Social and Humanitarian Sciences. Social sciences, their classification
There is a general term - "social sciences", or "social sciences" (in a broad sense). However, these concepts are not homogeneous. On the one hand, there is economics, sociology, the science of law. On the other hand, anthropology, art sciences, history, cultural studies. The former are called social in the narrow sense of the word, in contrast to the aforementioned broad one. The second is the humanities. After this empirical classification, it is necessary to discuss the criteria for the division into the humanities and social sciences.
There is a point of view that does not assume the possibility of the existence of the humanities at all. The argument is that it is only in sciences like the natural sciences that the object of study is constructed from an existing object by scientific procedure. In the humanities, the subject of science is not specially constructed, it coincides with the object, and we can only talk about humanistics, but not about specialized activities for the production of humanitarian scientific knowledge. This point of view ignores the existence of own scientific procedures for obtaining humanitarian scientific knowledge, which include: following the methods of the relevant scientific discipline that sets the standards and norms of scientific activity; the postulate of subjective interpretation, according to which the scientific descriptions of the studied reality and the subjective motives of human activity are correlated; the postulate of adequacy, which requires that the scientific statement of the humanities be understandable to the one about whom it is made. This distinguishes the humanities from the social sciences, in which a scientific statement is relegated to essence and is not intelligible to the people it describes. Thus, the humanities receive their own procedures for scientific activity and ways of constructing their object of knowledge.
There is another point of view, according to which the inclusion of the subject in the object of the social sciences makes all the sciences of this cycle humanitarian, human-oriented. The argument is that the subject of social cognition is the world of man, and not a thing. All social sciences study human activity, so they can be attributed to the humanities. Social sciences analyze processes, dynamics, objective laws. Any knowledge is social. The specificity of the knowledge of society is such that in a broad sense it is humanitarian. Ontologically, this is true. But the naturalistic research program discussed above indicates that in this group of sciences methods similar to those that work in natural science can be applied. The cultural-centric research program more clearly emphasizes the "other" scientific nature of knowledge about society.
The unified system of social sciences, called the social sciences, social sciences (in the broad sense of the word), social sciences and the humanities, is divided into social (in the narrow, above sense of the word) sciences and humanitarian sciences.
There are several points of view on the issue of their separation.
- The division of sciences by subject: social sciences study general social patterns, the structure of society and its laws, the humanities - the human world.
- The division of sciences by method: social sciences are those in which the method of explanation is used, sciences are called humanitarian, where understanding is the basic methodological tool.
- The division of sciences simultaneously by subject and method. This assumes that a particular object dictates particular methods.
- Division of sciences in accordance with research programs.
The representative of the Baden school of neo-Kantianism, W. Windelband (1848-1915), contrasted the natural sciences with historical ones, or otherwise: the sciences of nature - the sciences of culture. They correspond to a difference in methods. The former use the nomothetic (generalizing method), the latter use the idiographic (descriptive, individualizing methods). Another representative of this school - G. Rickert (1863-1936) believed that the sciences are divided into the sciences of nature (natural science) and the sciences of culture, history, which corresponds to the difference in methods: generalizing, independent of values, aimed at identifying patterns, methods of the first groups of sciences, and the individualizing, values-related methods of the second group of sciences.
Those of the social sciences that are similar to the natural sciences in methods, such as sociology, are called the social sciences, those that are closer to history are the cultural sciences - the humanities.
The most modern and promising way to separate the social sciences from the humanities may be to separate them on the basis of the research programs used.
Following it, the social sciences should include those that use a naturalistic program with its inherent model of explanation, the separation of subject-object relations.
The humanities will be those that apply an anti-naturalistic culture-centric research program with its characteristic elimination of the subject-object confrontation through the disclosure of the subjective characteristics of the object and the use of an "understanding" methodology.
Scientific social knowledge is the most objectified and close to the natural sciences type of knowledge about society, studying the laws of functioning and development of individual social spheres and society as a whole, the objective laws of social development. Here the subject-object confrontation, the confrontation between the researcher and the fragment of reality he is studying, is deliberately and methodically sharpened. In other words, only that which has the meaning of the universal and is embraced in the form of a concept can be described and explained in such sciences.
The humanities are the sciences of man, history, and culture. But their existence is constituted not so much by an object (knowledge about a person, history, culture can be obtained not only in a humanitarian, but also in a social form), but rather by the choice of a cultural-centric research program that involves the allocation of the subjective nature of the object of study itself, the dialectics of the objective (inherent in scientific knowledge) and subjective (inherent in the object of study itself). In this case, the same objective construction of the subject of research is carried out, as in social knowledge, but, as will be shown below, it is limited by the structures of everyday life.
