Man's knowledge of the world begins from sensitive contact with the world, from "living contemplation". By "living contemplation" is meant a sensitive reflection of reality in such forms as sensation, perception, representation.
Sensation is a display of individual properties of objects and phenomena due to their direct influence on the human senses. Sensation - these are the channels that connect the subject with the outside world. But, being the result of the direct influence of only individual properties and aspects of objects, sensation, although it is a source of knowledge, does not give a holistic description of reality, but only a one-sided picture of it.
Perceptions are a more complex form of display.
Perception is a sensitive reflection of objects and phenomena of reality in the totality of their inherent properties, with their direct action on the human senses. This is a qualitatively new form of sensitive display of REALITY, which performs two interrelated functions: cognitive and regulatory. The cognitive function reveals the properties and structure of objects, while the regulatory function directs the subject's practical activity in accordance with these properties of objects.
Representation is a sensitive image, a form of sensitive display, which recreates the properties of reality behind those reflected in memory in the wake of objects that were previously perceived by the subject.
Thinking is a process of active, purposeful, generalized, mediated, essential and systemic reproduction of reality and solving the problems of its creative transformation in such logical forms as a concept, judgment, conclusions, categories.
A concept is a form of rational cognition that reflects the essence of an object and provides its comprehensive explanation.
Judgment is such a logical form of thinking in which something is affirmed or denied regarding the object of knowledge. In judgments, the connection between concepts is expressed, their content is revealed, and a definition is given.
Inference is such a logical process, during which, from several judgments, on the basis of regular, essential and necessary connections, a new judgment is derived, which has new knowledge about Reality as its content. Inferences are divided into the following types: inductive - the movement of thought from judgments of a less general nature to a more general one; deductive - the movement of thought from judgments of a more general nature to a less general one; inferences.
Intuition is the ability to directly comprehend the truth, such a form of knowledge, when beyond the unconscious in this moment signs of time and not realizing the path of movement of his own thought, the subject receives a new objectively true knowledge of reality. The main characteristics of intuition in the study: immediacy, surprise, unconsciousness of the ways of obtaining new knowledge.
Understanding is the process and result of the spiritual, practical and cognitive development of reality, when external objects are involved in the understanding of human activity, they act as its subject content. Understanding is a form of mastering reality, which reveals and recreates the content of the object.
Explanation is the disclosure of the essence of objects and phenomena by clarifying the causes of their occurrence and existence, the existence of the laws of their functioning and development.
Knowledge, explanation and understanding are the necessary moments of human interaction with the outside world, with the help of which it accumulates certain information about objects that are included in social practice. But such an accumulation also provides for the periodic ordering and rethinking of knowledge, which leads to a deeper understanding of the world.
Thinking, in addition to logical laws that express absolutely precise and strictly defined connections between statements and their elements, is also based on certain principles of probable regulation, which, although they do not guarantee an error-free solution of problems, nevertheless ensure the movement of scientific research in the proper direction. In the process of scientific research, the subject is forced to interrupt the gradual logical consideration with intuitive leaps. Logic and intuition are two interdependent mechanisms of scientific creativity that complement each other and do not exist in isolation from one another.
Read the text and answer questions C1-C4
The logic of scientific thinking
“The relation between the individual and the general is the absolute foundation of all scientific thinking. At this point, a difference is revealed between the scientific and aesthetic function: while the artist’s gaze lovingly dwells on the particular in all its individual originality, the knowing mind ... seeks to bring the object under a more general form of representation, discard everything unnecessary for this purpose and save only the “essential” ...
All human knowledge moves between two poles: on one side are individual sensations, on the other - general provisions expressing known rules about possible relationships between sensations. All scientific thinking has as its task to bring sensations, with the help of logical forms of connection, under these general rules. This is precisely why all logical forms are based on the idea of the connection between the particular and the general, the dependence of the former on the latter. All our knowledge consists in connecting the most general with the most particular with the help of intermediate links created by reflection.
Thus, the certainty and truth of all these intermediate links is rooted in the last analysis in the certainty and truth of the indicated two elements, connected in them by means of logical operations: sensations and general propositions. Everything that lies between this and that is proved from them by the application of logical laws.
(V. Windelband)
1. What two poles in the development of human knowledge does the author indicate? Give the terms corresponding to the two methods of cognition, displaying the vectors of the relationship of these poles. (First indicate the term, and then the corresponding vector of knowledge).
| Points | |
| elements: 1) answered: the author indicates two poles in the development of human cognition: individual sensations and general provisions expressing certain rules about possible relationships between sensations. 2) terms corresponding to two methods of cognition are given: deduction (vector of knowledge from particular to general), induction (vector of knowledge from general to particular). | |
| The answer is given, two terms are given with the indication of vectors. | |
| An answer is given, one term is given OR the answer is implicit, but two terms are given. | |
| An answer is given OR one term is given OR the answer is incorrect. | |
| Maximum score | 2 |
| The content of the correct answer and instructions for grading (other formulations of the answer are allowed that do not distort its meaning) | Points |
| The correct answer must include the following: elements: 1) Based on the text specified difference between aesthetic and scientific knowledge, for example: “while the artist’s gaze lovingly dwells on the particular in all its individual originality, the knowing mind ... seeks to bring the object under a more general form of representation, discard everything unnecessary for this purpose and save only the “essential”. 2) given differences between forms of knowledge, for example: - aesthetic (artistic) knowledge is characterized by the subjectivism of the creator, scientific knowledge is distinguished by the desire for objectivity; - aesthetic knowledge displays the world in the form of artistic images, scientific knowledge - in the form of concepts, theories, laws. Other differences may be given. | |
| The author's difference is indicated, two others not given in the text are given. | |
| An author's difference is indicated, one other difference is given OR no author's difference is indicated, but two other differences not given in the text are given | |
| An author's difference is cited OR one other difference is given OR the answer is incorrect. | |
| Maximum score | 2 |
| Points | |
| The correct answer should include elements: 1) Dana wording the law of knowledge based on the text, for example: - "All our knowledge consists in connecting the most general with the most particular with the help of intermediate links created by reflection." 2) Two examples are given illustrating the connections between individual facts and general conclusions, let's say: - on the basis of the birch bark letters discovered by archaeologists during the excavations of Novgorod, their study, conclusions were drawn about high level literacy of the population of the ancient Russian city; - on the basis of experiments conducted by M.V. Lomonosov with various substances in an open and closed environment, the scientist concluded that in an isolated environment (closed vessel) the mass of substances before the reaction is equal to the mass of substances after the reaction. This became the basis for the formation of the law of conservation and indestructibility of the mass; - observation of the fall physical bodies, an apple that fell on his head, the scientist I. Newton formulated the law of universal gravitation. Other valid examples can be given. | |
| The wording of the law is given, two examples are given | |
| The wording of the law is given, one example is given OR the wording of the law is not given, but two examples are given | |
| The formulation of the law is given OR one example is given | |
| Wrong answer. | |
| Maximum score | 3 |
4. The author of the text speaks about the essence of logical laws, logical operations. Based on the text, knowledge of the course, personal social experience, give any three logical operations, illustrating them with specific examples.
| The content of the correct answer and instructions for grading (other formulations of the answer are allowed that do not distort its meaning) | Points |
| The correct answer may include: elements: The main logical operations and examples illustrating them, let's say: 1) analysis(a chemist, studying a substance, highlights its chemical composition, the elements of which it consists; a historian, studying a certain era, highlights its characteristic features, people acting in it, documents and evidence of the era); 2) comparison(when studying any historical event, a learned historian compares it with events that took place under similar conditions in other countries, in other eras); 3) synthesis(collecting the results of individual experiments and studies, scientists summarize the data, draw generalizing conclusions, for example, observing the nesting of birds, ringing them, ornithologists establish the direction of bird migrations). | |
| Three logical operations and examples illustrating them are given. | |
| Two logical operations and examples illustrating them are given OR three operations and two examples OR three operations, one example OR two operations, one example | |
| One logical operation is given and an example illustrating it OR two operations, examples are not given | |
| One logical operation OR is given, illustrating it with an example OR The answer is incorrect. | |
| Maximum score | 3 |
5. Intuition plays an important role in human cognitive activity. Many truths are revealed and known by people intuitively. Give four characteristic signs of intuition as a way of cognitive activity.
| The content of the correct answer and instructions for grading (other formulations of the answer are allowed that do not distort its meaning) | Points |
| The correct answer must contain the following elements: Four characteristic signs of intuition are given, for example, - intuition is the ability to comprehend the truth by direct observation of it without substantiation with the help of evidence; - intuitive "vision" occurs not only unexpectedly, accidentally and suddenly, but also without obvious awareness of the ways and means leading to this result; - a person may not retain (or have) any memories of the experienced act of intuition at all; - intuition is manifested and formed with a thorough professional training of a person, a deep knowledge of the problem, the search situation. Other characteristic features of intuition can also be given. | |
| Four characteristic signs of intuition are given | |
| Two or three characteristic signs of intuition are given | |
| One sign of intuition given OR Wrong answer | |
| Maximum score | 2 |
6. French philosopher Denis Diderot wrote that knowing how to change the world for the better characterizes a man of genius. Give three examples of the manifestation of human genius that changed the world for the better.
| The content of the correct answer and instructions for evaluation (other formulations of the answer are allowed that do not distort its meaning) | Points |
| The answer must contain the following elements: Three examples are given, for example: 1) Scientist N. Wiener laid the foundations of a new science - cybernetics, opening the way for mankind to the microprocessor revolution, the mass distribution of computers, without which the life of modern mankind is unthinkable. 2) A. Einstein, having discovered the theory of relativity, contributed to the formation of a new scientific picture of the world; 3) Genetic scientists, with their research and discoveries, have provided people with a more confident future, food security, and the possibility of curing many diseases. Other examples may be given. | |
| Three examples are given. | |
| Two examples are given. | |
| One example is given. | |
| Wrong answer. | |
| Maximum score | 3 |
7. The process of cognition is closely connected with the moral foundations of society. Give three justifications for the need to harmonize the process of cognition with the requirements of morality.
| The content of the correct answer and instructions for evaluation (other formulations of the answer are allowed that do not distort its meaning) | Points |
| The correct answer must contain the following elements: 1) three justification, for example : - there are certain moral restrictions in determining the very object of knowledge, for example, the study of the human psyche, the nature of human knowledge, experiments in the field genetic engineering; - the ways of cognition are also limited, for example, it is inhuman, antimoral to know the limits of the capabilities of the human body with the help of torture; - each scientist is limited by the principles of ethics, morality, in conducting his research, many discoveries of modern science can lead to the creation of new terrible types of weapons; - it is difficult from a moral point of view to study the nature of human feelings, for example, friendship, love, in this area it is almost impossible to conduct experiments. Other justifications may also be given. | |
| Three reasons given | |
| Two justifications are given | |
| One rationale given | |
| The answer is incorrect. | |
| Maximum score | 3 |
8. You are instructed to prepare a detailed answer on the topic "Truth as the goal of cognitive activity." Make a plan according to which you will cover this topic.
| The content of the correct answer and instructions for grading (other formulations of the answer are allowed that do not distort its meaning) | Points |
| When analyzing the answer, the following are taken into account: - the correctness of the wording of the points of the plan in terms of their relevance to the given topic and the clarity of expression of thought; - reflection in terms of the main aspects of the topic in a certain (adequate given topic) sequence. | |
| One of the options for the disclosure of this topic: 1) The concept of truth. 2) Objectivity as a property of truth. 3) Types of truth: a) absolute; b) relative. 4) Truth and lies. 5) Criteria of truth: a) practice; b) proof; c) obvious. 6) Features of the formation of true knowledge in the modern world. Perhaps a different number and (or) other correct wording of the points of the plan. | |
| The wording of the points of the plan is correct. Together, the points of the plan cover the main issues of the topic. The structure of the response follows the complex type plan. | |
| The wording of the points of the plan is correct. Certain issues relevant to this topic are omitted. The structure of the response follows the complex type plan. OR Some of the wording of the plan items is incorrect. Together, the points of the plan cover the main issues of the topic. The structure of the response follows the complex type plan. | |
| The plan does not cover the proposed topic. OR The response structure does not match the complex type plan. | |
| Maximum score | 2 |
9. Select one from the statements below and state your thoughts (your point of view, attitude) about the problem raised. Give the necessary arguments to justify your position.
When completing the task, use the knowledge gained during the study of the social science course, the relevant concepts, as well as the facts of social life and your own life experience:
| Among the criteria by which the performance of task C9 is assessed, criterion K1 is decisive. If the graduate, in principle, did not disclose the problem raised by the author of the statement, and the expert gave 0 points according to the K1 criterion, then the answer is not further checked. For the remaining criteria (K2, K3), 0 points are set in the protocol for checking tasks with a detailed answer. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Essay example
“We should strive to learn facts, not opinions, and, on the contrary, find a place for these facts in the system of our opinions” (G. Lichtenberg)
The problem raised by this statement is connected with the cognitive activity of a person and the understanding of the concept of true knowledge. True knowledge cannot be obtained by knowing opinions, since not every opinion or assessment is true.
I chose this aphorism because it is an interesting enough thought that has made me think about this problem more than once. This problem is very relevant in our time, because people, for the most part, learn opinions, as it is quick and easy, instead of getting the true information from primary sources. Listening to opinions and assessments, and not researching and studying the facts, you can get false information, which will lead to serious or frivolous errors.
