FEDERAL AGENCY FOR EDUCATION
State educational institution of higher professional education
"TYUMEN STATE OIL AND GAS UNIVERSITY"
Institute for the Humanities
Department of Religious Studies
APPROVE
Chairman of the Union of Right Forces
____________ G.P. Khudyakova
"___" __________ 2009
METHODOLOGICAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE STUDY
Disciplines Science and Religion
specialty 031801 "Religious Studies"
form of education full-time / part-time (6 years) / in absentia-abbr. (3 years 10 months)
course 2 / 2 /1
semester
lectures
practical lessons
exam
offset
to/work 3-4 /3-4/1-2
70 / 20/20
35 / 16/16
4 / 4 /2
3 / 3/1
4 / 3
Independent work 95 hours
Tyumen 2009
When developing guidelines for the study of the discipline, the State Educational Standard in the specialty 031801 "Religious Studies" is taken as the basis.
Extract from the GOS
GPD.F.07 Science and religion
Science and religion in the system of culture; features of expression in religion of knowledge about a person, society, the world; the formation and development of science and its influence on religion; religious and scientific pictures of the world; conflicts of science and religion; from conflict to dialogue; theological interpretations of the achievements of modern human science, social science, natural science; features of theological justifications for theism, creationism, theology, finalism with the help of these sciences. 200
Methodological guidelines for the study of the discipline were considered at a meeting of the department "Religious Studies"
Minutes No. 1 September 10, 2009
Head of the Department ______________ G.P. Khudyakova
Guidelines for the study of the discipline developed:
Department Lecturer
"Religious Studies" D.N. Mayorov, Art. teacher
Email: [email protected]
____________________
Guidelines for the study of the discipline should contain:
CONTENT:
1. The purpose and objectives of the discipline…………….………………………………….3 p.
2. The place of discipline in the educational process………………………………… 4 p.
3. The content of the discipline………………………………………….………4 p.
3.1. Topics of lectures and practical classes……….…...………….5 p.
3.5. approximate topics of essays, term papers and theses…...…6 pp.
3.6. an approximate list of questions for the test (exam) for the entire course ... 7 p.
3.7. a list of sample control questions and tasks for independent work……………………………………………………..8 p.
3.8. rating assessment of students' knowledge……………………………………9 p.
4. content of independent work of students……………..…………9 p.
4.1. calendar schedule of independent work of students in the discipline "science and religion"………………………………………………...……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
5. educational and methodological support……………………….……………..11 p.
5.1. Basic Literature……………………………….…………………..11 p.
5.2. additional literature……………………………………………...11 p.
1. PURPOSE AND TASKS OF THE DISCIPLINE
1.1 Purpose of the discipline
To study the history of the relationship between science and religion and show the prospects for their cooperation.
1.2 Tasks of studying the discipline
On the basis of the state standard in the discipline "Science and Religion" to answer the following questions:
science and religion in the system of culture;
features of expression in religion of knowledge about a person, society, the world;
the formation and development of science and its influence on religion;
religious and scientific pictures of the world;
conflicts of science and religion;
from conflict to dialogue;
theological interpretations of the achievements of modern human science, social science, natural science;
features of theological justifications for theism, creationism, theology, finalism with the help of these sciences
In addition to these tasks, you need to:
consider the history of the relationship of the science of religion
to propose promising models of interaction between science and religion on the example of their interaction in the West and East in the 20th and 21st centuries.
to show how the issue was resolved in various religious movements in antiquity and at the present time.
1.3. Learning Outcomes
have a clear understanding of the object, subject and methods of the relevant discipline;
own the basic conceptual and categorical apparatus and methodology;
understand the relationship between religion and science, the features of the expression in religion of knowledge about man, society, the world, the various nature of the relationship between religion and science, depending on historical circumstances, the content of religious and scientific concepts, understand the meaning of religious and non-religious interpretations of science data.
2. THE PLACE OF DISCIPLINE IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS
As part of the study of the discipline, it is necessary to get acquainted with the history of natural science, studied in the course of the concept of modern natural science, the philosophy of science, studied in the history of philosophy, the basic ideas about religion, which are studied in the history of religion.