It is the research program that ultimately determines the division of sciences into social and humanitarian ones, since, as already noted, objectification, naturalization, sociologization can be subjected to research on such objects as a person, culture, history, as well as a cultural-centric strategy, taking into account subjective characteristics is possible. and when considering social spheres. Already at the level of the formation of the subject of science, the transition from the object of reality to its representation in scientific knowledge, one of the cognitive strategies begins to operate - objectification (naturalization) or anti-naturalism, finding a continuation in the method. The object of research to a certain extent dictates the method of formation of the subject of science and the choice of method, but does not determine them with absolute certainty.
There is a certain freedom in expanding the scope of the humanities through the application of anti-naturalistic culture-centric strategies. It is considered most often as the only way to increase the humanitarian adequacy of all social knowledge. Moreover, the humanities act to a certain extent as a model of knowledge in general, since technical knowledge has discovered the presence of a subject in its object, natural science is revising its objectivist ideals, is guided by the understanding that any science works with available cultural means and depends on the level of practice and the level of knowledge. The social nature of science turns out to be methodologically significant for determining its cognitive ideals. In addition, such a traditional humanitarian way of seeing the subject of research as understanding has penetrated into natural science, characterizing its humanitarization, because the function of understanding in this case is to preserve the existential meaning of the introduced theoretical constructs in all analytical dissections of reality. Understanding is a way of meaningful interpretation of scientific abstractions, because theoretical constructs in developed knowledge are abstract, divorced from the world and exist in a system of mathematical and theoretical arguments, and therefore giving them meaning is a humanitarian concern for the preservation of the human world even in natural science. Especially in the social sciences, the task of achieving humanitarian adequacy is extremely important.
We have experience of the dogmatic functioning of social theory, the absence of a critical attitude towards it, the disconnection of the feedback links between social theory and practice. However, the "repressiveness" of universal ideas is also stated in itself, since with their help people should learn to think and live differently than they think and live.
But in this case, the individual experience of the researcher is taken as a guarantor of humanitarianism. The latter, however, may be at variance with our experience and may be imposed on us in the same way as an abstract schema. In this case, science turns into a rationalization of the experience of ordinary consciousness. Nevertheless, the advantage of this approach is that the experience of the subject of knowledge and the conclusions proposed by it can be discussed by a wide range of people in a language they understand. When discussing, the value-semantic content of real life is preserved. It is obvious that humanitarian knowledge, formed in this way, meets its purpose of being a science about man, thereby reaching a certain level of humanitarian adequacy. However, the notion that this is the only way is wrong. Obviously, the humanization of knowledge, the choice of a humanitarian, cultural-centric methodological strategy is not the only and in some cases purely external possibility of achieving the humanitarian adequacy of knowledge about society.
There is a certain tendency to reject scientific dominance in the social sphere and a tendency to criticize science, and criticism is largely fair. The importance of scientific-humanitarian and non-scientific social knowledge is emphasized. Their immediacy, comprehensibility for non-specialists, connection with everyday practical consciousness inspires natural confidence in this type of knowledge. However, social sciences are responsible to people for the state of social life, because their goal is not only in objective knowledge, but also in finding ways for socially necessary transformations. The requirement of clarity, accessibility for discussion is replaced here by another one - the ability to reveal social mechanisms, to enable them to be used, to carry out not only a regulatory-advisory, but also a cognitive-transforming, even technological function. The social sciences are adequate in the humanities if they fulfill these tasks. For example, the economic sciences will show their humanitarian adequacy if they not only express the economic aspirations of people, but also find mechanisms and ways to realize these aspirations based on the study of objective economic laws. At the same time, as noted above, the social sciences can fall into the field of unjustified expectations, when science is required to do what only society or even history can do.
The belief that science can always fulfill any desire, that it is the magic key to any storehouses of progress, is a scientistic illusion, generated in part by science itself.
Both strategies - naturalistic and cultural-centric - most often come into confrontation, but can potentially be in commonwealth, stimulate each other's development. Compatibility does not always mean some special or specific way of communication, it only means that there are two points of view on one problem: one comes from the goals of the subject, the other from objective processes.
Social science deserves serious criticism. If it is more accurately addressed to various groups of knowledge about society, then extra-scientific knowledge can be reproached for unwillingness to take into account the achievements of science when setting socially significant goals, especially in worldview search. Humanitarian scientific knowledge, subjecting the proper discussion of the meaning-building of human life, does not consistently assert values. Today, this is especially evident when a technological component appears in it - testing, manipulation, selective technologies, PR, including dirty ones. Social knowledge is immersed in intra-scientific logic, ignoring the vital content of this logic and the practical consequences of its conclusions.