We really should strive to learn facts, not opinions, since knowledge is an activity aimed at knowing the truth, at forming knowledge about the world, the laws of its development and about man himself. Knowing opinions, not facts, we run the risk of not receiving true data or news, since each person sees things in the world around him in his own way (as Aristotle stated: “What seems to everyone is certain”), so the sensations of another person cannot be accept as true knowledge. But by knowing the facts, we can get accurate information about a particular event or object, and, having learned the facts, we draw conclusions, estimates, and, based on this, we form certain opinions, we observe patterns that will help us to make our own decisions in the future. life is more convenient in the world around us. This point of view has the French philosopher R. Descartes, who wrote: "The word" Truth "means the correspondence of thought to the subject."
Therefore, I want to say that I fully share the author's point of view and consider him absolutely right, because only true knowledge gives us the opportunity to draw the right conclusions.
As a fact of knowledge, each kind of intuition is an indisputable reality that exists in the field of knowledge for all knowers. The human mind, preoccupied with comprehending questions related to cognitive activity, also tried to resolve the question of how knowledge generated by experience and possessing relative necessity and universality can follow knowledge that no longer has relative, but unconditional universality and necessity.
Another important question is whether the mind is capable of thinking some truths directly, without the help of proof. The doctrine of intellectual intuition arose as an answer to this question.
The term "intuition" is usually found with the words "knowledge" and "cognition":
1) intuition is view knowledge, the specificity of which is determined by the method of its acquisition. This is direct knowledge that does not need proof and is perceived as reliable. Such a position, for example, was held by Plato, Descartes, Locke, Spinoza, Leibniz, Hegel, Bergson.
Direct and indirect knowledge is characteristic of all sciences, but the distinction between them was first clearly drawn in mathematics.
2) According to the method of obtaining, intuition is a direct perception of the truth, i.e. objective connection of things, not based on evidence (intuition, from lat. intueri- to contemplate - is the discretion of the inner vision).
Among the many definitions of truth, there are general provisions: 1) the immediacy of intuitive knowledge, the absence of preliminary reasoning, 2) independence from inference and evidence, 3) confidence in the correctness of the result, and it is based on certain unconscious mental data, 4) the significance of the previous accumulation of knowledge.
Intuitive cognition as direct differs from rational cognition based on the logical apparatus of definitions, syllogisms and proofs. The advantages of intuitive knowledge over rational knowledge can be represented as follows: 1) the ability to overcome the limitations of known approaches to solving a problem and go beyond the usual ideas approved by logic and common sense, to see the problem as a whole; 2) intuitive knowledge gives the cognizable object as a whole, immediately "all the infinite content of the object", allows "to grasp the greatest fullness of possibilities." At the same time, various aspects of an object are known on the basis of the whole and from the whole, while rational knowledge deals only with parts (sides) of the object and tries to put together a whole out of them, to build an infinite series of general concepts that are attached to each other, but due to the fact that that such a series is unrealizable, rational knowledge always remains incomplete; 3) intuitive knowledge has an absolute character, because it contemplates a thing in its essence, rational knowledge has a relative character, since it consists only of symbols; 4) intuition is given creative variability, the fluidity of reality, while in the general concepts of rational knowledge only immobile, general states of things are conceived; 5) intuitive knowledge is the highest manifestation of the unity of intellectual knowledge, because in the act of intuition, the mind simultaneously thinks and contemplates. Moreover, this is not only a sensory knowledge of the individual, but an intellectual contemplation of the universal and necessary connections of the subject. Therefore, as the rationalists of the 17th century believed, intuition is not just one of the types of intellectual knowledge, but its supreme vee d most perfect.
Having all these advantages over rational knowledge, intuition, nevertheless, also has vulnerabilities: these are 1) the lack of manifestation of the reasons that led to the result obtained, 2) the absence of concepts that mediate the process of intuition, the absence of symbols, and 3) confirmation of the correctness of the result obtained . And although a direct understanding of the connections of an object or phenomenon may be sufficient to discern the truth, but not at all sufficient to convince others of this, proof is required for this. Every intuitive guess needs verification, and such verification is most often carried out by logically deducing the consequences from it and comparing them with the available facts.
Thanks to the basic mental functions (sensing, thinking, feeling and intuition), consciousness receives its orientation. The peculiarity of intuition is that it participates in perception in an unconscious way, in other words, its function is irrational. Differing from other perceptual functions, intuition may also have features similar to some of them, for example, sensation and intuition have much in common, and, in general, these are two perceptual functions that mutually compensate each other, like thinking and feeling.
§ 2. Intellectual intuition - innate ideas - a priori knowledge
The doctrine of intellectual intuition as a direct observation of the necessary and universal connections of things with the help of the mind must be distinguished from the doctrine of the so-called innate ideas and from the doctrine of a priori knowledge.
Innate ideas are concepts originally inherent in our mind. But if Descartes argued that some ideas are innate in our mind in a completely ready and finished form, then Leibniz believed that innate ideas exist only in the form of certain inclinations and inclinations of the mind, prompted to develop by experience and, in particular, by sensation.
The doctrine of the a priori nature of some knowledge arose as an answer to the question: are there truths for the mind that precede experience and are independent of experience? The direct nature of obtaining certain truths was conceived in different ways: on the one hand, as the immediacy of knowledge, given in experience, on the other hand, as the immediacy of knowledge, previous experience, i.e. a priori. Therefore, when deciding on the role of experience in the origin of knowledge of the theory of intuition, they are divided into non-a priori And a priori. Thus, for example, most theories of sensory intuition were not a priori theories at all. On the contrary, the rationalist theories of intellectual intuition were a priori, or at least contained elements of apriorism.
However, not every doctrine of apriorism was combined with the theory of intellectual intuition, i.e. the immediate, namely the intuitive nature of these a priori truths was denied. Kant, as far as is known, denied the ability of man to intellectual intuition, and his theory of knowledge and the doctrine of the forms of sensory intuition - space and time - are a priori.
§ 3. The nature of intuition
The work of creative intuition, the achievement of insight are presented as the most mysterious phenomena, and since intuition, in essence, is an unconscious process, it hardly lends itself not only to logical analysis, but also to verbal description.
Illuminated by the light of reason, intuition appears in the form of a waiting attitude, contemplation and peering, and always only the subsequent result can establish how much was “looked” into the object and how much was actually embedded in it.
All creative tasks can be roughly divided into two classes: those solved by means of arbitrary logical search and those whose solution does not fit into the logic of the existing knowledge system and therefore cannot be algorithmized in principle. Then in the first case, if the previous phase does not give adequate ready-made logical programs, intuition naturally turns on. In addition, an intuitive solution can also be understood as one of the phases in the mechanism of creativity, following an arbitrary, logical search, and requiring subsequent verbalization, and possibly even formalization of an intuitive solution.
To date, there is still no generally accepted concept that would make it possible to consider and analyze the mechanism of action of intuition, but separate approaches can be distinguished.
1. The sphere of intuition is the “superconsciousness of a person”, achieved by a “breakthrough” through the mental shell to other layers. To explain the nature of superconsciousness, the concept of engrams (traces in the subject's memory) is used, the transformation and recombination of which form the neurophysiological basis of superconsciousness. Operating with engrams, recombining them, the brain generates unprecedented combinations of previous impressions. Fund engram, - and this is the outside world, overturned into the human body - ensures the relative autonomy and freedom of the latter, however, the impossibility of going beyond engrams puts a limit to this freedom.
2. An explanation of the mechanism of intuition is sought in the "world of the subconscious", in which the entire history and prehistory of processes that practically do not manifest themselves are accumulated, and the selection of various solutions is guided by subconscious attitudes. Due to the fact that intuition, spontaneity, free movement of the mind play a role at the stage of selection, the presence of unpredictable and random elements is possible. The effectiveness of the solution is enhanced by a special motivation, moreover, when the ineffective methods of solving the problem have been exhausted and the less automated the mode of action is, and the search dominant has not yet faded away, the greater the chances of solving the problem.
Intuition is also understood as a manifestation of the subdominant level of the organization of action, without tying it rigidly to the unconscious level.
3. From the point of view of synergetics, the mechanism of intuition can be represented as a mechanism of self-organization, self-completion of visual and mental images, ideas, ideas, thoughts.
4. J. Piaget considered intuition as figurative objective thinking, characterizing mainly prelogical stage of development, considering, like K.G. Jung, that with age, the role of intuition somewhat decreases and it gives way to a more social type of thinking - logical. Jung called intuition the mother soil from which thinking and feeling grow as rational functions.
5. Thinking and intuition are two areas on the scale of awareness inherent in the process of inference. Thus, intuition is likened to thinking - it is an unconscious conclusion, it is a process of generating decisions that proceeds unconsciously. A person may not be aware of either some part of the process or the whole process.
6. Based on the mechanism of work of both hemispheres of the human brain, R.M. Granovskaya explains the psychophysiological mechanism of intuition. This process includes several consecutive stages of alternate dominance of both hemispheres. In the case of the dominance of the left, the results of mental activity can be realized and "spoken about". In the opposite case, the thought process, developing in the subconscious, is not realized and is not voiced. All higher mental processes occurring in both hemispheres have significant differences, however, the information processing operations inherent in the right and left hemispheres have not been equally studied by psychology.
A significant difference in the work of the hemispheres is that right-sided perception is figurative perception, episodic and autobiographical memory, situational generalization, continuous and multi-valued logic. When the left hemisphere is working, conceptual perception, categorical memory, two-valued logic, and classifications by features are activated.
The transition of information processing from the left hemisphere to the right explains why it is impossible to realize the intermediate stages of achieving the result, and sensibility, certainty, unconsciousness, emotional components of intuition are all consequences of a one-time transition when realizing the result from right to left.
With this position, the intuitive solution looks like a two-phase process: first, some unconscious sensual right hemisphere stage, then a jump, and awareness in the left hemisphere.
§ 4. Forms of intuition
Today, there are many disparate, unsystematic approaches to determining the form in which intuition manifests itself.
4.1. From the point of view of the subject of perception, this subjective And objective forms
Subjective - is the perception of unconscious mental data of subjective origin. Objective form is the subliminal perception of factual data emanating from the object, accompanied by subliminal thoughts and feelings.4.2. Sensual and intellectual forms of intuition
The ability of a person to distinguish and identify objects of the surrounding world and their simple combinations is intuitive. The classic intuitive concept of objects is the idea of the presence of things, properties and relationships. First of all, we mean objects that are sensually perceived either in the surrounding reality or in the reality of the inner world of images, emotions, desires, etc.
Thus, the simplest form of intuition, which plays an important role in the initial stages of the creative process, is sensory contemplation, or spatial intuition. (In the definition of mathematicians "categorical"). With its help, the initial geometric concepts of figures and bodies are formed. The first simple judgments of arithmetic have the same sensory-practical and intuitive character. All elementary ratios of arithmetic, such as "5 + 7 = 12", are perceived as absolutely reliable. The real, initial confidence in the truth of such statements does not come from proofs (although they are possible in principle), but from the fact that these statements are elementary subject-practical statements, facts given subject-practically.
Conclusions are also taken as immediate evidence, something unconditionally given. Logical analysis takes into account, but never rejects, this kind of statement. This type of intuition in mathematics is called "objective" or "praxeological".
A somewhat peculiar kind of intuition is the transfer of features that have a common meaning for a certain class of objects to new objects of this class. In mathematics, it is called "empirical" intuition. Logically, empirical intuition is a hidden conclusion by analogy, and it has no more certainty than analogy in general. The conclusions obtained in this way are tested by logical analysis, on the basis of which they can be rejected.
Confidence in the results of sensory intuition was undermined after a large number of concepts and theories arose in mathematics that contradicted everyday sensory intuition. The discovery of continuous curves that have no derivatives at any point, the emergence of new, non-Euclidean geometries, the results of which at first seemed not only contrary to ordinary common sense, but also unimaginable from the point of view of intuition based on Euclidean ideas, the concept of actual infinity, conceivable according to analogies with finite sets, etc. - all this gave rise to a deep distrust of sensual intuition in mathematics.
At present, it is generally accepted that in scientific creativity the decisive role belongs to intellectual intuition, which, however, is not opposed to the analytical, logical development of new ideas, but goes hand in hand with it.
Intelligent intuition does not rely at all on sensations and perceptions, even in their idealized form.
In mathematical reasoning, primarily in elementary discursive transitions, i.e. in the conclusions “from the definition”, as well as in the conclusions on the logical schemes of transitivity, contraposition, etc., without an explicit formulation of these schemes, there is a so-called “logical” intuition. Logical intuition (certainty) also refers to stable unrealizable elements of mathematical reasoning.
Based on the division of situations of intuitive clarity, two main types of intuition are distinguished: apodictic, the results of which are not subject to revision from the point of view of logic, and assertoric, which has a heuristic value and is subject to logical analysis.
One of the most productive forms of intellectual intuition is creative imagination, with the help of which new concepts are created and new hypotheses are formed. An intuitive hypothesis does not logically follow from the facts, it relies mainly on creative imagination.
In other words, intuition in mathematical creativity acts not only as a holistic, unifying idea, to a certain extent completing the cycle of research, but also as a guess that needs further development and verification using deductive, evidential methods of reasoning.
4.3. Concrete and abstract forms of intuition
Concrete intuition is the perception of the factual side of things, abstract intuition is the perception of ideal connections.
4.4. Conceptual and eidetic forms of intuition
The conceptual one forms new concepts on the basis of previously existing visual images, and the eidetic one builds new visual images on the basis of previously existing concepts.
4.5. Functions of intuition
The primary function of intuition is the simple transmission of images or visual representations of relationships and circumstances that are either completely unattainable with the help of other functions, or can be achieved "on distant detours."
Intuition can act as an auxiliary tool, acting automatically when no others are able to open a way out of the situation.
