The impact of epistemic criteria on the development of philosophy of science
Abstract
The identification of the main epistemological criteria is one of the most important tasks of modern post-non-classical science. The lines of demarcation between scientific and non-scientific knowledge are still very blurred despite the bright concepts and scientific schools dealing with this problem. The main purpose of the work is to establish a connection between possible epistemological criteria and the limiting equilibrium states of cognitive processes. The limiting equilibria of the process of cognition are important because they represent the maximum completeness of acquired knowledge at a certain stage. These limit states are characterized by optimality and stability. Additional knowledge becomes redundant for a specific process of cognition and cannot be associated with already formed knowledge structures. Methodological and ontological criteria are also used to clarify this possibility. Relationships of the studied criteria with the limiting equilibria of the processes of cognition are considered, starting with the criteria for the truth of scientific knowledge. Then the same approach is developed in relation to epistemological fundamentalism and epistemological relativism. Separately, three varieties of epistemological relativism are singled out: personalist, cognitive, and cultural-historical. The revealed characteristics of the limiting states of the processes of cognition represent their general contours. Orientation to limit dynamic equilibria allows us to combine a variety of areas of ontological, epistemological and methodological research, because all of them have limit dynamic equilibria and ways of interacting with them. The approach leaves much out of research, since it deals only with the boundaries of the processes under consideration. However, even such a “boundary” identification of epistemological criteria greatly simplifies the study of some problems, and makes it possible to more clearly set the goals and objectives of future research.
About the Author
V. S. DanilovaRussian Federation
DANILOVA Vera Sofronovna – Doctor of Philosophical Sciences (ontology and epistemology), Docent of Philosophy
Yakutsk
References
1. Dekart, R. Pravila dlja rukovodstva uma : Sochinenija v 2 tt. T. 1. / R. Dekart / Per. s lat. – Moskva : Mysl’, 1989. – S. 77-153.
2. Kozhevnikov, N. N. Istorija i filosofija nauki / N. N. Kozhevnikov, V. S. Danilova. – Jakutsk : Izd. dom SVFU, 2023. – 460 s.
3. Illarionov, S. V. Teorija poznanija i filosofija nauki / S. V. Illarionov. – Moskva : ROSPSPJeN, 2007. – 536 s.
4. Ovchinnikov, N. F. Principy teoretizacii znanija / N. F. Ovchinnikov. – Moskva, 1996. – 215 s.
5. Kozhevnikov, N. N. Osnovnye ponjatija filosofii v kontekste sistemy koordinat mira na osnove predel’nyh dinamicheskih ravnovesij deterministicheskogo haosa / N. N. Kozhevnikov. – Jakutsk : Izd. dom SVFU, 2020. – 160 s.
6. Popper, K. R. Ob#ektivnoe znanie. Jevoljucionnyj podhod / K. R. Popper. – Moskva : Jeditorial URSS, 2002. – 384 s.
7. Okun’, L. B. Fizika jelementarnyh chastic / L. B. Okun’. – Moskva : Nauka, 1988.
8. Arshinov, V. I. Sinergetika : Novaja filosofskaja jenciklopedija v 4 t. T. III. / V. I. Arshinov. – Moskva : Mysl’, 2001. – S. 545-546.
9. Jenciklopedija jepistemologii i filosofii nauki. – Moskva : «Kanon+», ROOI «Reabilitacija», 2009. – 1248 s.
10. Shlik, M. O fundamente poznanija / M. Shlik // Analiticheskaja filosofija. Izbrannye teksty. – Moskva, 1993. – S. 44.
11. Mamchur, E. A. Obrazy nauki v sovremennoj kul’ture / E. A. Mamchur. – Moskva : Kanon+, 2008. – 400 s.
12. Jung, K. G. Fenomen duha v iskusstve i nauke / K. G. Jung // Sobr. soch. v 19 tt. T. 15 – Moskva : Renesans, 1992. – 320 s.
13. Viner, N. Moe otnoshenie k kibernetike, ejo proshloe i budushhee / N. Viner. – Moskva : Sovetskoe radio, 1969. – 24 s.
14. Hajdegger, M. Vremja i bytie / M. Hajdegger. – Moskva : Respublika, 1993. – 447 s.
Review
For citations:
Danilova V.S. The impact of epistemic criteria on the development of philosophy of science. Vestnik of North-Eastern Federal University. Pedagogics. Psychology. Philosophy. 2023;(2):54-62. (In Russ.)