In connection with this criticism, many specialists have the illusion that it is possible to deny theoretical social knowledge as notorious scholasticism. Meanwhile, the reaction is adequate when a social theorist is required to identify what real life problems are behind his constructions and what contribution he makes to their solution, and a humanities scientist is required to describe a person’s behavior in a certain situation, to clarify his motives, goals and values. . Humanitarian knowledge about economic processes is knowledge of the motives of economic behavior, knowledge of human behavior in economic processes. Social economic knowledge is the knowledge of the laws and mechanisms of economic life and the ways of their use, the implementation of economic goals and motives. As we can see, the approach of social science to life and its humanitarization are associated with the simultaneous application of both cultural-centric and naturalistic strategies, with the joint work of the social and human sciences.
The former idea of the structure of knowledge about society rigidly fixed for the sciences the division into social and humanitarian knowledge on the subject. Economics or sociology in this case do not think of themselves as humanitarian knowledge. At the same time, as we have already shown, the meaning of achieving humanitarian adequacy is to approach the same object from the point of view of two strategies that ensure the simultaneous operation of naturalistic and cultural-centric programs. We emphasize once again - humanitarian scientific knowledge can be obtained about any object by methodically sharpened interest in its subjective nature and vital and semantic content, social knowledge can be obtained about any object by deliberately methodically emphasizing its objectivity and recognizing patterns in it.
The emergence of an anti-naturalistic cultural-centric program shook the principle of classical scientificity and contributed to its transition to a non-classical stage. The transformation of the cultural-centric research program from a program for a part of the social sciences into a program suitable for all social sciences, into a general scientific one, was a symptom of the emergence of post-non-classical science. In this last phase, the contradiction between naturalistic and cultural-centric programs still persists, but there is already obvious evidence for our assumption that one and the same science can be constructed either as a social science or as a humanitarian one. The well-known methodologist of literary criticism R. Livingston convincingly showed that both naturalistic and cultural-centric programs (he calls it humanistic) can function in the science he studies, which fully divide literary criticism into social and humanitarian sciences (depending on which research program is being used).
If this example surprises with the equivalent possibility of applying the naturalistic program in literary criticism, then the penetration of cultural-centric, anthropological approaches into the theory of organization is no less striking. Today, the anthropology of organizations, which includes analysis of culture, age, gender, community, the relationship between bureaucracy and informal * aspects of relationships, working with marginal customers, etc., is a stunning new strategy in both anthropology and organizational theories.
The desire to overcome the opposition of naturalism and cultural-centrism, their opposition is characteristic of today's discussions. But how to overcome them? There are several proposals for this.
- Try to build theoretical knowledge on the basis of both programs, so to speak, mixing them, to create an integral program. This is not true, if only because both programs have multidirectional vectors and mutually negate each other.
- To be "beyond" this confrontation, "beyond" the objectivism and "relativism" that is often attributed to the anti-naturalistic research program. To be “on the other side” means to do away with theoretical self-confidence, to take into account pluralism, to be more flexible, to turn to practical discourse, to abandon the revolutionary hope for a radical change in society through any theory.
- Overcoming the antinomies of naturalism and cultural centrism is achieved through the joint work of the two programs, while discussing practical problems. Two points of view can be presented here. The following point of view is promising: interaction between the social sciences and the humanities is necessary; running two programs at the same time. One analyzes the goals and values of the subject, the other reveals patterns that could lead to the achievement of these goals. The first is focused on "humanization", the second - on "reification". But this does not mean that the first is obviously better and "more humanitarian". They must work on any object, finding out its human and objective content, so that the latter can be used in the interests of man.
Wallerstein shows that there is a transformation of world systems in the world that cannot be described in terms of "up, down or straight". This changes the methodology, connecting the naturalistic analysis of macroprocesses with the cultural-centric study of individual points, i.e. the question of the relationship between the two research programs is posed as a question of the different scale of their explanatory power in the framework of a new approach that recognizes the stochastic and non-unidirectional nature of the future. Regarding these programs, Wallerstein writes: “Because we are faced with an unsolvable logical dilemma, the solution must be sought on a heuristic basis. The analysis of world systems offers a heuristic assessment of life strategy between transhistorical generalizations and particular expositions... We argue that the optimal method is analysis within a systemic framework that is sufficiently long in time and space to contain the main "logics"... while recognizing and given that these systemic frameworks have a beginning and an end and therefore should not be regarded as "eternal" phenomena.