§ 5. The role of intuition in science
The role of intuition in scientific and, in particular, mathematical knowledge has not yet been sufficiently developed.
It is known that the intuitive components of cognition can be found in representatives of many professions and in various life situations. Thus, in jurisprudence, a judge is expected not only to know the "letter" of the law, but also its "spirit". He must pass sentence not only according to a predetermined amount of evidence, but also according to "internal conviction".
In philology, one cannot do without the development of a “linguistic sense”. Having cast a cursory glance at the patient, the doctor can sometimes make an accurate diagnosis, but at the same time he has difficulty explaining which symptoms he was guided by, he is not even able to realize them, and so on.
As for mathematics, here intuition helps to comprehend the relationship between the whole and parts, before any logical reasoning. Logic plays a decisive role in analysis finished proof, in dividing it into separate elements and groups of such elements. Synthesis the same parts into a single whole, and even individual elements into larger groups or blocks, is achieved with the help of intuition.
Attempts at machine modeling of human activity turn out to be secondary in relation to intuitive human activity, based on the synthesis of parts and the whole.
Consequently, the understanding of mathematical reasoning and proof is not limited to logical analysis, but is always supplemented by synthesis, and such synthesis, based on intellectual intuition, is by no means less significant than analysis.
The intuitive hypothesis does not follow logically from the facts, it is mainly based on the creative imagination. In addition, intuition is "the ability to see the target from afar."
A prominent role in the development of questions related to the place of intuition in the field of mathematics belongs to the so-called intuitionism, the founder of which is considered to be the outstanding Dutch mathematician, logician, methodologist of science L.E.Ya. Brouwer (1881–1966). Intuitionism, which claims to be a general mathematical theory, has had a huge impact on: a) maintaining a stable interest in the problem of intuition among mathematicians; b) stimulation of serious philosophical research on the study of the phenomenon of intuition; and, finally, c) they gave brilliant examples of obtaining mathematical results of fundamental significance on an intuitive basis.
The main directions in which intuitionism has made a serious contribution to the development of the doctrine of mathematical intuition:
§ 6. Philosophical theories of intuition
There are as many philosophical theories of intuition as there are existing epistemological teachings that explain the facts of "direct" or "intuitive" cognition. As a theory of the facts of knowledge, every theory of intuition is a philosophical theory.
The term "intuition" and philosophical teachings about intuition originated in ancient Indian and ancient Greek philosophy. Of great interest are the theories of intuition created by the philosophers of the Renaissance, in particular, N. of Cusa and D. Bruno.
Teachings about intuition of the 17th century. arose in connection with the epistemological problems posed to philosophy by the development of mathematics and natural science - an attempt to find out the foundations on which these sciences rely, the reliability of their results and evidence. In these teachings there is no opposition between intuitive thinking and logical thinking; there is no alogism in them. Intuition is considered as the highest kind of knowledge, but knowledge is still intellectual.
On the contrary, the intuitionism of the twentieth century - a form of criticism of the intellect, a denial of intellectual methods of cognition, an expression of distrust in the ability of science to adequately cognize reality.
A philosophical view of the question of the nature of intuition allows us to pose a number of consistent questions: is it possible to control the process of cognition by developing the mechanism of intuition? This question leads to another: is it possible to purposefully control the process of intuition? And if it is possible, then how to put it into practice and are there ready-made recipes for stimulating the intuitive process? The question of innate abilities for intuitive creativity is also important. It is not possible today to answer the last question, however, observations are accumulating that indicate that these abilities are amenable to development.
From the point of view of resolving a long-standing theoretical dispute over the opposition of intuitive and rational cognition and numerous attempts in this opposition to emphasize the advantages of the intuitive type of cognition in every possible way, it is more expedient to consider them as a holistic process. This approach makes it possible to explain the very mechanism of making intuitive decisions.
And then the opposite of the intuitive should be considered not so much logical (even mathematical and logical), but algorithmic. If an exact mathematical algorithm for obtaining a true result is given (or a proof of algorithmic undecidability), then no intuition (neither sensory-empirical nor intellectual) is needed to obtain this result. It retains only an auxiliary function of using the rules for applying the algorithm scheme, unambiguous recognition of elementary constructive objects, and operations on them.
Another thing is the search for a new algorithm, which is already one of the main types of mathematical creativity. Here, intuition, especially intellectual, is very productive, it is a necessary component of the research process: from varying the initial goal in direct and reflexive comparison with the desired conclusion up to obtaining a result (no matter positive or negative) or abandoning further search for obvious reasons.
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Epistemological mechanisms of various types of these combinations turn out to be "symmetrical" See: Karmin A. S., Khaykin E. P. Gnoseological analysis of scientific intuition. - In the book: Problems of Philosophy and Methodology of Modern Natural Science, M., 1973, p. 323-324. In each of the four indicated types of combinations, there is a connection between the nature of the auxiliary image and the result: if the auxiliary image is conceptual, then the result is a new concept, if the auxiliary image is sensory-visual, then the result is a new visual representation.
Types I and II are carried out at the level of conceptual intuitive cognition, III and IV - at the level of eidetic intuitive cognition.
Since we are now talking about scientific intuition, it should be noted that the interaction between the two types of sensory-visual images (according to type IV) does not give new knowledge. This combinatorics apparently refers to an eidetic act of this kind, which is not included in the field of scientific knowledge. The result of types I, II and III of interaction is intuitive knowledge, which is an important component in the structure of the process of obtaining scientific knowledge.
DIRECT AND INTUITIVE KNOWLEDGE IN SCIENTIFIC CREATIVITY
The problem of correlation between "direct" and "intuitive" knowledge is one of the most difficult in modern epistemology. And it is not surprising, because the very formulation of the question is partly problematic. This is due to the spread of the point of view about the identification of direct and intuitive knowledge, since "immediacy" is indeed an essential feature of intuition.
Like most epistemological problems, the question of the relationship between direct and intuitive knowledge cannot be resolved only by comparing these two forms of knowledge. It is necessary to start with an analysis of the process of obtaining them, and the latter is inseparable from the general laws of cognition. But we will talk about obtaining "direct" and "intuitive" knowledge as important components of the general system of scientific knowledge, and therefore we cannot ignore the highest form of scientific knowledge - the act of scientific creativity.
The concept of "creativity" is a very capacious and multifaceted concept. The complexity in the study of its epistemological essence is predetermined to a certain extent by confusion in the disclosure of the content of interconnected concepts: "creativity - knowledge", "creativity - scientific creativity", "scientific creativity - scientific knowledge". The lack of clear definitions makes it difficult, on the one hand, to analyze the specifics of these cognitive processes, and on the other hand, to identify a qualitative difference in the ways of expressing the results obtained. In this regard, it sometimes seems possible to confine ourselves to conditional negative definitions such as: "not all creation is creativity", "not all knowledge is creativity", "not all development and formation is creativity", "not all activity is creativity", etc. . Apparently, they could be combined into one common: "not every cognitive process necessarily presupposes the presence of a creative act."
In other cases, for example, they try to use certain positive characteristics based on the thesis: "there is always an element of creativity in creating something new." These include the definition of creativity given in the "Philosophical Encyclopedia": "Creativity is an activity that generates something new, never before" Philosophical Encyclopedia, vol. 5. M., 1970, p. 185. .
There are also a number of more detailed definitions that, as it were, synthesize these aspects. Among them is the definition: "Creativity is a spiritual activity, the result of which is the creation of original values, the establishment of new, previously unknown facts, properties and patterns of the material world and spiritual culture "Spirkin A. G. Consciousness and self-consciousness. M., 1972, p. 193. It seems quite possible to use this more detailed definition as a working one to identify the main properties of creativity in general. Under the latter is understood as a certain holistic act, in which the activity of the consciousness of the creator is clearly expressed.From the formal-logical point of view, the concepts of "creativity" and "cognition" belong to the category of intersecting ones, because knowledge, as simply the accumulation of knowledge, can also be uncreative.
An analysis of the entire history of human cognition of the external world indicates that creativity is the highest form of the cognitive process. But when we analyze creativity, we must keep in mind that it also acts as scientific creativity - the highest act of scientific knowledge.
Scientific knowledge begins with the process of transforming knowledge. However, not every transformation of knowledge involves the acquisition of new scientific knowledge. And, moreover, not all scientific knowledge is obtained as a result of scientific creativity. Scientific creativity has a certain specificity in relation to scientific knowledge. As a result of the process of scientific creativity, we obtain fundamentally new scientific knowledge. Analyzing the methods of obtaining this new scientific knowledge, identifying the criterion for this fundamental novelty, we will be able to trace what are the functions of direct and intuitive knowledge in this process and their qualitative differences.
In order to single out the process of obtaining direct and intuitive knowledge from the process of obtaining knowledge in general, one should again turn to the analysis of the internal structure of cognition. Cognition is a single monolithic process of reflecting reality, the complexity and versatility of which is expressed in several key points: "From living contemplation to abstract thinking, and from it to practice - this is the dialectical path of knowing the truth" Lenin V. I. Poln. coll. cit., vol. 29, p. 152-153. .
This well-known Leninist position has become a generally accepted formula in the modern theory of knowledge. The deep content inherent in these words is adequate to the depth and inexhaustibility of human cognitive capabilities. A creative approach to solving a number of epistemological problems lies in the further deepening, supplementing and application of this provision, which most accurately reflects the most complex dialectical relationship between the individual elements of the cognitive process.
Already living contemplation presupposes, to a certain extent, practical activity and elements of abstract thinking, since living contemplation itself is predetermined by the direct interaction of a person (cognitive subject) with the external world (object). In abstract thinking, a person, operating with concepts, relies on ideas about the processes and patterns of reality, correlating them with the practical experience that has been accumulated both by him and society in the process of historical practice. In other words, abstract thinking is dialectically connected with living contemplation as a direct reflection of objective-practical activity. And, finally, in practical activity, a person correlates his ideas with those general conclusions that he formulated in the process of abstract thinking, i.e. in the process of practical activity, using the results of both sensory and logical knowledge.
An analysis of the complex dialectical interconnection of the moments of cognition allows us to conclude that in living contemplation in a "filmed form" there are both elements of abstract thinking and elements of practice. Living contemplation is the dialectical unity of the immediate and the mediated. The specificity of direct knowledge obtained through sensory contemplation lies in the direct perception of the truth without further proof at this stage of the study. This special kind of knowledge appears in cognition as a process and as a result. Apparently, it is in this direction that the epistemological analysis of direct knowledge should be carried out.
"One and the same objectively concrete acts as the starting point of cognition - given in sensual contemplation and at a higher level - as a result as mental concreteness. In this case, it turns out that between the concrete as a starting point and the concrete as a result lies a complex path of cognition, consisting, among other things, in the analysis, decomposition of the originally concrete and abstract definitions, and in the synthesis, the combination of these definitions back into the concrete.At the same time, the complete reproduction of the objectively concrete in the cognizing head of a person on the basis of the ratio of analysis and synthesis is possible because this process is a processing of contemplation and representation in the concept" Marx K., Engels F. Soch., vol. 12, p. 727. .
This "originally concrete" definition appears in cognition as direct knowledge, which is the result of the dialectical correlation of conscious and unconscious forms of reflection. As a result of the conscious "processing" of direct knowledge, various forms of discursive knowledge are obtained, with unconscious "processing" - in some cases, intuitive knowledge. So, from the above position of K. Marx it logically follows that it is wrong to identify direct and intuitive knowledge, however, the qualitative differences between these two forms of knowledge do not end there.
Human consciousness is more than just awareness. All cognitive functions of our thinking are in the sphere of consciousness, but they are far from being always realized. And it is the unconscious reflection that is the basis for obtaining intuitive knowledge.
The purpose of cognitive processes is the procedure for accumulating knowledge. But knowledge in the history of its development does not initially become scientific See: Mayzel IA Science, automation, personality. M., 1972, p. 121. . The result of sensory and rational knowledge is not always scientific knowledge. Cognition in general is the accumulation of knowledge, but not all knowledge is science. The latter, as a system of developing knowledge, is made up of a set of results of evidence-based knowledge.
The process of cognition as such begins with sensory cognition, and its result is direct knowledge. This certain form knowledge, although in some cases misleading the subject. Direct knowledge is a prerequisite and the beginning of obtaining any new knowledge, but in itself it is not yet scientific knowledge. According to its epistemological essence, direct knowledge cannot be classified as scientific. Its primary "givenness" seems to be the starting point of knowledge, and not only scientific. In contrast, mediated knowledge is knowledge obtained through various types of transformation, it takes the form of empirical and theoretical knowledge. Mediation is a set of mental operations that allow the transformation of knowledge at the level of both sensory and logical cognition, and at the level of their interaction. This is precisely why Hegel is right when he asserts that there is nothing in nature or in society, and consequently in cognition, that does not contain both immediacy and mediation.
But then what about direct knowledge itself? In the epistemological sense, it is really not mediated. This is, of course, some assumption necessary for the study. But in the ontological sense, direct knowledge is always mediated by socio-historical practice.
So, knowledge (and even pre-scientific) is not limited to the acquisition and accumulation of knowledge, it moves through the process of knowledge transformation in three ways.
First way from sensory image to sensory image. The result of the transformation of direct knowledge in processes of this type is the first form of mediated knowledge - sensory knowledge.
Second way from concept to concept. Its result is rational knowledge. But it is not yet scientific. Scientific knowledge should be a system of developing knowledge that forms the basis of scientific foresight, i.e. obtaining new knowledge See: The logic of scientific research. M., 1965, p. 190-191. . It should also explain new patterns, have evidentiary and transforming power See: Shtoff V.D. Introduction to the methodology of scientific knowledge, 1969, p. 12-13. . At the same time, "probative" force is not identified with the practical verification of truth or falsity. Knowledge can be true, verified experimentally, and yet not be scientific.
