Fundamental natural science and theoretical social science: two incompatible types of scientific knowledge?

Aleksey Ermilov

UDC 1 UDC 10

2 more Collapse

FUNDAMENTAL NATURAL SCIENCE AND THEORETICAL SOCIAL SCIENCE: TWO INCOMPATIBLE TYPES OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE? Fundamental natural science and theoretical social science: two incompatible types of scientific knowledge?

АА Аа

Published in Journal of Philosophical Research · Volume 10, Issue 1 · Pages 8–21 · Rubric: Ontology and theory of knowledge

Received: 05.03.2024 Accepted: 19.03.2024 Published: 19.03.2024 Language of publication: ru-RU

Authors

Aleksey Ermilov

Academic degree: doctor of economic sciences

Science rang: professor

Institut ekonomiki i organizacii promyshlennogo proizvodstva SO RAN leading researcher · Center of resources economy · Russian Federation · Novosibirsk

ABSTRACT

In modern economic science - the most important section of social science - the methods of the natural sciences and, above all, various types of formalization are used very intensively. The main disciplines of neoclassical economic theory (macro- and microeconomics) are entirely built on the analysis of various formulas, systems of equations and graphs. Political economy, which two hundred years ago occupied the entire space of economic science, has significantly lost its position and is considered as a kind of anachronism, which was also the reason for the weak development of its specific methodology. Along with the “removal” of political economy, neoclassicism removed from consideration both the object of its research - the relational side of economics, and the subject - economic relations, focusing on the use of research methods of natural science. The question arises: how capable are these latter of solving the problems of economic theory? In this work we will consider the relationship between subjects and methods of the two most important types of scientific knowledge - fundamental natural science and theoretical social science. We adhere to the point of view according to which the subjects of these branches of science are qualitatively different and therefore their research requires the use of fundamentally different methods. According to a number of researchers, the natural and social sciences and humanities at their current level of development are actually two incompatible types of scientific knowledge. The current obvious methodological advantage of natural science knowledge encourages social scientists to evaluate the introduction of natural science methods into their research as an increase in their level. However, the “formal” application of “advanced” methods of natural science in social and humanitarian research significantly reduces their quality. The record holder here is the neoclassical direction of modern economic theory (the so-called “mainstream”). Since the last third of the 19th century, it has actively cultivated the use of mathematics to describe the technological side of economic management, simultaneously with an almost complete refusal to study its relational side. The crisis state of economic science is largely explained by this.

KEYWORDS

methodology; natural science; social science; class approach; experience; true knowledge; scientific laws

Text

Text (PDF)

Read Download

1. Gorohov V. G. Razmyshleniya o koncepcii «postneklassicheskoy nauki» [Tekst] / V.G. Gorohov // Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki. - 2013. - № 2. - S. 71-77. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/OMIJWE

2. Ermilov A.P. Vlast' i ekonomicheskie otnosheniya: deyatel'nostnyy podhod [Tekst] / A.P. Ermilov. - Novosibirsk: IEOPP SO RAN, 2017. -312 s. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/YORDHM

3. Ermilov A.P. Obschestvennye, ekonomicheskie i proizvodstvennye otnosheniya v sisteme social'noy deyatel'nosti [Tekst] / A.P. Ermilov. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IEOPP SO RAN, 2022. - 376 s. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36264/978-5-89665-371-4-2022-007-376; EDN: https://elibrary.ru/EVIFPU

4. Knyazeva E.N. Social'no-gumanitarnoe znanie i estestvoznanie: razmyvayuschiesya granicy [Tekst] / E.N. Knyazeva // Filosofiya nauki i tehniki. 2020. - T. 25. - № 2. - S. 9-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21146/2413-9084-2020-25-2-9-12; EDN: https://elibrary.ru/XUXCHG

5. Knyazeva E.N. Suschestvuyut li predely metodologicheskoy konvergencii estestvenno-nauchnogo i social'no-gumanitarnogo znaniya? Diskussiya [Tekst] / E.N. Knyazeva, V.G. Kuznecov, N.M. Smirnova, G.L. Tul'chinskiy // Filosofiya nauki i tehniki. - 2020. - T. 25. - № 2. - S. 21-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21146/2413-9084-2020-25-2-21-25; EDN: https://elibrary.ru/ZOHFZN