Science and scientists can be responsible when they correctly understand their tasks. To do this, it is necessary to abandon the fetishism of ideally pure states, the ontologization of the true objects of science, to provide practice with natural opportunities for finding diversity, to develop theories without the vulgar identification of theoretical models with reality, without the vulgar displacement of universal moral norms in the name of theories. In science itself, taking into account the interests of people can be carried out through the interaction of various research strategies, interaction with extra-scientific knowledge and practical experience of people. At the same time, the freedom of science in choosing its decisions from political and administrative structures, the internal independence of scientists and science is necessary. Competence is the basis for inviting a scientist to make decisions. But one cannot demand from a scientist that he feed, clothe and shoe the people. It is necessary not to interfere with each person to do their job - to feed, clothe and shoe the country for one, to explore the world for the other. It is necessary to create structures in which it is possible to encourage any productive work.
Naturalistic and cultural-centric research programs, singled out as the leading research programs of social cognition, find their specific transformation in each of the areas of social knowledge. The point of singling out research programs as a methodological tool for studying the genesis of social knowledge is to present a pluralistic characterization of social research and its sociocultural preconditions. In order to clarify the main provisions of research programs and find out the features of their interaction and social application in scientific expertise, it is necessary to turn to specific disciplines of scientific social and humanitarian knowledge.
Social sciences, they are often called social sciences, study the laws, facts and dependencies of the socio-historical process, as well as the goals, motives and values of a person. They differ from art in that they use the scientific method and standards to study society, including qualitative and quantitative analysis of problems. The result of these studies is the analysis of social processes and the discovery of patterns and recurring events in them.
Social Sciences
The first group includes the sciences that provide the most general knowledge about society, primarily sociology. Sociology studies society and the laws of its development, the functioning of social communities and the relationship between them. This multi-paradigm science considers social mechanisms as self-sufficient means of regulating social relations. Most of the paradigms are divided into two areas - microsociology and macrosociology.
Sciences about certain areas of public life
This group of social sciences includes economics, political science, ethics and aesthetics. Culturology deals with the study of the interaction of cultural in individual and mass consciousness. The object of economic research is economic reality. Because of its breadth, this science is a whole discipline that differs from each other in the subject of study. Economic disciplines include: macro- and econometrics, mathematical methods of economics, statistics, industrial and engineering economics, history of economic doctrines and many others.
Ethics is the study of morality and ethics. Metaethics studies the origin and meaning of ethical categories and concepts using logical analysis. Normative ethics is devoted to the search for principles that regulate human behavior and guide his actions.
Sciences about all spheres of public life
These sciences permeate all spheres of public life, these are jurisprudence (jurisprudence) and history. Relying on various sources, the past of mankind. The subject of study of jurisprudence is law as a socio-political phenomenon, as well as a set of generally binding rules of conduct established by the state. Jurisprudence considers the state as an organization of political power, which ensures the management of the affairs of the whole society with the help of law and a specially created state apparatus.
Society is such a complex object that science alone cannot study it. Only by combining the efforts of many sciences, it is possible to 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 science. 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, scientific schools.
Social science, having arisen later than many other sciences, incorporates their concepts and specific results, statistics, tabular data, graphs and conceptual schemes, theoretical categories.
The whole set of sciences related to social science is divided into two varieties - social And humanitarian.
If the social sciences are the sciences of human behavior, then the humanities are the sciences of the spirit. In other words, the subject of the social sciences is society, the subject of the humanities is culture. The main subject of the 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. A group of other related disciplines adjoins it: philosophy, history, art history, cultural studies, and literary criticism. They are referred to 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 arbitrary. At their intersection, interdisciplinary sciences constantly arise, for example, social anthropology appeared at the intersection of sociology and anthropology, and economic psychology 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, and 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 activity of people, the relations of production, exchange, distribution and consumption that are formed in every society, formulates the foundations for the rational behavior of the producer and consumer 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, calculating our income and expenses, demanding payment of wages, and even going to 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, the 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, relations that arise in the process of implementing state-power activities.
Psychology- the science of the laws, mechanism and facts of the mental life of humans and animals. The main theme of the psychological thought of antiquity and the Middle Ages is the problem of the soul. Psychologists study persistent and repetitive behavior in individuals. The focus is on the 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, labor psychology, psychology of creativity, 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, manners of behavior.
Social Psychology studies small group(family, group of friends, sports team). Social psychology is a borderline discipline. She was formed at the intersection of sociology and psychology, taking on those tasks that her parents were unable to solve. It turned out that a large society does not directly affect 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 life. In general, we live in small, not in big worlds - in a specific house, in a specific family, in a specific company, etc. The small world sometimes affects us even more than the big one. That is why science appeared, which came to grips with it very seriously.