In some cases, as a result of the transformation of knowledge in the first and second ways, scientific knowledge can be obtained if it meets the above characteristics. In the process of scientific knowledge, there are a number of scientific and auxiliary operations (the activities of scientific and technical workers, laboratory assistants, repeated repetition of experiments, etc.), which are introduced into the general system of scientific knowledge, and their result is also scientific knowledge. However, there is no act of scientific creativity as the highest form of scientific knowledge. The act of scientific creativity aims to obtain not just scientific knowledge, but fundamentally new scientific knowledge. To obtain this kind of knowledge, the above two types of transformation are not enough.
Third specific way- from a sensory image to a new concept or from a concept to a new sensory image. This way of transforming knowledge takes place in the process of unconscious interaction between the sensory and the logical in cognition, in other words, in the process of intuitive cognition. Its result, as already noted, is "intuitive knowledge" - the beginning of any new scientific knowledge.
To prove the above provisions, let us digress from the epistemological study of the problem and turn to the field of physics.
The basis for the formulation of quantum concepts in the physics of the atom and elementary particles was the data obtained as a result of sensory knowledge. This, in particular, is evidenced by the discovery of the electron and radioactivity. Models of the atom, built on the basis of classical concepts, did not have an experimental basis. They could not, for example, explain the stability of the atom, a number of spectral regularities, and, above all, the linear character of atomic spectra. But these results of experimental studies were the source for new theoretical considerations, which found their expression in the works of Bohr. Moreover, as Heisenberg noted, Bohr proceeded "not from mathematical analysis underlying the theory of assumptions, but from an intensive study of the phenomena themselves, which allowed him to feel the relationships intuitively rather than deduce them formally "Heisenberg V. Quantum theory and its interpretation. - In the book; Niels Bohr. Life and creativity. M., 1967, pp. 6. .
Bohr's theory was further developed in the works of Louis de Broglie. Bohr's theory and his postulates could not explain the reasons for the quantum displacements of an electron in an atom. In order to solve this problem, de Broglie puts forward an assumption about the dual corpuscular-wave nature of microparticles and gives it a mathematical description, known in physics as the de Broglie mathematical equation.
Some bourgeois philosophers try to present the process of obtaining these equations as "pure fiction" of a scientist. They proceed from the fact that the content of the creative process arises from the immanent nature of the spiritual world, the essence of cognition. The latter is always the result of construction, not reflection. At the same time, apologists for such concepts are trying to confirm the neo-positivist thesis about the absence of sensory cognition in studies of the physics of the microworld.
Nevertheless, de Broglie's ideas were born under. by the direct influence of the data of sensory cognition and were later confirmed by experience. Thus, Davisson, Jamer and Tartakovsky established that the electron, like light, is characterized by the phenomena of diffraction and interference. The same experiments confirmed the validity of the quantitative relationships formulated by de Broglie.
However, it should be noted that there is also a certain difficulty in interpreting the transition from the source to de Broglie's assumptions. This process is not subject to established views on rational knowledge. The acquisition of new knowledge occurs according to the third way of transforming knowledge, which consists in the interaction of the sensual and the rational.
In the process of such an approach to the transformation of knowledge, so-called jumps are made, or, in other words, there is a lack of a clear connection between the individual links in the study. This does not at all mean the actual discreteness of the process under study: discontinuity applies only to this stage of scientific research. With long-term analysis, it somehow lends itself to detection.
The considered examples from the field of physics of the microcosm show that the basis of all the results obtained is always the previous experience, the sensory data obtained in it, expressed in the form of direct knowledge. The real development of physical knowledge allows us to conclude that scientific knowledge does not fit only into the framework of sensory and rational knowledge. The process of movement of scientific knowledge tends to its highest act - the act of scientific creativity, which implies the acquisition of a fundamentally new scientific knowledge, which forms the basis of a new theory. What is usually called a discovery in science is a most complex process in which the scientist does not have time to realize the actual mechanism of his creative thinking. The discovery already acts as a result of scientific creativity, carried out at the level of interaction between sensory and rational cognition.
Direct knowledge, as the initial form of knowledge, is subjected at this level of knowledge to the process of transformation of knowledge according to the third method. This transition occurs unconsciously, suddenly, and the result of it is intuitive knowledge. This new (theoretical or empirical) knowledge, if it is confirmed by logical proof, is always the end of one process of scientific knowledge and the beginning of a new one.
The third stage of transformation presupposes the subsequent movement from the concept to a new sensory image, i.e. to direct knowledge. It differs from purely direct knowledge, it is relatively direct, its specific form is intuitive knowledge. The intuitive knowledge obtained in this way, confirmed by experience, is the basis for obtaining new empirical knowledge, which is again the completion of the old and the beginning of the new knowledge. It already contains the prerequisites for obtaining new theoretical knowledge. This is a fundamentally new theoretical and empirical knowledge and represents a new scientific knowledge. The complex process of obtaining it assumes as a necessary element the highest stage of scientific knowledge - the act of scientific creativity, which, among other things, is characterized by the use of intuitive knowledge.
Einstein pays great attention to "intuitive knowledge" when analyzing the mechanism of scientific creativity. For him, generally speaking, "only intuition is of real value" Einstein A. Physics and reality. M., 1965, p. 337. .
So, if the process of transforming direct knowledge is carried out according to the third method, then we get specific direct knowledge, which can be given the following definition. Intuitive knowledge is a special kind of direct knowledge based on previous experience, mediated by the social practice of mankind, which is the result of a sudden, unconscious insight into the truth without previous logical analysis and subsequent logical proof at this stage of scientific research.
Intuitive knowledge is one of the most important manifestations of scientific creativity. Apparently, "scientific creativity" in the epistemological plane should be considered as the culminating stage in common system scientific knowledge, which is necessary component in the process of obtaining fundamentally new scientific knowledge.
The analysis of the problem of the relationship between scientific knowledge and scientific creativity should, in our opinion, be divided into two stages:
Definition of the field of scientific knowledge.
The allocation of scientific creativity as the highest act of scientific knowledge and the definition of its specificity.
The difficulty in defining scientific knowledge is primarily due to the fact that the boundaries between the components included in it are very conditional. Under different conditions, the same operations can be qualified both as scientific and as non-scientific. One of the options for limiting the scope of scientific knowledge is proposed in the report of the special consultant of UNESCO Pierre Auger: "Modern trends in scientific research".
"The field of scientific knowledge, - according to P. Auger, - includes: fundamental research: research undertaken primarily for the development of scientific knowledge, without any special practical goals. Applied research: the same, but it means specific practical purpose Development: the use of the results of fundamental or applied research aimed at introducing useful materials, devices, products, systems and processes or at improving existing ones. by the book: The effectiveness of scientific research. M., 1968, p. 63. . In addition, Auger believes that the concept of "work related to scientific activity" should also be introduced. It is proposed to refer to this area a number of scientific and auxiliary operations that are not related to scientific research. "It is useful to distinguish this kind of work from more original contributions to human knowledge, defined here as research and development," writes P. Auger Ibid., p. 72.
Undoubtedly, the original moments in scientific knowledge should be singled out and assigned to a special sphere of scientific knowledge - to the act of scientific creativity. However, "work related to scientific activity" belongs to the sphere of scientific knowledge, and it should hardly be taken out of it. "Scientific knowledge" is still not limited to the scope of "scientific research". Moreover, the main point for distinguishing research from non-research is "the absence or presence of an element of innovation or innovation. If this or that activity is carried out within the usual framework, it is not research and development. If it departs from conventional methods and looks for new ways, it qualifies as research and development" Ot. according to the book: The effectiveness of scientific research, p. 71. .
The moment of novelty is introduced in this case as a criterion for distinguishing scientific research from non-scientific. And this is basically true. However, any scientific knowledge involves the acquisition of new knowledge. Apparently, it is necessary to more strictly define the criterion of "novelty", while singling out "fundamentally new" as the result of scientific creativity.
Justice requires that the question of the criteria for "novelty" in scientific knowledge become the subject of an independent in-depth study. But since it is quite obvious that this particular question is one of the highlights in solving the problem of correlation between the areas of scientific knowledge and scientific creativity, we pay special attention to it.
Having singled out the sphere where a specific transformation of knowledge takes place (according to the third method), we can say that an act of scientific creativity also takes place in this area of scientific knowledge. And hence the specificity of scientific knowledge in relation to scientific creativity lies in the fact that in the process of this transformation, a special “new” arises - not just a different about: “old”, but some kind of “novelty”, which is at the same time the completion of some past process. the beginning of new knowledge. The acquisition of such "newness" occurs in an unusual, original, sudden movement from the previously unknown to something new. A prerequisite for such a qualitative leap in scientific creativity is intuitive Knowledge.
Of course, both the first and second ways of transforming knowledge can be considered as cognitive and creative processes related to the necessary stage of scientific knowledge. But the act of scientific creativity presupposes the creation of new knowledge according to the third way of transforming knowledge, in which all forms of sensory and rational cognition participate in a dialectical relationship.
In addition, when the question of the product of the creative act arises, the importance of the element of "uniqueness" as a criterion of creativity should be emphasized. When analyzing the specifics of scientific creativity, this is perhaps the most interesting and controversial issue.
A detailed analysis of the problem of uniqueness in the act of scientific creativity can, apparently, give many unexpected and interesting results from the epistemological point of view. It suffices to recall the history of the creation of the special theory of relativity, and many of the above arguments, including those about the uniqueness of the creative process, receive their empirical confirmation. Thus, using various analogies, one can obtain different results from each other, as was the case with the works of Lorentz, Einstein, Poincaré, Minkowski on the creation of the special theory of relativity. The individuality and uniqueness of the creative mechanism of the scientist is also confirmed in the history of the creation of quantum mechanics.
The discovery of the special theory of relativity and quantum mechanics belongs to the sphere of not just scientific knowledge, it presupposes an act of scientific creativity. The results obtained in these studies can be classified as fundamentally new scientific knowledge. Moreover, it should be borne in mind that the specificity of scientific creativity (say, in comparison with artistic creativity) lies in the fact that the result - the product of scientific creativity - not only can, but must be repeated. But the process of scientific creativity, as well as the process of artistic creativity, is original, individual and unrepeatable. Uniqueness is a necessary component of the process of scientific creativity, even if its product turns out to be false.
The individuality, originality, uniqueness of a scientist's creative act is largely determined by his intuition. But, in order to judge this with great reason, one should not only consider the results of scientific discoveries, but study in detail and deeply the very process of obtaining them. We must try to go through the whole path of research that led to the discovery, only then the action of intuition will not seem to us as some kind of mythical insight. Really existing processes of the material world underlie the action of intuition. This will make it possible to reveal the structure of "intuitive knowledge", the process of transformation of which presupposes the implementation of an act of scientific creativity.
So, we can offer some conclusions. Apparently, the cognitive process can be qualified as an act of scientific creativity if, as a result of scientific research carried out by new original methods, we have a qualitatively new result - a product that meets the following requirements:
This new product must also have a new essence, a new inner content, and not just a form of expression or description.
The process of obtaining it is original, individual and unique thanks to the intuition of the scientist. Scientific creativity is impossible without the action of intuition.
The methods used in the process of scientific creativity are original both in their structure and in their application.
The novelty of the product of scientific creativity has an objective historical character, and is not only a subjective novelty for the researcher who received it.
The product of scientific creativity must simultaneously be the completion of the old known processes and studies of the laws of the objective world and their new systematization, the beginning of a new scientific research.
These conditions define a fundamentally new scientific knowledge, in contrast to scientific knowledge in general, as a certain system of developing knowledge that forms the basis of foresight, i.e. obtaining new knowledge, which serves as a prerequisite for the subsequent transformation of knowledge. And if this transformation follows the third way, then we again have a process of scientific creativity. The specifics of the latter, in our opinion, are as follows:
The act of scientific creativity necessarily involves the use of intuitive knowledge.
The result of scientific creativity is a fundamentally new scientific knowledge, objectively new in the "context of the whole history" of human knowledge.
The criterion of uniqueness in the analysis of scientific creativity is applicable only to the very process of scientific creativity, but not to its result.
Identification of such characteristics, apparently, will make it possible to formulate definitions of the main types of creative activity: scientific, technical, artistic creativity, etc. And this, in turn, is necessary to create a general theory of creativity. In this section, we were only interested in studying the specifics of scientific creativity, which can conditionally be given such a definition Conditionally because only one aspect of the problem has been studied: the specifics of the difference between scientific creativity and scientific knowledge. : Scientific creativity is the highest act of cognition, characterized by originality, originality of methods for obtaining fundamentally new scientific knowledge and the repeatability of their results, an act based on the process of transforming intuitive knowledge.
The identification of direct and intuitive knowledge is illegal, as it leads to an undesirable simplification of the complex structure of the process of scientific knowledge. The main goal in studying the features of the process of scientific creativity is to penetrate as deeply as possible into the essence of the act of scientific creativity, isolate its components and determine their specificity.
In the epistemological sense, the concept of the immediate is broader than the concept of intuitive knowledge. Direct and intuitive knowledge, although dialectically interconnected, perform different functions in cognition. Direct knowledge, as a result of conscious and unconscious forms of reflection, is the beginning and prerequisite of any knowledge (not only scientific), including intuitive. Intuitive knowledge, as a result of unconscious reflection, appears in scientific knowledge as one of the types of direct knowledge and is a necessary component of the act of scientific creativity. Nothing is possible without the use of intuitive knowledge. scientific discovery, as evidenced by the entire history of science.