6. Lebedev S.A. Edinstvo estestvenno-nauchnogo i social'no-gumanitarnogo znaniya [Tekst] / S.A. Lebedev // Novoe v psihologo-pedagogicheskih issledovaniyah. - 2010. - №2 (18). - S. 5−10. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/MOUBPR

7. Lebedev S.A. Metodologiya nauki: ot monizma k sistemnomu plyuralizmu [Tekst] / S.A. Lebedev // Zhurnal filosofskih issledovaniy. - 2021. - T. 7. - № 4. S. 48-56. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/WPADBR

8. Lebedev S.A., Schukin G.O. Metodologiya klassicheskoy, neklassicheskoy i postneklassicheskoy nauki [Tekst] / S.A. Lebedev, G.O. Schukin // Zhurnal filosofskih issledovaniy. - 2022. - T. 8. - № 2. - S. 32-40. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/RQGEHQ

9. Lebedev S.A., Tverdynin N.M. Gnoseologicheskaya specifika tehnicheskih i tehnologicheskih nauk [Tekst] / S.A. Lebedev, N.M. Tverdynin // Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 7: Filosofiya. - 2008. - № 2. - S. 44-70. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/JVGUHL

10. Mamedov O.Yu. "Elementarnaya chastica" ekonomiki [Tekst] / O.Yu. Mamedov // Terra Economicus. - 2018. - T. 16. - № 3. - S. 6-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23683/2073-6606-2018-16-3-6-15; EDN: https://elibrary.ru/YBCKAP

11. Mamchur E.A. Filosofiya i nauka [Tekst] / E.A. Mamchur // Voprosy filosofii. - 2008, - № 7. - S. 159-164. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/JJOICR

12. Nikiforov A. L. Chto takoe «postneklassicheskaya nauka»? [Tekst] / A.L. Nikiforov // Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki. - 2013. - № 2. - S. 59-64. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/QCDNUZ

13. Nikiforov A.L. O specifike gumanitarnogo poznaniya [Tekst] / A.L. Nikiforov // Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki. - 2015. - T. 45. - № 3. - S. 29-32. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/UKOMUN

14. Nikiforov A.L. Transformaciya nauki v HH v.: ot poiska istiny k sovershenstvovaniyu tehniki [Tekst] / A.L. Nikiforov // Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki. - 2019. - T. 56. - № 3. - S. 20-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/eps201956342; EDN: https://elibrary.ru/YTSPWX

15. Plyusnin Yu.M. Problema biosocial'noy evolyucii: Teoretikometodologicheskiy analiz [Tekst] / Yu.M. Plyusnin. - Novosibirsk: Nauka. Sib. otd-nie, 1990. - 240 s.

16. Smirnova N.M. Social'no-gumanitarnoe znanie: specifika ili inoprirodnost'? [Tekst] / N.M. Smirnova // Filosofiya nauki i tehniki. - 2020. T. 25. - № 2. - S. 5-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21146/2413-9084-2020-25-2-5-8; EDN: https://elibrary.ru/AZSESS

17. Uilson E. Proishozhdenie tvorchestva. Provokacionnoe issledovanie, pochemu chelovek stremitsya k sozdaniyu prekrasnogo [Tekst] / Uilson E. - M.: Bombora, 2019. - 256 s.

18. Cheremnyh N.M. K voprosu o specifike postneklassicheskogo etapa razvitiya nauki [Tekst] / N.M. Cheremnyh // Vestnik rossiyskogo himikotehnologicheskogo universiteta imeni D. I. Mendeleeva. Gumanitarnye i social'no-ekonomicheskie issledovaniya. - 2016. - № 7-1. - S. 107-115. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/YFMQRZ

19. Shulevskiy N B. Istoricheskie tipy vzaimodeystviya estestvoznaniya i obschestvoznaniya [Tekst] / N.B. Shulevskiy // Nauka i obrazovanie: hozyaystvo i ekonomika; predprinimatel'stvo; pravo i upravlenie. - 2010. - № 6(6). - S. 56-78. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/NTUUTD

PDF JATS XML

Glavnyy redaktor

Sergey Klimov

klisn@mail.ru

Otvetstvennyy redaktor

Elena Titova

titova_en@infra-m.ru

2669

downloads

FUNDAMENTAL NATURAL SCIENCE AND THEORETICAL SOCIAL SCIENCE: TWO INCOMPATIBLE TYPES OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE? Fundamental natural science and theoretical social science: two incompatible types of scientific knowledge?

Confirmation