History- one of the most important sciences in the system of social and humanitarian knowledge. The object of its study is man, 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 study of history is the past. The well-known French historian M. Blok categorically objected to this. "The very idea that the past as such is capable of being the 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 devoted 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. Thucydides, Polybius, Arrian, Publius Cornelius Tacitus, Ammianus Marcellinus have much more reason 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: “The lessons learned from history most truly lead to enlightenment and prepare for engaging in public affairs, the story of the trials of other people is the most intelligible or only mentor that teaches us to courageously endure the vicissitudes of fate.”
And although, over time, people began to doubt that history could teach future generations not to repeat the mistakes of previous ones, the importance of studying history was not disputed. The famous Russian historian V.O. Klyuchevsky wrote in his reflections on history: “History does not teach anything, but only punishes for ignorance of the lessons.”
Culturology primarily interested in the world of art - painting, architecture, sculpture, dance, forms of entertainment and mass spectacles, educational institutions and science. The subjects of cultural creativity are a) individuals, b) small groups, c) large groups. In this sense, culturology covers all types of people's associations, but only to the extent that it concerns the creation of cultural values.
Demography studies the population - the whole set of people that make up human society. Demography is primarily interested in how they reproduce, how long they live, why and in what quantity they die, where large masses of people move. She looks at man partly as a natural, partly as a social being. All living beings 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. Such is its biological resource. However, the vast majority of people live up to 60-70 years. But this is today, and two hundred years ago, the average life expectancy did not exceed 30-40 years. In poor and underdeveloped countries, even today people live less than in rich and very developed ones. In humans, life expectancy is determined both by biological, hereditary characteristics, and by social conditions (life, work, rest, nutrition).
3.7 . Social and humanitarian knowledge
social cognition is the knowledge of society. Cognition of 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 relations are explored. These relations are much more complex, diverse and contradictory than the 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 cognize it.
Speaking about the specifics of social cognition, extremes should be avoided. On the one hand, it is impossible to explain the reasons for the historical backwardness of Russia with the help of Einstein's theory of relativity. On the other hand, one cannot assert that all those 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, knowledge concerns animate objects endowed with consciousness. And if, for example, the stars, even after observing them for many years, remain completely unperturbed in relation to the observer and his intentions, then in social life everything is different. As a rule, a back reaction is detected on the part of the object under study, something makes observation impossible from the very beginning, or interrupts it somewhere in the middle, or introduces into it such interference that significantly distorts the results of the study. Therefore, non-participant observation in social science gives insufficiently reliable results. Another method is needed, which is called included observation. It is carried out not from the outside, not from the outside in relation to the object under study (social group), but from within it.
For all its importance and necessity, observation in social science demonstrates the same fundamental shortcomings as in other sciences. Observing, we cannot change the object in the direction we are interested in, regulate the conditions and course of the process under study, reproduce it as many times as is required for the completion of the observation. Significant shortcomings of observation are largely overcome in experiment.
The experiment is active, transformative. In the 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 patterns and consisting in influencing the object (process) under study by means of special tools and devices. Thanks to the experiment, it is possible to: 1) isolate the object under study from the influence of secondary, insignificant and obscuring its essence phenomena and study it in a “pure” form; 2) repeatedly reproduce the course of the process in 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 has a concrete historical character. Experiments in the field of physics, chemistry, biology can be repeated in different epochs, in different countries, because the laws of the development of nature do not depend either on the form and type of production relations, or on national and historical characteristics. Social experiments aimed at transforming the economy, the national-state system, the system of upbringing and education, etc., can give in different historical epochs, in different countries, not only different, but also directly opposite results.
2. The object of a social experiment has a much lesser degree of isolation from similar objects remaining outside the experiment and all the influences of a given society as a whole. Here, such reliable insulating devices as vacuum pumps, protective screens, etc., used in the course of a physical experiment, are impossible. And this means that the social experiment cannot be carried out with a sufficient degree of approximation to "pure conditions".
3. A social experiment imposes increased requirements for observing “safety precautions” in the process of its implementation compared to natural science experiments, where even experiments performed 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 people involved in the "experimental" group. Underestimation of any detail, any failure in the course of 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 carried out in order to obtain directly theoretical knowledge. To put experiments (experiments) on people is inhumane in the name of any theory. A social experiment is a stating, confirming experiment.
One of the theoretical methods of cognition is historical method research, that is, a method that reveals significant historical facts and stages of development, which ultimately allows you to create a theory of the object, reveal the logic and patterns of its development.