INTUITIVE AND DISCOURSE IN SCIENTIFIC THINKING
The question of the relationship between the intuitive and the discursive-logical in the history of epistemology has always been as problematic as it is traditional. It is no coincidence that, according to many researchers, this question is a question about intuition itself. At least in the analysis of intuition as an epistemological problem, it occupies an important place.
This question arose especially sharply in connection with the study of the nature and specifics of the formation of a system of modern scientific knowledge. “The mathematization and formalization of knowledge,” notes P.V. Kopnin, “the desire to finally displace the intuitive moment in it has become a fact. But at the same time, there is another trend - the inclusion of this intuitive moment as the main means of movement towards new theoretical constructions. Of course, knowledge more and more tends to logical rigor, one of the elements of which is formalization. It is impossible to stop this movement, and there is no need for it. At the same time, science, as before, needs ways out from under the rigid despotism of formal-logical deduction, in jumps, in the movement of thought to fundamentally new results, in the bold advancement of ideas, concepts that currently do not find a strict logical justification. Without this, science cannot successfully develop "Kopnin P.V. Marxist-Leninist theory of knowledge and modern science. - Questions of Philosophy, 1971, No. 3, p. 29. .
There are quite a few approaches to solving this problem, but all of them, perhaps, ultimately come down to three main areas:
Intuitive and discursive-logical are fundamentally different, incompatible forms (types) of cognition, which have their own areas of application.
The intuitive is a special form of the logical.
Intuitive and discursive-logical - various dialectically contradictory forms (sides, moments) of a single process of cognition.
The first of these directions is presented in a very clear form in intuitionism.
Quite common at present is the second direction, which, as a rule, logicians advocate, although a similar point of view is also common among philosophers who believe that the task of studying the problem is precisely to remove the mystical and irrational coating from intuition and bring it under the system of logical-discursive thinking.
This point of view, of course, has not only its supporters, but also opponents. Without going into the essence of discussions on this subject, we only note that disputes are sometimes conducted not on the merits of the issue and are related to various interpretations concepts.
The thing is that the concept of "logical" has a very wide semantic amplitude. V. I. Lenin called "subtle and deep" Hegel's thought, which refers to the fact that logic is similar to grammar: for a beginner - this is one thing, for a knower - another. V. I. Lenin attached particular importance to the idea of the identity of logic and the theory of knowledge. In this case, both for Hegel and V. I. Lenin, it was about the dialectical system of knowledge as a whole, and V. I. Lenin emphasized the crucial importance of dialectical principles, based on which Hegel laid the foundations of the modern theory of knowledge.
For Hegel himself, the human mind did not represent something unified and unambiguous, but acted as a complex hierarchical system in which, in addition to “thinking in general”, there are “reasonable thinking” and “rational thinking”, which are dialectically contradictory to each other. Speaking about the complex structure of the process of cognition, F. Engels distinguished between the doctrine of the laws of the process of thinking itself, logic and dialectics. "... The theory of the laws of thought is by no means some kind of "eternal truth" established once and for all, as philistine thought associates with the word "logic" K. Marx, F. Engels Soch., vol. 20, p. 367, .
If the word "logic" is rigidly and unambiguously associated with the theory of knowledge in its entirety, then, of course, there is nothing illogical left, but at the same time, there is no need for logic as a spider. Dialectical materialism considers cognition as a self-contradictory process, where a strict system of rational constructions must be opposed by something that has opposite properties. This "something", apparently, is that mysterious and little-studied moment of knowledge, which is called "intuition". In this sense, the intuitive is opposed to the discursive-logical and is non-logical (which is not at all identical with the concept of "alogical", which has an irrational meaning) form of knowledge. If, however, by logic we mean dialectics, the theory of knowledge, then, of course, it is unlawful to take the intuitive out of the framework of the logical.
Some researchers are confused by the fact that intuition, unlike the logical one, cannot be brought under a system of known rules and patterns. Apparently, they are alarmed by the fact that the division of the concepts "intuitive" and "logical" testifies to the illogicality of intuition with all the ensuing consequences. Obviously, this circumstance prompts the idea of the possibility and even the necessity of algorithmization of intuition. "Cognition as one of the types of human activity ... cannot but be algorithmic. Therefore, the statement about the impossibility of an algorithmic representation of intuition is tantamount to the statement that some types of mental activity do not obey any internal laws" Bychko I. V., Zharikov E. S. Scientific search. - In the book: The logic of scientific research. M., 1965, p. 226. .
The point, however, is not that this or that phenomenon is not subject to any laws, but that these laws remain unknown for the time being. This is one of the fundamental theses of Marxist epistemology.
Of the three aforementioned directions in solving the problem of the intuitive and the discursive, the most correct seems to be the one in which intuition and logic act as two mutually presupposing and at the same time contradictory aspects of the process of cognition.
Contradictory, as noted by F. Engels, is thinking itself, in which there is a synthesis of feelings and higher forms of abstraction. The dialectic of the process of cognition necessarily presupposes (and this is confirmed by theoretical studies) See Gödel's incompleteness theorem. that such a form of cognition as discursive-logical (rational) thinking cannot fully explain and exhaust the process of cognition. The rational is not the same as the rational. "The goal of the struggle of the mind, - said Hegel, - is to overcome what is fixed by reason" Hegel F. Soch., vol. 1, p. 70. .
The need to recognize the fact of the simultaneous discursiveness and intuitiveness of the cognitive process is a clear evidence of its dialectical nature. Some types of representations, according to J. Hadamard, "may give a more logical course to thoughts, others - a more intuitive move" Hadamard J. Study of the psychology of the invention process in the field of mathematics. M., 1970, p. 107. . However, from one logical system to another, you can go (make a leap) only with the help of intuition. This was shown by Descartes.
Against the absolutization of logical methods, alas, containing, in the words of Descartes, a number of "either harmful or unnecessary" prescriptions, Poincaré also spoke out in his time. His well-known characterization of logical and intuitive methods in creative activity has already become a classic aphorism. However, Poincaré unnecessarily absolutized both of these methods of cognition. Moreover, he supported the idea of dividing scientists into two categories according to innate "types of thinking": logicists and intuitives. These views not only have nothing to do with reality, but later acquired an undesirable ideological and social coloring. Based on this idea, the famous German mathematician Klein suggested the priority of the intuitive type of thinking among scientists of Teutonic origin. The logical type of thinking, as less perfect, is inherent, in his opinion, to the Slavs and Jews. Subsequently, Hadamard resolutely spoke out against such a "theory", convincingly refuting it on the basis of a large amount of factual material. .
The fair criticism of the views of the logicists by Poincaré, later by de Broglie, Einstein, Bunge and others, in the interpretation of some scientists, unfortunately grew into an extreme of a different kind. Thus, Jugurth generally denies the role of logic in scientific creativity. “We can safely say,” he writes, “that none of the great geniuses of scientific thought thought logically in the way it is depicted in the textbooks of logic, i.e. in figures, modes, schemes, principles, or whatever they are called, these scholastic quirks..." Quoted. by: Bychko I. V., Zharikov E. S. Scientific search, p. 222. . If Jugurth stipulates the content of the concept "logical", then Nicole argues that new creations do not owe anything at all "neither to logic nor reason"!
Genuine creativity "should be at odds with logic and common sense." "Intuition begins where logical ways of problem analysis are discarded..." Baroyan O. Researcher's talent. - Literary newspaper, 1967, March 8, p. eleven. .
I. A. Bernshtein adheres to a different opinion. The cessation of attempts to solve a problem logically, in his opinion, by no means creates the prerequisites for its expulsion from the "field of vision of the psyche", but only leads to a change in the activity of the psyche, in particular, to the activation of those of its forms that are associated with intuition.
At one time, on the pages of domestic scientific publications, there was a dispute on the question of whether the so-called "logic of discovery" exists. Many well-known Soviet philosophers took part in this discussion. Apparently, the reason for this discussion is again connected with the issue of the semantic ambiguity of the concept of "logical". Obviously, there is a "logic of discovery" in the sense that every discovery has its own internal logic, regularity. If we understand the expression "logic of discovery" in the literal sense, i.e. mean by this a special form of scientific knowledge, then there is no such logic, just as there are no "purely logical" and "purely intuitive" discoveries.
It seems far-fetched, devoid of sufficient grounds, and the question of the supposedly taking place some kind of "offensive" of logic on the position of intuition, about the "recapture" of the latter huge areas. Such an assumption is untenable, since when extrapolating it, we necessarily come to the conclusion that intuition is gradually "absorbed" by logic. The question of what precedes what in the act of cognition is also pseudo-problematic: intuitive - logical or vice versa. Usually, intuition is considered to be "pre-logical thinking" (N. A. Bernshtein); logical forms of cognition are based on "non-logical" ones (J. Piaget), and so on. Such a question is legitimate only from the point of view of the psychological analysis of thinking. In epistemology, however, it makes no sense.
In the problem of the relationship between the intuitive and the discursive-logical, the dialectical nature of cognition is most clearly revealed. Logical and intuitive are different sides (moments) of a single and contradictory process. The logical contains the moment of the intuitive and vice versa. Intuitive and logical in a conventional sense can also be considered as ways of knowing, having their own specific features and characteristics. For example, if there is a gain in speed during intuitive cognition, then the conclusions obtained by the logical-discursive method, apparently, have a greater degree of reliability. All this, however, cannot have an absolute meaning, just as neither the intuitive nor the logical can serve as an absolute guarantor of true knowledge. There is no reason to give preference to one or another method of cognition, and even more so to agree with the opinion that truth is seen when and insofar as the subject has some kind of "good", "correct" intuition.
Neither "good" intuition, nor reasoning, built according to all the rules of logic, can guarantee the receipt of true knowledge. The logical method of proof cannot be considered as a criterion for the truth of axiomatic and probabilistic concepts. This method allows one to prove the consistency of theories, but does not guarantee reliability, since it is not able to reveal its full adequacy. The criterion of truth can only be practice, which is the source, basis and goal of knowledge. The logical method, therefore, can only verify the consistency of knowledge obtained intuitively, but not the proof of its truth.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I would like to say that in general I have some idea of the concept of intuition and its place and role in the active cognitive process. Intuition seems to me an integral part of creative cognition, and the action of intuition (illumination) is just as impossible without a long preliminary work of the mind, as it is impossible to swim across the river if you cannot swim. And now the process of obtaining new knowledge is most fully represented to me and I think that I can use some of the provisions discussed in this essay.
Knowledge gives us many secrets, and one of them is intuition. The difficulty here lies in the fact that intuition itself is part of cognition. And at this stage in the development of philosophy and science, we have only slightly opened the veil over this mystery. The prospect of future research, it seems to me, is the full disclosure of the mechanism of action of intuition and the development of intuitive abilities. The results of these studies will, in my opinion, have an enormous positive impact on the development of our science and culture.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Adler G. NLP: modern psychotechnologies. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001.
2. Kanke V.A. Main philosophical directions and concepts of science. -- M.: "Logos", 2000.
3. Kruglyakov E.P. What threatens society with modern pseudoscience? // Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2004, vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 8-27.
4. Kulik B.A. The logic of natural reasoning. -- SPb.: Nevsky dialect, 2001
5. Psychology and psychoanalysis of power (reader) in 2 volumes. -- Samara: Publishing House "BAHRAKH", 1999.
6. Sagatovsky VN Is there a way out for mankind? -- St. Petersburg: "Petropolis", 2000.
7. Yuzvishin I.I. Fundamentals of informationology. - M. high school. 2000.
8. Psychology and psychoanalysis of power (reader) in 2 volumes. -- Samara: Publishing House "BAHRAKH", 1999.
9. Kuvakin V.A. Your heaven and hell Humanity and inhumanity of man. (Philosophy, psychology and style of thinking of humanism). - M. - St. Petersburg, 358 p.
10.http://psylib.org.ua/books/irnov01/txt06.htm
Similar Documents
The doctrine of intuition in the works of Plato, Aristotle, Descartes. Types of intuition and their characteristics. The concept of the "sixth sense". Schematic of Graham Wallace's creative thinking process. The role of intuition in cognition. Cryptognosis and the specifics of its application in psychology.
abstract, added 05/27/2015
Possibilities of human knowledge in the history of philosophy: optimists, skeptics and agnostics. Subject and object of knowledge, ways of their formation. Sensory cognition and thinking. Reason and reason as aspects of the mind, the measurement of intelligence. The role of intuition in cognition.
abstract, added 12/24/2009
The concept of intuition, the origin and development of this term in philosophical thought, in modern times. Classification of forms of intuition, its varieties and distinctive features. Ways of correlation and interaction of the concepts of ideal and discursive in philosophy.
term paper, added 01/24/2010
The concept and problems of intuition in the history of mankind, its main forms. Analysis of the features of the mechanism of functioning of sensory cognition. Distinctive features of sensual and intellectual intuition, the role of self-organization in the field of creative thinking.
term paper, added 07/07/2017
Analysis of the problem of the cognizability of the world in the history of philosophy: realism, skepticism, agnosticism. Variety of forms of knowledge and cognitive activity. Definition of the role of intuition in cognition as the unity of the rational (reasonable) and sensual moments.
presentation, added 12/10/2015
"Living contemplation" or sensory cognition, its features, forms and role in the process of cognition. The role of sensory reflection of reality in providing all human knowledge. Abstract-mental comprehension of the world, its forms and role in cognition.
test, added 12/08/2010
Classification - the process of grouping objects of study or observation in accordance with the perception of their "common features". Characteristics of the types of classification, its functions and role in scientific knowledge and practice; analysis of rules and errors.
test, added 09/20/2011
Origin in philosophy of the term "theory of knowledge". The process of human comprehension of the surrounding world, interaction with material systems. Property and concepts of intuition, the role of thinking. Absolute and relative truth. Principles of scientific knowledge.
presentation, added 04/27/2015
Structure and specificity of philosophical knowledge. The concept of matter in philosophy, being and non-being. The idea of development in philosophy: determinism and indeterminism. Sensual and rational in cognition. Philosophical problem of intuition. Stages and directions of development of philosophy.
course of lectures, added 06/14/2009
Language as a predictive reality in the context of non-classical theory of knowledge. Reconstruction of various approaches to understanding the essence of language in the history of philosophy and science. Substantiation of the predictive potential of a scientific text in the humanities.
