man). The term "natural science" in Russian comes from the word "nature", which is a synonym for the word "nature".

The foundation of natural science can be considered mathematics, as well as philosophy. By and large, all modern natural sciences came out of them. At first, naturalists tried to answer all questions concerning nature and its various manifestations. Then, as the subject of research became more complex, natural science began to break up into separate disciplines, which over time became more and more isolated.

In the context of modern times, natural science is a complex of scientific disciplines about nature, taken in their close relationship.

The history of the formation of natural sciences

The development of the natural sciences took place gradually. However, human interest in natural phenomena manifested itself in antiquity.

Naturphilosophy (in fact, science) actively developed in ancient Greece. Ancient thinkers, with the help of primitive methods of research and, at times, intuition, were able to make a number of scientific discoveries and important assumptions. Even then, natural philosophers were sure that the Earth revolves around the Sun, they could explain solar and lunar eclipses, and quite accurately measured the parameters of our planet.

In the Middle Ages, the development of natural science slowed down noticeably and was heavily dependent on the church. Many scientists at that time were persecuted for the so-called heterodoxy. All scientific research and research, in fact, came down to the interpretation and substantiation of the scriptures. Nevertheless, in the era of the Middle Ages, logic and theory developed significantly. It is also worth noting that at this time the center of natural philosophy (the direct study of natural phenomena) geographically shifted towards the Arab-Muslim region.

In Europe, the rapid development of natural science begins (resumes) only in the 17th-18th centuries. This is a time of large-scale accumulation of factual knowledge and empirical material (results of "field" observations and experiments). The natural sciences of the 18th century are also based in their research on the results of numerous geographical expeditions, voyages, and studies of newly discovered lands. In the 19th century, logic and theoretical thinking again came to the fore. At this time, scientists are actively processing all the collected facts, putting forward various theories, formulating patterns.

Thales, Eratosthenes, Pythagoras, Claudius Ptolemy, Archimedes, Galileo Galilei, Rene Descartes, Blaise Pascal, Nikola Tesla, Mikhail Lomonosov and many other well-known scientists are among the most prominent naturalists in the history of world science.

The problem of classification of natural science

The basic natural sciences include: mathematics (which is also often called the "queen of sciences"), chemistry, physics, biology. The problem of classification of natural science has existed for a long time and worries the minds of more than a dozen scientists and theorists.

This dilemma was best handled by Friedrich Engels, a German philosopher and scientist who is better known as a close friend of Karl Marx and co-author of his most famous work called Capital. He was able to distinguish two main principles (approaches) of the typology of scientific disciplines: this is an objective approach, as well as the principle of development.

The most detailed was offered by the Soviet methodologist Bonifatiy Kedrov. It has not lost its relevance even today.

List of natural sciences

The whole complex of scientific disciplines is usually divided into three large groups:

• humanities (or social) sciences;
• technical;
• natural.

Nature is studied by the latter. The full list of natural sciences is presented below:

• astronomy;
• biology;
• the medicine;
• geology;
• soil science;
• physics;
• natural history;
• chemistry;
• botany;
• zoology;
• psychology.

As for mathematics, scientists do not have a common opinion as to which group of scientific disciplines it should be attributed. Some consider it a natural science, others an exact one. Some methodologists include mathematics in a separate class of so-called formal (or abstract) sciences.

Chemistry

Chemistry is a vast area of ​​natural science, the main object of study of which is matter, its properties and structure. This science also considers objects at the atomic-molecular level. It also studies chemical bonds and reactions that occur when different structural particles of a substance interact.

For the first time, the theory that all natural bodies consist of smaller (not visible to humans) elements was put forward by the ancient Greek philosopher Democritus. He suggested that every substance includes smaller particles, just as words are made up of different letters.

Modern chemistry is a complex science that includes several dozen disciplines. These are inorganic and organic chemistry, biochemistry, geochemistry, even cosmochemistry.

Physics

Physics is one of the oldest sciences on earth. The laws discovered by it are the basis, the foundation for the entire system of disciplines of natural science.

The term "physics" was first used by Aristotle. In those distant times, it was practically identical philosophy. Physics began to turn into an independent science only in the 16th century.

Today, physics is understood as a science that studies matter, its structure and movement, as well as the general laws of nature. There are several main sections in its structure. These are classical mechanics, thermodynamics, the theory of relativity and some others.

Physiography

The demarcation between the natural and human sciences ran like a thick line through the "body" of the once unified geographical science, dividing its individual disciplines. Thus, physical geography (as opposed to economic and social) found itself in the bosom of natural science.

This science studies the geographic shell of the Earth as a whole, as well as individual natural components and systems that make up its composition. Modern physical geography consists of a number of them:

• landscape science;
• geomorphology;
• climatology;
• hydrology;
• oceanology;
• soil science and others.

Natural and Human Sciences: Unity and Differences

Humanities, natural sciences - are they as far apart as it might seem?

Of course, these disciplines differ in the object of research. The natural sciences study nature, the humanities focus their attention on man and society. The humanities cannot compete with the natural disciplines in accuracy, they are not able to mathematically prove their theories and confirm hypotheses.

On the other hand, these sciences are closely related, intertwined with each other. Especially in the 21st century. So, mathematics has long been introduced into literature and music, physics and chemistry - into art, psychology - into social geography and economics, and so on. In addition, it has long been obvious that many important discoveries are made just at the junction of several scientific disciplines, which, at first glance, have absolutely nothing in common.

Finally...

Natural science is a branch of science that studies natural phenomena, processes and phenomena. There are a huge number of such disciplines: physics, mathematics and biology, geography and astronomy.

The natural sciences, despite numerous differences in the subject and methods of research, are closely related to social and humanitarian disciplines. This connection is especially strong in the 21st century, when all the sciences converge and intertwine.