Another method is modeling. Modeling is understood as such a method of scientific knowledge, in which the study is carried out not on the object of interest to us (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, it 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 reasons. considerations.
In his goal-setting activity, which makes history, man has always sought to comprehend the future. Interest in the future in the modern era has become especially aggravated 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 mankind. foresight came out on top.
scientific foresight is 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 of their further development. Scientific foresight does not claim to be absolutely accurate and complete knowledge of the future, to its obligatory reliability: even carefully verified and balanced forecasts are justified only with a certain degree of certainty.
Spiritual life of society
©2015-2019 site
All rights belong to their authors. This site does not claim authorship, but provides free use.
Page creation date: 2016-02-16
Social sciences, their classification
Society is such a complex object that science alone cannot study it. Only by combining the efforts of many sciences, it is possible to 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 science. 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, scientific schools.
Social science, having arisen later than many other sciences, incorporates their concepts and specific results, statistics, tabular data, graphs and conceptual schemes, theoretical categories.
The whole set of sciences related to social science is divided into two varieties - social And humanitarian.
If the social sciences are the sciences of human behavior, then the humanities are the sciences of the spirit. In other words, the subject of the social sciences is society, the subject of the humanities is culture. The main subject of the 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. A group of other related disciplines adjoins it: philosophy, history, art history, cultural studies, and literary criticism. They are referred to 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 arbitrary. At their intersection, interdisciplinary sciences constantly arise, for example, social anthropology appeared at the intersection of sociology and anthropology, and economic psychology 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, and 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 activity of people, the relations of production, exchange, distribution and consumption that are formed in every society, formulates the foundations for the rational behavior of the producer and consumer 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, calculating our income and expenses, demanding payment of wages, and even going to 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, the 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, relations that arise in the process of implementing state-power activities.
Psychology- the science of the laws, mechanism and facts of the mental life of humans and animals. The main theme of the psychological thought of antiquity and the Middle Ages is the problem of the soul. Psychologists study persistent and repetitive behavior in individuals. The focus is on the 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, labor psychology, psychology of creativity, 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, manners of behavior.
Social Psychology studies small group(family, group of friends, sports team). Social psychology is a borderline discipline. She was formed at the intersection of sociology and psychology, taking on those tasks that her parents were unable to solve. It turned out that a large society does not directly affect 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 life. In general, we live in small, not in big worlds - in a specific house, in a specific family, in a specific company, etc. The small world sometimes affects us even more than the big one. That is why science appeared, which came to grips with it very seriously.
History- one of the most important sciences in the system of social and humanitarian knowledge. The object of its study is man, 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 study of history is the past. The well-known French historian M. Blok categorically objected to this. "The very idea that the past as such is capable of being the 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 devoted 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. Thucydides, Polybius, Arrian, Publius Cornelius Tacitus, Ammianus Marcellinus have much more reason 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: “The lessons learned from history most truly lead to enlightenment and prepare for engaging in public affairs, the story of the trials of other people is the most intelligible or only mentor that teaches us to courageously endure the vicissitudes of fate.”
And although, over time, people began to doubt that history could teach future generations not to repeat the mistakes of previous ones, the importance of studying history was not disputed. The famous Russian historian V.O. Klyuchevsky wrote in his reflections on history: “History does not teach anything, but only punishes for ignorance of the lessons.”
Culturology primarily interested in the world of art - painting, architecture, sculpture, dance, forms of entertainment and mass spectacles, educational institutions and science. The subjects of cultural creativity are a) individuals, b) small groups, c) large groups. In this sense, culturology covers all types of people's associations, but only to the extent that it concerns the creation of cultural values.
Demography studies the population - the whole set of people that make up human society. Demography is primarily interested in how they reproduce, how long they live, why and in what quantity they die, where large masses of people move. She looks at man partly as a natural, partly as a social being. All living beings 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. Such is its biological resource. However, the vast majority of people live up to 60-70 years. But this is today, and two hundred years ago, the average life expectancy did not exceed 30-40 years. In poor and underdeveloped countries, even today people live less than in rich and very developed ones. In humans, life expectancy is determined both by biological, hereditary characteristics, and by social conditions (life, work, rest, nutrition).
3.7 . Social and humanitarian knowledge
social cognition is the knowledge of society. Cognition of 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 relations are explored. These relations are much more complex, diverse and contradictory than the 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 cognize it.