One of the most dangerous delusions of our time is the overestimation of the role of discursive thinking (mind) and the underestimation of direct intuitive knowledge. Reason - that which distinguishes man from animals and makes him the "crown of creation" - is erroneously declared the highest dignity of man. We are accustomed to talk about the greatness and power of the human mind, frivolously declare it the highest value and do not see the difference between an intelligent person and a wise person.
In fact, reason is a lower, in comparison with intuition, cognitive ability, functioning only within the limits of duality, subordinate to logic and not able to go beyond it. Intuition, on the other hand, is a qualitatively different, higher cognitive ability in relation to the mind, not limited by duality, going beyond the logical and, by its nature, fundamentally paradoxical.
“Staying in duality” is such a way of perceiving reality, which is characterized by a rigid and categorical division of everything that exists into irreconcilable opposites and their constant opposition. Rational knowledge is characterized by intolerance to contradictions. It does not recognize the right to the simultaneous existence of both opposites. Such a cognitive attitude is expressed in the Christian thesis “black is black, white is white; everything else is from the evil one.” However, Eastern mystics argue that the opposite principles, Yin and Yang, should not form a rigid static structure in which they, puffed up, stand against each other, like two armies before a battle. Intuition is a consistent and dynamic integrity of contradictory principles: good and evil, day and night, black and white. The great Guru of Tibet, Padmasambhava (5th century BC), whom Tibetans consider the reincarnation of Buddha Gautama, expressed the idea of non-duality of higher knowledge with its inherent strength and conciseness: “Opposites, in reality, do not exist, pluralism is also untrue. Enlightenment is not possible until dualism is cast aside and unity is known.”
This statement echoes the words of the great 20th-century physicist Niels Bohr: “Every deep truth has the peculiarity that the statement diametrically opposed to it is no less deep truth.”
Absoluteization of one pole of a pair of opposites and rejection of the other can only be in thinking, but not in real life. Hegel spoke remarkably about this: “The north pole in a magnet cannot be without the south, and the south cannot be without the north. If we cut the magnet into two halves, then we will not have the north pole in one piece, and the south pole in the other.
So reason is logical and, as such, does not tolerate contradictions. But is the world, the objective reality that it seeks to know, logical? It turns out that in fact, all real life is woven from contradictions. As one of my acquaintances, who had a dog for many years, told me, "the leash has two ends." You can go even further and say that in general everything in this world "has two ends." However, the paradoxical nature of being cannot be grasped by the mind, which rejects everything that “does not correspond to common sense and elementary logic". “No, you can prove it to me!”, the “reasonable” person demands. But he is unaware that any evidence works only within the limits of discursive thinking, only within the limits of reason. The complete senselessness of the requirement of logical proofs is especially clearly visible when it comes to the truths of a higher order, the knowledge of which requires transcending the mind, that is, going beyond its limits.
One wise Sufi master said about this: “Demanding intellectual proof of the existence of God is like demanding to see with the ears.” With regard to such a range of issues, the requirement “prove!” gives out the spiritual immaturity and cognitive failure of the questioner, indicates that he does not understand the elementary truths of the theory of knowledge. Mystics of all ages have faced this problem - learned ignoramuses, full of self-satisfaction, willing to argue, but incapable of higher knowledge.
In this regard, the less logical and more intuitive East has significant advantages over the scientific and technical, computerized to the marrow, West. The East is closer to understanding that true wisdom cannot be expressed except as a paradox. Here is an example of this kind of Eastern wisdom: "When dealing with an enemy, do not forget that he can become a friend; when dealing with a friend, do not forget that he can become an enemy."
Pure (that is, abstracted from the intuitive beginning) logic is always rigid and static, while intuition is fluid and mobile, has a pronounced dynamic character. The mind, meeting with any statement, requires its proof and checks it in terms of logical criteria of truth. Intuition does not recognize these claims of reason, because the lower cannot judge the higher. Arthur Schopenhauer said remarkably about the limitations of the rational-logical cognition inherent in science and the self-sufficiency of intuitively cognizable truth:
“This path of cognition, characteristic of the sciences, from the general to the particular, entails that in them much is justified by deduction from the preceding propositions, i.e. evidence; this gave rise to the old delusion, that only what has been proved is completely true, and that every truth needs proof, while, on the contrary, every proof rather needs an unprovable truth, which would serve as the ultimate support of itself or, again, its proof: here why directly proven truth is as much preferable to evidence based truth as spring water is better than that taken from the aqueduct.
Intuition is always beyond logic. Logic is always dualistic, two-dimensional, while intuition is three-dimensional. Metaphorically speaking, logic can deal not with a three-dimensional object, but only with its projection onto a plane (please do not lose sight of the metaphorical, and not the literal nature of this statement). From here arises the fundamental paradox and illogicality of intuitive knowledge. But only in this way can higher truths be expounded. The language of the great sages and mystics has always been distinguished by precisely this feature, and we are not talking about logical errors and absurdities. This is not at all the level of pre-scientific, imperfect thinking, the inability to think, but a completely, completely different level - the level of the ability not to think, not the level of “non-thinking”, but the level of super-thinking, which, in fact, is no longer thinking at all. Intuition is by no means a negation of logic, that is, a form of intellectual wretchedness, an archaic "childish" form of pre-scientific knowledge. Although intuition is indeed not logic, it is not lower than thinking, but higher than it; it does not negate discursive thinking, but transcends it.
In fact, a person needs both - both a strong disciplined thinking, and a clear intuitive insight into the essence of things. It should only be remembered that discursive thinking is never self-sufficient. The mind, devoid of natural, not always noticed, but always present support from intuition, at least in the guise of the so-called "common sense" - inevitably degenerates into schizophrenia.
The mind can only decide on the internal consistency of some system of views, some concept that describes reality, but it can never give us guarantees that this description is adequate to reality. He always leaves open the question of the adequacy of the informational description of a real object. The mind always uses words and symbols, without them its functioning is impossible (in ancient Greek, the same word was used to denote speech and mind - “logos”).
It is quite obvious that any speech message, and consequently, thinking, built on the principle of internal dialogue, is initially inherent in duality (dualism). This proves the fact that any sequence of characters and symbols used to express and convey some meaning can ultimately be reduced to a binary code (0 - 1, yes - no, dot - dash). But this is also the division into opposites, this is the duality of speech and thinking.
Thus, our mind, inconceivable without internal (thinking) and external speech, is always a computer mind, by definition not capable of going beyond duality. In addition, discursive thinking (and, accordingly, speech, which is inextricably linked with it), is fundamentally discrete. Each symbol, each word, each thesis (premise) is separated from the others. Discreteness can be defined as the "fluidity" of thinking and speech (the image of gravel that pours stone after stone), while the quality of continuity is inherent in intuitive wisdom-prajna. It can be likened to oil pouring from a jug in a continuous stream.
Words, words... Words can explain anything, prove anything, and refute anything (ancient Greek sophistry is a good example of this). But are words any meaningful criterion of truth? The so-called "explanatory power of a theory" is, in fact, a rather dubious criterion of its truth. I can say this as a professional psychologist: both neurotics, and paranoids, and “practically healthy” people who come with their “unsolvable” personal and emotional problems - all, without exception, have their own versions of reality that perfectly explain everything, but, unfortunately often completely inconsistent with the true state of affairs. This criterion (explanatory power) requires that all the facts that we have at our disposal fit (explain) in a consistent way in a theoretical scheme. It requires the absence of contradictions and logical inconsistencies, it requires complete internal consistency between all the constituent elements of a given theory. Let us repeat once again the thought already expressed earlier, in view of its special importance:
The mind can ensure the consistency and mutual consistency of the system of signs and symbols that claim to describe reality, but the mind does not guarantee the adequacy of this reflection, its truth. So, for example, it is known that a paranoid delusional system, as a rule, is distinguished by logic, internal consistency of all its components and great persuasiveness for an outsider who is not familiar with how things really are (a standard trap for inexperienced journalists). Other examples of this are the “legend” of a scout, a false version of a criminal trying to deceive the investigation, or an ordinary household lie (“Honey, I was late today due to a serious business need - another accident at the substation”). Perhaps the reader will want to object that the examples given are, so to speak, of an everyday nature, but for strict disciplined scientific thinking, everything is completely different. Such a reader is invited to visit the cemetery of obsolete scientific theories. Their authors were no dumber than you and me, on the contrary, many were much smarter than us, but this, as we see from the results, did not help them much.
There is no fundamental, profound difference between the “everyday” and scientific functioning of the mind. Logic, not substantiated by intuition, in any sphere of its action inevitably creates false, inadequate theories. Logic and adequacy are completely different things, and the second does not automatically follow from the first. This is well illustrated by the following example:
“You walk down the street and ask a passer-by:
“Excuse me, do you happen to know what time it is?” - to which he answers you:
“Yes, I know, and it passes by.”
His answer is absolutely logical, completely consistent with the question; there are no logical inconsistencies, contradictions between the question and the answer (of course, if we look at it from the point of view of "pure" logic, not burdened by common sense). However, from the point of view of this very common sense, from the point of view of the context, this is a complete inadequacy, which can be interpreted either as outright rudeness or as a mental illness. In this example, everything is presented in a vivid grotesque form, however, many people who sincerely consider themselves rational beings often make a similar mistake: they cling to purely external, formal-logical contradictions in the words of the interlocutor, while completely ignoring their semantic content and context. in which these words are spoken. It is a sad sight to see a self-confident intellectual nonentity listening to an intelligent person not in order to learn something from him, to draw something from him, but in order to catch his interlocutor in some purely formal contradiction and thus assert himself for him. check. Well, it’s not without reason that Scripture says just for such cases: “Do not throw pearls in front of pigs, for they will turn on you and tear you to pieces.” This unhealthy style of communication is much more common than it seems at first glance.
So, we have come to the conclusion that the explanatory power of a theory is by no means a self-sufficient criterion of its truth. It is quite possible to have a logically impeccable, consistent, and highly convincing exposition of an erroneous and inadequate theory, while an indubitable truth based on a deep and clear insight into the nature of reality can be presented in a very unintelligible, confused and incoherent way, with many contradictions and logical inconsistencies. In the first case, we have a remarkable development of verbal intelligence and discursive thinking with a regrettable insufficiency of intuition. In another case, on the contrary, a wonderful intuitive vision with an inability to fully and efficiently formalize it in words. Of course, we should not forget about the fundamental impossibility of verbalization of higher intuitive knowledge. Here, if you wish, you can point out a logical contradiction in what was written above: on the one hand, it speaks of the inexpressibility of the intuitively known, on the other, of adequate verbalization. In fact, there is no contradiction, since there are spheres of experience in relation to which both intuitive knowledge and rational explanation are possible (the sphere of the gross material), however, there are other spheres, when moving into which the verbalization of intuitive comprehension becomes more and more difficult and, finally, becomes impossible.
It can be concluded that although the mind is the lowest cognitive ability, and the highest truth is inexpressible, nevertheless, it would be a gross mistake to reject the mind, discursive thinking. It is simply impossible to put him, as people of science do, in the role of master of knowledge. His role, although important, is subordinate, and he must know his place.
All these considerations bring us close to the problem of explicit and implicit knowledge.
Explicit and implicit knowledge
Knowledge that a person receives on the basis of known cognitive mechanisms is usually divided into explicit and implicit, i.e. explicit and hidden, deep. Explicit knowledge is a sign system - these are books, magazines (printed products); lectures are a verbal form of a sign system; tape recorders, duplicators, television, computers, facsimile machines, mobile phones- technical means. Such knowledge has a well-developed conceptual apparatus, each of their details can be reproduced and stored. They are formed in the process of the act of cognition on the basis of the traditional cognitive mechanism.
Implicit knowledge is not formulated, it is obtained directly - this is an individual spiritual experience, a look turned inward, rather a feeling of knowledge, a person is not separated from what he knows, this is the result of a knowing imagination), here is a value-oriented approach. A feature of implicit knowledge is its spontaneous nature, it arises almost instantly, without giving time for reflection, i.e. to the work of the mind. It's out rational process beyond the limits of the senses. The terms "explicit" and "implicit" knowledge were introduced by the Anglo-American philosopher Michael Polanyi. In his research, he paid the main attention to implicit, personal knowledge (Polanyi M. Personal knowledge: on the way to postcritical philosophy. M .: Progress, 1958.).
Let us consider in detail implicit knowledge as an extra-rational cognitive mechanism.
The more complex and unregulated the activity is, the more its results are determined by the person's personal knowledge. This statement concerns, first of all, science, but here, in fact, everything is not so simple: scientific knowledge is primarily an intellectual, rational process, and personal knowledge lies beyond the scope of the intellect. This is the result of the fact that we very narrowly define the process and mechanism of scientific knowledge, practically excluding the field of the non-rational from it. On the other hand, creativity has become a force defining the new century. Everyone strives for the actualization of his personality, penetration into his own inner world, development of the Highest in himself.