Speaking about the specifics of social cognition, extremes should be avoided. On the one hand, it is impossible to explain the reasons for the historical backwardness of Russia with the help of Einstein's theory of relativity. On the other hand, one cannot assert that all those 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, knowledge concerns animate objects endowed with consciousness. And if, for example, the stars, even after observing them for many years, remain completely unperturbed in relation to the observer and his intentions, then in social life everything is different. As a rule, a back reaction is detected on the part of the object under study, something makes observation impossible from the very beginning, or interrupts it somewhere in the middle, or introduces into it such interference that significantly distorts the results of the study. Therefore, non-participant observation in social science gives insufficiently reliable results. Another method is needed, which is called included observation. It is carried out not from the outside, not from the outside in relation to the object under study (social group), but from within it.
For all its importance and necessity, observation in social science demonstrates the same fundamental shortcomings as in other sciences. Observing, we cannot change the object in the direction we are interested in, regulate the conditions and course of the process under study, reproduce it as many times as is required for the completion of the observation. Significant shortcomings of observation are largely overcome in experiment.
The experiment is active, transformative. In the 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 patterns and consisting in influencing the object (process) under study by means of special tools and devices. Thanks to the experiment, it is possible to: 1) isolate the object under study from the influence of secondary, insignificant and obscuring its essence phenomena and study it in a “pure” form; 2) repeatedly reproduce the course of the process in 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 has a concrete historical character. Experiments in the field of physics, chemistry, biology can be repeated in different epochs, in different countries, because the laws of the development of nature do not depend either on the form and type of production relations, or on national and historical characteristics. Social experiments aimed at transforming the economy, the national-state system, the system of upbringing and education, etc., can give in different historical epochs, in different countries, not only different, but also directly opposite results.
2. The object of a social experiment has a much lesser degree of isolation from similar objects remaining outside the experiment and all the influences of a given society as a whole. Here, such reliable insulating devices as vacuum pumps, protective screens, etc., used in the course of a physical experiment, are impossible. And this means that the social experiment cannot be carried out with a sufficient degree of approximation to "pure conditions".
3. A social experiment imposes increased requirements for observing “safety precautions” in the process of its implementation compared to natural science experiments, where even experiments performed 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 people involved in the "experimental" group. Underestimation of any detail, any failure in the course of 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 carried out in order to obtain directly theoretical knowledge. To put experiments (experiments) on people is inhumane in the name of any theory. A social experiment is a stating, confirming experiment.
One of the theoretical methods of cognition is historical method research, that is, a method that reveals significant historical facts and stages of development, which ultimately allows you to create a theory of the object, reveal the logic and patterns of its development.
Another method is modeling. Modeling is understood as such a method of scientific knowledge, in which the study is carried out not on the object of interest to us (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, it 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 reasons. considerations.
In his goal-setting activity, which makes history, man has always sought to comprehend the future. Interest in the future in the modern era has become especially aggravated 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 mankind. foresight came out on top.
scientific foresight is 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 of their further development. Scientific foresight does not claim to be absolutely accurate and complete knowledge of the future, to its obligatory reliability: even carefully verified and balanced forecasts are justified only with a certain degree of certainty.
Plan: 1. Natural-scientific and social-humanitarian knowledge. 2. Classification of social sciences and humanities. 3. Social sciences: sociology, political science, psychology. 4.Philosophy. HOMEWORK HOMEWORK Lesson 1. §1, items 1 - 3, questions 1-7, text + questions Lesson 2. §1, items 4 - 5, questions 7-11
Natural-science and social-humanitarian knowledge SCIENCE is a form of people's spiritual activity aimed at producing knowledge about nature, society, about knowledge itself, with the goal of comprehending the truth and discovering objective laws. Functions of science: 1. Cultural and ideological (knowledge of the world in the system); 2. Cognitive-explanatory (cognition and explanation of the surrounding reality); 3. Prognostic (predicting changes).
SOCIO-HUMANITARIAN Form of spiritual activity of people aimed at the production of knowledge about society (single) NATURAL Form of spiritual activity of people aimed at the production of knowledge about nature (general knowledge) INTERMEDIATE SCIENCES geography, ecology, mathematics, logic, etc.