We all have deep, inner knowledge, and the main thing here is to isolate them in a non-stop stream of thoughts. Among other things, it is necessary to think about the subject, which, first of all, allows you to differentiate, fix the knowledge concerning it, simply put, pay attention to it, remember the thought that has come to mind. This is implicit knowledge, implicit, hidden, latent, uncodified, it can be called personal knowledge, which is inextricably linked with its carrier. A person may not know that he possesses it, but it unconditionally exists and, when the need arises, makes itself felt. This knowledge is called intuitive.
The role of intuition in our life is colossal. Usually we fail at all on some subtle and unusually complex things. In all spheres of life of various scales, failures and catastrophes are caused by non-compliance with the most simple and very simple principles. Therefore, it is not the deepest and most subtle minds that often succeed in life, but rather mediocre people who know not so much, but who realize well what they know. The systematic work of the average mind, built on intuitive sound principles, can be much more effective than the unsystematic efforts of a genius. There is certainly some truth in this.
The problem of the conceptual apparatus arises. Apparently, not all implicit knowledge can be called intuitive. They should be divided into intuitive, taking shape in the sphere of everyday experience, within the boundaries of this world, within the framework of life collisions and relationships that allow linking knowledge to context, and knowledge transcendental. Intuitive personal knowledge, along with explicit ones, which we do not consider now, are the object of management within the framework of the organization's management. And they are of interest to managers from the point of view of obtaining a practical result of an innovative nature that brings the maximum effect. But implicit, in-depth knowledge can be of a global nature, be associated with understanding the foundations of the universe, the relationship between man - God, man - the Universe, the place of man in space, relate to models of the development of society, the new world order, etc.
In this case, a person can experience an exit into a depersonalized consciousness, devoid of the usual meanings, this is the world of “non-existent being,” as V.V. called it. Nalimov, "this is creativity that allows you to touch the Highest Reality, this is contact with the secret" (Nalimov V. In search of other meanings. M .: Progress, 1993.). Such knowledge can hardly be called intuition, it is a world that is not the source of our thoughts and perceptions in the ordinary state of consciousness, but a transcendental experience, access to transcendental spheres, other models of the world. This is directly related to science in those moments that we call insight.
Implicit knowledge is high creativity, inspiration. There is no preliminary author's concept here - this is the property of the mind. The bearer of inner knowledge does not create knowledge itself, he makes it possible, this is an impersonal process that has its own dynamics and leads a person along. If we are talking about a representative of science, then he has a very developed rational thinking, unlike, for example, a poet or an artist, and he naturally tries to find an explanation for such a state. He experienced that, this is his personal experience, and now he wants to understand how he achieved this. After all, intuition, inspiration are not achievable through willpower or intellectual work, they just happen.
So what was it, how he is not alone, how other people of different eras and cultures were able to express a similar state? And this is really one and the same state: the order of things, the essence of being, the structure of the world - one timeless substance. And we plunge into the noospheric cultural space developed by human thought, there we try to find people who have experienced the same state and whose way of expressing this state is close to us. A living thread is stretched between us - the joy of recognizing not only the idea, but what is behind it, the feeling of the hidden depths of a person's knowledge, the path he has traveled, everything he has felt. Immersion in the cultural environment is an impulse for a new creative impulse. Such internal states are prolonged precisely in creativity, only it can stop the moment, the moment of seeing the order of things or the essence of being, and here great creations are created. I think that Academician V.I. Vernadsky in his theory of the noosphere.
At the same time, it must be recognized that the division of implicit knowledge into intuitive and transcendental is conditional. In any case, this knowledge was obtained in a non-rational way, it is the result of the expansion of consciousness, access to another reality, where the mechanism of internal, spiritual vision works. And again the problem of the conceptual apparatus arises: spiritual experience is a transcendent experience associated with the experience of otherworldly reality, or any experience that gives a sense of another reality, bringing implicit knowledge. And isn’t implicit knowledge itself a contact with another reality, if not high, transcendent, then anyway going beyond the limits of “everyday meanings”?
It seems that the difficulties associated with an attempt to define the concept of spirituality are of a fundamental nature. This concept does not fit into the framework of rational thinking, cannot be adequately displayed in the form of logical constructions, but is associated with a higher plane of being - spiritual experience. Reason has no means of expressing subjective spiritual experience. It cannot be described in words, because it lies outside the realm of the senses and the intellect, from which our words and concepts originate. And only in general view we can say that spirituality is always striving beyond the narrow worldly meaning, it is a transcendent principle in a person.
Implicit knowledge is recognized as the most important for a person, the economy and society as a whole. Naturally, the modern world requires their indispensable formalization, coding, and making them accessible to the user. Such technologies are being introduced wherever it is effective, which leads to an acceleration in the rate of diffusion of new knowledge. The transformation of personal knowledge into knowledge available to others is the main activity of a company that creates knowledge. And here, of course, we need people who know the secrets of formalizing hidden knowledge. In any case, these are high creative forces, freedom from preconceived notions. The level of intelligence and the amount of explicit knowledge that a person owns, the ability to isolate the new from the total amount of information provided, the courage to name this new, which means to translate it into structured explicit knowledge, are very important.
A huge amount of information and knowledge is lost, we simply do not catch it. However, it happens that absolutely spontaneously we begin to write down our thoughts, moreover, concerning a particular subject, and we ourselves do not immediately understand why we are writing them down. But if we started to do this, then we will not miss the newly come thought, we will fix it. And then you get a study that pulls other works based on it as a basis. Obviously, here knowledge is a source of formation of new knowledge that is fixed and can be transferred for use.
You can try to see the process of obtaining internal, implicit knowledge in a slightly different way. Inner knowledge, and these are the depths of our consciousness, is a huge power. However, formalizing, sorting out the experience gained means not trusting one’s own experience, since formalization is always associated with the activity of the mind, which greatly reduces the value of experience (the term “experience” means a direct inner experience that gives full evidence of the truth, this is a conceptually non-mediated act, characterized by the connectedness of the experienced with the experiencing subject and the significance of the experienced for the subject).
It seems that by deciphering, transmitting, formalizing such knowledge, we simplify it, reducing it to the level of understanding. What is expressed in words is only a model of the process, in one way or another adequate to the process itself. In fact, personal knowledge has a powerful emotional charge, great power and intensity, and goes beyond a clearly expressed meaning. In this case, when formalizing implicit knowledge, a difficult task arises: to what extent is it possible to catch its deep, unmanifested meaning? Is it realistic to solve the problem adequately?
On the other hand, how can science exist without an attempt to clarify experience, to bring it into the sphere of the known? The impossibility of expressing implicit knowledge verbally does not depend on the level of consciousness at which our experience takes place - at the level of everyday reality or reaching metaphysical heights. In any case, it is very difficult to convey directly received knowledge in its original form, especially in the absence of a conceptual apparatus. In addition, if we use our speech to reveal inner experience, then its depth, and with it the personal essence, disappear.
It is clear that the process of obtaining implicit knowledge is associated with a deep transformation of the personality, these are processes that are inseparable from one another. Such states represent immersion in spiritual reality, “ascent in being”, according to the Russian philosopher N.A. Berdyaev. Such an experience allows us to learn about the potential forces of love, productive activity inherent in us, it gives a feeling of connection with the Higher reality. Apparently, this is the original matrix imprinted in the human mental sphere, an element of the collective unconscious according to Carl Gustav Jung, containing memories and cultural heritage of all mankind. The universal and primordial structures in the collective unconscious, or archetypes, are mythological in nature. Experiences that include an archetypal element of the psyche contain a sense of the sacred, sacred, which is not an individual, personal, but a supra-individual, transpersonal and, in this sense, a transcendent level of human consciousness.
For many, this is indisputable, unconditional knowledge. It has penetrated consciousness: we know that we know. For others, such knowledge does not manifest itself in consciousness, it is deep in the unconscious. One thing is obvious: all these processes have a life of their own, they can be considered independently, outside of religious experience. Often this is called faith, which is the belief in the certainty of something without the mediation of the senses or the logical train of thought: by inexplicable certainty (apparently, faith differs from personal knowledge in that it is associated with religious awareness). Another thing is that this knowledge comes in the process of spiritual experience, not necessarily associated with religious quests. Non-traditional cognitive mechanisms, inseparable from the expansion of consciousness, which we explore, are associated with figurative-sensory vision. This is a spontaneous process. In any case, such knowledge is not Plato's "proven true belief" but Jung's "prototype of the unconscious, an irrational given that simply is."
We have come to a fundamentally important aspect of the study, concerning the non-traditional cognitive mechanism associated with the acquisition of knowledge and the assessment of the role of consciousness in this process. How does a person produce, receive uncodified knowledge? A person does not receive such knowledge from outside, they are the result of self-knowledge, are extracted from the depths of one's own Self: everything is in me, nothing outside, but outside is the same as in me. It can be said that a person descends into the depths of himself and at the same time rises above himself. It was well known in ancient cultures. Let's take the Indian epic "Upanishads": "The Spirit that is here in man, and the Spirit that is there in the Sun - look, this is the One Spirit, and there is no other." Or Zen Buddhism: "The realm of awakening is not an external sphere with clear, distinct signs ... it is a realm of sacred knowledge in yourself." “Consciousness whole, radiating Light, permeates the entire Universe. It is within you and does not come from outside. As the poets wrote about this, the holy fathers - the first Christians: “Try to enter into your inner cell and you will see the cell of Heaven. Both the first and the second are one: with one entrance you enter both. The ladder to the Kingdom of Heaven is within you: it exists mysteriously in your soul. Immerse yourself into yourself from sin and you will find steps in yourself by which you can make the ascent... Whoever focuses the sight of the mind inside himself sees in himself the dawn of the Spirit.” These thoughts are separated by centuries and millennia, but they are expressed in almost the same words. Everything here is sublime: a different picture of the world, different meanings of life, immersion in the Mystery.
All of the above allows us to draw the most important conclusion for our study: the expansion of consciousness beyond the limits of the Self (i.e., the removal of restrictions, the release of a huge potential lurking in its unexplored areas beyond these limitations), the acquisition of deep, personal knowledge and its integration into the overall structure of the cognitive process is one system based on other, non-traditional cognitive mechanisms, which are based on a creative act. The process of cognition itself is changing, not I - the subject cognizes an object external to me, on the contrary, this process is holistic, holistic in nature, allows you to merge with the cognizable, and therefore penetrate into its very essence, see it from the inside. Such knowledge takes place within our deep, spiritual experience, direct experience of this experience (one might say, spiritual realities), and with it inner comprehension. This non-rational, mindless, supersensory sensation is implicit knowledge. At the same time, science itself turns into an interconnected complex of rational and non-rational, implicit knowledge.
This study indicates that fundamentally new cognitive mechanisms invading modern science, are directly related to human consciousness: the mechanisms of cognition and our consciousness are phenomena of the same order, interconnected and interdependent. Non-traditional mechanisms of cognition are unrealizable without deep penetration into the sphere of consciousness, and the sphere of consciousness expands without limit and provides unlimited opportunities for understanding the world. Cognition occurs in the process of spiritual experience directly experienced by a person, he is a part of this experience and constitutes a unity with the knowable. Each experience expands consciousness, and so on ad infinitum. And one more very important question. Why does a person change in the process of experiencing experience? Because his self-knowledge deepens, inner growth takes place, his own Self is revealed, and these are the paths leading to the realization of the Highest in oneself.
Obviously, despite the predominantly rational nature of the mechanisms of scientific knowledge, deep, personal knowledge, intuition, as a result of spiritual experience, occupy a large place in science. This study indicates that their role will increase, they will become an officially recognized component of the scientific cognitive mechanism. The new apparatus of scientific knowledge does not require formalization, verbal expression of inner experience, hidden knowledge of a scientist, as is done, for example, in the framework of the procedure for managing personal knowledge of employees of large companies in order to increase the efficiency of the organization. In science, only the scientist himself can formalize his own personal knowledge, inscribing it in the context of his analysis, thoughts and reasoning. The scientist, based on the integration of his internal, super-rational and traditional rational knowledge, must himself formulate the results of his own perception of reality as he sees, feels, guesses them.
This is a mechanism of awareness that contributes to the transformation of knowledge obtained in a non-rational way, outside the field of scientific thinking, i.e. transferring it to the area of consciousness and integration with knowledge of a rational order (one very important question arises here: is it always possible to integrate personal, direct knowledge with knowledge obtained in a rational way?). He knows that he knows because he feels a connection between himself and the new reality, and this is not just a connection, but a unity. Academician V.I. Vernadsky: “The sources of the most important aspects of the scientific worldview arose outside the field of scientific thinking. Such concepts as atoms, ether, inertia, the infinity of the world, force, etc. arose from ideas and ideas that were alien to scientific thought. The number entered science from music. The idea of world harmony from the Rigveda… Separation of science from religion, philosophy, social life, art is impossible – they are closely intertwined” (Vernadsky V.I. Proceedings on the general history of science. M.: Nauka, 1988).
There is a question. It is known that knowledge is capable of existence only in the presence of developed institutional control, i.e. institute of expertise, which determines whether certain data can be attributed to knowledge. Such an institution turns out to be a specially appointed expert, a team, publications in relevant publications, and other forms. And the proposed model of the cognitive process does not require institutional expertise for the possibility of classifying certain data as knowledge.
Implicit knowledge has nothing to do with discursive, demonstrative knowledge, it is not a justified judgment, but spontaneous understanding. It is also called divine understanding (Zavadskaya E.V. Culture of the East in the modern Western world. M .: Nauka, 1977, p. 62), intuitive or spiritual revelation, or it can be considered as the result of the release of the huge potential of the unconscious (there is no conceptual apparatus) . Such knowledge is available in its original form only to its creator, any formalization distorts its deep meaning (as already mentioned). So only the bearer of knowledge can be an expert, a scientist who identifies incoming information, establishes its link to existing knowledge (which in no way means following the dogmas and limitations of everyday consciousness) and creates a visual sensual image of the reflected reality with inner vision.
The problem of linking intuition to existing knowledge obtained in a rational way is ambiguous. It turns out that the value of intuition is limited by certain limits, and these limits are its verification by the mind. The famous American philosopher William James writes about this that intuition serves as a completely independent and self-sufficient means of world perception, just as reason is one of the mechanisms for comprehending the world. Intuition is a special form of knowledge, closed to a sober mind, direct knowledge, conviction; it is stored in the depths of the human spirit, and logical argumentation is only a superficial manifestation of it. However, rational knowledge performs its function and the conclusions of the mind must be considered (James W. Variety of religious experience. M., 1993, p. 375). It seems that, since science will be formed as an indissoluble unity of the rational and the superrational, the link between the two types of knowledge will somehow come true. This will be the integral comprehension of truth.
On the other hand, who better than science to shake the generally accepted, successively established views and norms? Then what kind of binding can we talk about? If we talk about the economy, then perhaps we should not be guided by existing models and concepts at all, the world is changing very quickly, and then what can be taken as a starting point? In this situation, in its entirety, the problem arises not of what, but of how. Not what needs to be done (in this case, to bind the knowledge obtained in a non-rational way to fundamental principles and models), but how, in accordance with this knowledge, to provide conditions for reconfiguring the economy and society as a whole, their adaptation to new global challenges.
We can assume another version of the verification of implicit knowledge - external expertise, bearing in mind that the presented model of the cognitive process changes the very nature of the expertise. If knowledge is not obtained in a rational way, then its verification should be based on a special kind of expertise - irrational, which is no less a high creative act than the presented knowledge itself. Understanding is not required here, it is rather an inner feeling, recognition as something of one’s own, at least close, sitting in the depths of consciousness - a wave, a connecting thread, quite tangible in the noospheric cultural space, which the expert found or he found it. And that's it. This is enough to evaluate the work. Let's not forget that we are talking about expertise as a creative act. “Creativity raises above everyday life, helps to weaken dependence on it,” these are the words of one of the outstanding philosophers of the 20th century. Erich Fromm (Fromm E. To have or to be. M .: Nauka, 1990, p. 117).
A man of science cannot fail to understand what is meant. Each of us is familiar with this special state, a feeling of closeness, an inner experience when reading any scientific text - here it attracts a model of thinking, a hidden view, a perceived subtext, an intuitive hypothesis that opens up to us, a perspective, maybe an idea outlined with strokes, etc.
Culture of thinking
The presentation of a certain concept is necessarily successive (i.e., built on the principle of a linear sequence), while the understanding of its essence must be simultaneous (i.e., represent the simultaneous perception of all its constituent parts in their organic unity and integrity).
When the author starts work, at first he tries to give a systematic exposition of his theory "in order", starting from the basic concepts, from the foundation, and has the intention to gradually, step by step, methodically and consistently, erect the building of his theory. However, he later discovers that this linear "architectonic" model of presentation does not work. It turns out that from each point of presentation there are numerous branches and semantic connections to all other points. It turns out that there is no beginning and no end, no foundation and no upper floors, but there is a semantic volume, permeated with a great many connections and having a semantic core.
Further, it turns out that no part of the teaching can be fully understood in isolation from all others, and what is stated at the beginning of the book can be fully perceived only through the assimilation of all subsequent material.
These ideas were first expressed by the famous German philosopher of the 19th century, Arthur Schopenhauer, in his programmatic work The World as Will and Representation. According to Schopenhauer, the structure of any sufficiently deep and mature concept is not architectonic, but organic, that is, one in which each part supports the whole as much as it itself is supported by this whole; none of the parts is essentially the first and not the last ... "Based on these considerations, he draws an important practical conclusion:" In any science, a complete understanding of it is obtained only after its entire course has been completed and then returned to the beginning " . Following Schopenhauer, it can be argued that the deeper and more serious the concept is expounded, the less likely it is to be fully assimilated from the first reading. Serious books, as Schopenhauer advised, should be read at least twice.
Our time is completely unique and incomparable with any of the previous historical eras, primarily in terms of the incredible abundance of publicly available information. We really live in conditions of information super-abundance. However, this does not mean complete well-being at all, on the contrary, information superabundance gives rise to many intractable problems, in particular, the problem of information littering. The information bombarding our heads is both redundant, insufficient and contradictory. It can be argued that our era is developing not so much a creative as a tape recorder mind, in which memorization increasingly dominates understanding. The student more and more resembles a creature with a huge funnel inserted into his head, through which professors and associate professors pour in buckets of information.
The overestimation of the role of reading, which is very common in our society, contributes to a large extent to the violation of the optimal balance between the reception and processing of information. Reading and thinking are not always the same thing, reading is easier than thinking. As Marcel Proust wrote, “Reading cannot be recognized as a decisive role in our spiritual life,” it can in no way replace personal intellectual activity. G. Lichtenberg adhered to the same opinion: “People who read a lot rarely make big discoveries. I say this not to justify laziness, but because discovery presupposes an independent contemplation of things: one should see more for oneself than repeat other people's words. He also says: “... the rapid accumulation of knowledge acquired with too little independent participation is not very fruitful. Scholarship, too, can only give birth to leaves, without bearing fruit.
According to contemporaries, Rene Descartes, the great Cartesius, before reading a book on a topic of interest to him, first figured out the main problem of this book by the introduction, after which he closed the book and then made an independent attempt to solve the problem. And only after that he turned to the book, comparing the results of the author with his own calculations. Usually this was perceived as evidence of his genius, while, on the contrary, his genius should be considered to a large extent a consequence of precisely this style of cognitive activity.
So, from the point of view of intellectual development, even reading is secondary in comparison with one's own cognitive efforts. What can we say about the TV, which simply does not leave us any chances for normal development, for gaining the ability to think independently and efficiently. The fact is that the TV sets such a dense and intense flow of information that its parallel processing and full comprehension are practically excluded. This is the dramatic difference between watching TV and reading books. You can always put a book aside, pause and reflect on what you have read. Television does not provide us with such an opportunity. Hence the pronounced difference between the older generation, who grew up reading books, and the new generation, who grew up watching television.
Those who grew up on books have a higher educational level, a higher culture of thinking and speech culture, and a significantly higher verbal intelligence compared to those who grew up watching television. This pattern is quite objective and confirmed by numerous studies. “Bookish” people are more able to think, while “television” people forget how to think and are only capable of passive perception, with an extremely low level of understanding of the information received.
productive development information system intelligence is carried out through learning and through creativity. In order for such development to take place in an optimal way, it is necessary to maintain the right balance, the right proportion between the flow of information from outside and its internal processing. The acquired knowledge must be assimilated, organized and streamlined, which is impossible without independent efforts to comprehend the information received. And such internal work should take place with the receipt of each new portion of knowledge. The essence of this internal work is the interconnection of the existing system of knowledge and newly received information. If there is no such internal harmonization, the creation of a consistent synthesis, then further input of new information will only disorganize thinking. As Herbert Spencer said, "If a man's knowledge is in a disorderly state, then the more he has of it, the more his thinking is upset." The optimal ratio between the flow of information from the outside and its internal processing is a variable. The more organized the knowledge system, the higher its consistency and integrity, the more appropriate will be the absorption of new information. On the contrary, the more disordered information has accumulated, the more important it is to reduce its reception and intensify its processing. Thus, it is necessary that the processing of information keep pace with its arrival, otherwise a person simply begins to face "indigestion of the head."
The process of absorption of information and the process of its processing can be considered as dialectical opposites. Intensive reception of information from the outside greatly complicates its parallel processing. The more new information, new ideas and concepts come in, the more often you have to stop entering information and stop to comprehend it. And, on the contrary, intensive internal processing of information is always accompanied by a concentration of attention on the inner world and disconnection from the outer. The well-known absent-mindedness of enthusiastic thinkers is the reverse side of the utmost concentration on the internal object. It is a well-known fact that a person absorbed in his own thoughts may not even hear the words addressed to him. Speaking in cybernetic language, the input of the system is blocked and this creates favorable conditions for the full internal processing of previously received information. The greater the depth of this processing, the better it is, the more time and effort it requires.
When reading specialized literature, listening to lectures, reports, etc., the processing of information primarily serves the reception and for this reason is more superficial and less intensive than processing in the absence of new information from the outside. The work of thought in the mode of autonomy (when you have before you not an open book, but a blank sheet of paper) is also more adequate both to the goals you set and to the existing cognitive structures. Usually, the goals of the author of the book under study and his intellectual interests only partially coincide with ours; his vision of the world and his language also differ to some extent, and sometimes quite significantly, from ours. In the mode of autonomy, we can work in our own cognitive interests, our thought can move in the direction we have chosen, without being forced to follow the shadow of the author's reasoning. In addition, in autonomous mode, we can freely work in terms of our own intellectual experience. All this contributes to a more targeted, deeper and more efficient processing of previously received information. It can be argued that an optimally constructed process of development of an information system of intelligence should be cyclic, pulsating in nature and consist of two cycles: the cycle of information absorption and the cycle of its internal processing. Based on this simple and uncomplicated idea, it is possible to propose a highly fruitful methodology that is equally suitable for both learning and creativity (between the two, in fact, the border is very arbitrary). This methodology is based on the principle of separating in time the process of receiving new information and the process of processing the acquired knowledge. At one time, the American scientist A. Osborne proposed the “brainstorming” method, the main principle of which was to separate the process of generating new ideas from the process of their critical evaluation. Separation in time of these two processes interfering with each other turned out to be very effective. No less effective, in my opinion, is the principle of separating the reception of information from its processing. Of course, the separation of the reception and processing of information in this context should be understood in the sense of a different target orientation to different stages creative process. In a strict psychological sense, the process of receiving information is always accompanied by its processing, moreover, it is carried out through processing. This takes place even in the process of ordinary perception (visual or auditory), not to mention the reception of semantic information. Another thing is that this processing can be of different depth and intensity. The same is true for the brainstorming principle. Here we can only speak of a relative separation in time between the generation of ideas and their critical examination. Thinking is inherently selective and there can be no complete absence of criticism. We are talking only about the weakening of a critical component in the structure of creative activity at the stage of generating new ideas.
The organization of the creative cycle should include the following two stages, forming a closed circle, in which the second stage follows after the first, and the first again after the second. This is the stage of information autonomy and the stage of intensive reception of new information.
1. Stage of information autonomy. At this stage, there is no reception of information from outside. Temporarily stops reading special literature, discussing the problem with colleagues. During this period, a creative person can be likened to a chicken hatching an egg - no running around the chicken coop, no clucking. Work on the problem is carried out in full autonomy and complete independence. At this time, we operate only with what we can extract from our own memory, without going beyond its limits into the information environment. At the stage of primary autonomy, the following goals are pursued:
a) statement of the problem (formulation of the problem, its clarification and concretization);
b) registration of the most important and valuable information in the form of brief abstracts, in a form convenient for their review as components of a single whole;
d) creation of cognitive motivation, cognitive dominant.
Even if the problem is not resolved at this stage, nevertheless, the information space of the task develops from the initial stage of the “amorphous spot” to some level of its structuring. As a result, open connections of this structure are revealed, and a powerful energy potential is created at their free ends in the form of burning issues that need to be resolved as soon as possible.
Criteria for moving to the second stage:
a) the problem is formulated in a clear, precise and sufficiently specific form (as opposed to the initial vagueness);
b) independent work has reached a dead end, internal resources have been exhausted;
c) the results of the work done (both in terms of clarification and concretization, and in terms of its solution) are formalized in writing.
This is important because there is a big difference between just thinking and writing your own thoughts. The latter requires much more effort and energy, but it gives a concrete result. The elaboration of the problem posed in the written presentation is much deeper and more intensive, not to mention the fact that we get specific creative products, even if they are rough and very imperfect. Otherwise, creativity degenerates into empty talk and pleasant, but non-committal reasoning. In such cases, "all the steam goes into the whistle" and no real progress is made. Chatting is easy, writing is difficult.
d) there is a cognitive dominant, manifested in ardent interest and high cognitive activity in relation to the problem being developed (for which it is important to “torment” the problem properly).
2. The stage of intensive reception of pertinent (relevant) information. At this stage, there is an active search for pertinent information in the surrounding information environment (reading special literature, discussing the problem with colleagues, etc.). The fruitfulness of this stage depends on the degree of completion of the previous one. New knowledge is perceived in a completely different way if its acquisition was preceded by serious independent work: there is an active search for answers to pressing questions. R. Tagore once said that answering a person when he did not ask a question is the same as feeding him when he is not hungry.
The main goal of this stage is to search for a new constructive idea that allows you to look at the problem from a different angle. The criterion for the completion of the second stage is the emergence of new information that requires the reorganization of the existing system of views and opens up new opportunities. After the appearance of such new information, a return to work in autonomy mode follows, but at a higher level. Then the cycle is repeated until an acceptable result is obtained. The development of the information system of intelligence can be likened to the pulsating movement of a jellyfish, in which the stage of expansion alternates with the stage of contraction, due to which there is an abrupt forward movement.