Classification of the social sciences and humanities Science that gives the most knowledge about society Science that reveals the spheres of society Science penetrating all spheres of society philosophy sociology economics political science cultural studies history jurisprudence What unites these sciences? All of them reflect the spheres of public life. There is a classification of the social sciences and the humanities according to the subject of study. Read about it on pages 8-9
1. the totality of social relations 2. res"title="(!LANG: Social sciences: sociology SOCIOLOGY (Greek Sociaetas - society, logos - word) - the science of the patterns of development and functioning of social systems, both global and private. » => 1. set of social relations 2. res" class="link_thumb"> 7 !} Social sciences: sociology SOCIOLOGY (Greek: Sociaetas - society, logos - word) - the science of the laws of development and functioning of social systems, both global and private. "Social" => 1. the totality of social relations 2. the result of the joint activity of people What does sociology study? Read about it on p.9 The social life of people. Social facts, processes and relations. Activities of social groups, individuals, their roles, statuses. 1. the totality of social relations 2.res "\u003e 1. the totality of social relations 2. the result of the joint activity of people What does sociology study? Read about it on p. , statuses."> 1. the totality of social relations 2. res" title="(!LANG: Social sciences: sociology and private "Social" => 1. set of public relations 2. res"> title="Social sciences: sociology SOCIOLOGY (Greek: Sociaetas - society, logos - word) - the science of the laws of development and functioning of social systems, both global and private. "Social" => 1. set of social relations 2. res"> !}
Three levels of sociological knowledge Theoretical level: Theoretical level: general sociological theories, structures, functioning of society. Applied sociology: Applied sociology: sociological research, obtaining authentically verified knowledge (testing, survey, observation, experiment). Theories of the middle level: Theories of the middle level: connects the previous levels (sociology of the family, work, conflicts) with factual information about reality.
POLITICAL SCIENCE is a science that studies the relations of various social, ethnic, religious and other groups, authorities, relations between classes, parties and the state. Purpose: Purpose: analysis and forecasting of the political situation in the country. region of the world, etc. W.s. W.s. - General theory of politics (patterns of relations between ruling and subject) Theory of politics includes: the concept of power, the theory of the state, the theory of political parties, the theory of international relations. Sh.s. Sh.s. – a complex of disciplines studying politics Social sciences: political science
PSYCHOLOGY (from Lat. psi soul; logos word) patterns of features of the development and functioning of the psyche SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY patterns of behavior and activities of people due to the fact of their inclusion in social groups, as well as the psychological characteristics of these groups processes. Socialization of the individual Personal activity Forms of social interaction What does social psychology study? Read about it on p.11
Philosophy PHILOSOPHY (gr. philio - love sofia - wisdom) is the science of the general laws of the development of nature, society, knowledge. Problems of Philosophy What can I know? What can I believe? What can I hope for? What is a person? Eternal questions of philosophy, formulated by I.Kant I.Kant PHILOSOPHY IS ALWAYS PLURALISTIC. Think why? Pluralism (from Lat. pluralis plural) is a philosophical position according to which there are many different equal, independent and irreducible forms of knowledge.
Philosophy What is the difference between philosophy and science? Read on p. 12 and write in your notebook. DIFFERENCES FROM PHILOSOPHY AND SCIENCE: The provisions of science are expressed in the form of truth. The truth of science is objective. It is natural for philosophy to confront various doctrines, methods, and so on. Various research methods are used: Science: Science: rational, practical methods, experiments, testing, surveys, etc. Philosophy: Philosophy: speculative activity, use of argumentation beyond rational logic, appeal to paradoxes (absurd result), aporias (undecidable results)
The study of the joint activities of people in society Philosophical knowledge is multilayered the doctrine of being the doctrine of cognition the science of morality the science of beauty the value of existence the knowledge of the essence and nature of man, the ways of human existence Existential philosophy Ontology Gnoseology Ethics Aesthetics Philosophical anthropology Social philosophy Read p.13 and write out the definitions of the main areas of philosophy.
Philosophy Problems of social philosophy: Society as integrity; Patterns of development of society; The structure of society as a system; The meaning, direction and resources of social development: The ratio of the spiritual and material aspects of society; Man as a subject of social action; Features of social cognition. “The problem of social philosophy is the question of what society actually is, what significance it has in a person’s life, what is its true essence and what it obliges us to do.” S.L. Frank
Questions. Lesson What are the most important differences between the social sciences and the natural sciences? 2. Give examples of various classifications of scientific knowledge. What is their basis? 3. Name the main groups of social sciences and humanities distinguished by the subject of research. 4. What is the subject of sociology? Describe the levels of sociological knowledge. 5. What does political science study? 6. What is the relationship between social psychology and related fields of scientific knowledge?
Questions. Lesson What distinguishes and what brings together philosophy and science? 8. What problems and why are referred to as eternal questions of philosophy? 9. What is the pluralism of philosophical thought expressed in? 10. What are the main sections of philosophical knowledge? 11. Show the role of social philosophy in understanding society.
Determine what relates to the problems of studying sociology, psychology, political science? 1. Social life of people. 2. Patterns of socio-psychological phenomena, processes. 3. Socialization of the individual 4. The concept of power 5. Social facts, processes and relationships. 6. Personal activity 7. Activity of social groups, individuals of their roles, statuses. 8. Forms of social interaction 9. Theories of international relations