3.1. The content of lectures
1 Scientific and religious exploration of reality. 10/2/2 Introductory lecture
2 Scientific picture of the world 10/2/2 Lecture
3 Humanity 8/4/4 Lecture
4 Theism 8/2/2 Lecture
6 Christian theology 8/4/4 Lecture
7 World Religious Traditions 10/4/4 Lecture
8 In Search of Knowledge and Wisdom 8/2/2 Lecture
TOTAL 70/20/20
3.2. The content of practical classes
No. Name of topics and their content Number of hours Teaching methods
1 Scientific and religious exploration of reality. 5/2/2 Learning control
2 Scientific picture of the world 5/2/2 Learning control
3 Humanity 5/2/2 Learning Control
4 Theism 5/2/2 Learning control
6 Christian Theology 5/2/2 Teaching Supervision
7 World religious traditions 5/2/2 Visual method (project)
8 In Search of Knowledge and Wisdom 5/2/2 Discussion
TOTAL 35/16/16
TOPICS OF LECTURES AND PRACTICAL CLASSES
Topic 1. Scientific and religious exploration of reality. Area of interaction.
Science and religion as phenomena of culture. Features of scientific and religious exploration of reality. Sources of Knowledge in Religion and Science: Experience, Reason, and Revelation. Mystical experience and scientific experiment comparative analysis. Religious and scientific structures of knowledge. Faith, Reason, Revelation. Experiment, hypothesis, theory. Historical stages in the development of culture and the place in it of religious and scientific forms of mastering reality. Some historical examples. Galileo. Darwin. The nature of science. Difficulties. Some answers. critical realism. The nature of theology. Theological discussion. Types of interaction. Conflict. Independence. Dialogue. Integration. Harmony. Assimilation. Models, metaphors and symbols. Models. Metaphor. Symbol.
Topic 2. Scientific picture of the world.
Quantum theory. The principle of superimposition/combination (superposition). Measurement. Other components of quantum theory. metaphysical implications. Cosmology. quantum cosmology. Anthropic principle. Evolution: chance and necessity. Chaos and complexity theory. Chaos theory. Order out of chaos. Complexity. Time. Reversibility. Arrow of time. Simultaneity. Block universe. Disputes about the essence of science at the beginning of the 20th century. Philosophical problems of the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics. Gravitational, electromagnetic and nuclear field. The gravitational constant, the constant of the speed of light and Planck's constant - as the constituents of reality. Is divine knowledge about the world possible: a discussion between N. Bohr and A. Einstein. Randomness and necessity in the quantum-mechanical model of the microworld. Continuity and discreteness in quantum mechanical processes. W. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Problems of quantum theory of light. Complementarity concept by N. Bora. Theological understanding of the scientific revolution of the XX century. Antinomy and paradox in science and theology. The problem of the irrational in the science of the XX century.
Topic 3. Humanity.
Reductionism and holism. component reductionism. Process reductionism. Physicalism. Idealism. Dualism. Two-dimensional monism. Philosophy of the process. unknowability. Consciousness. Philosophy of consciousness. Functionalism. emergentism. Complementarity. Personality and soul. Fall.
Topic 4. Theism.
The nature of God. natural theology. Historical review. The revival of natural theology. Knowability (intelligibility). Anthropic universe. Theology of nature. Creation. Creation from nothing. Continuous creation. humanitarian reality. Perception of value. Signs of hope. Conclusion.
Topic 5. Divine activity
Single action. root cause. Philosophy of the process. Analogies with human activity. Embodiment. Downward causation. Open universe. Temporal correlation of Divine reality. Miracle. Theodicy.
Topic 6. Christian theology.
Revelation. Scripture. Tradition. Reasonable approach. Jesus Christ. Resurrection. Death of Jesus. Resurrection of Christ. Christology. Evidence from the New Testament. Church Fathers. Modern ideas. Trinity. Eschatology. human destiny. The fate of the universe.
Topic 7. World religious traditions
Divine. relationship options. Exclusivism. Pluralism. Inclusivism. Continuation of the dialogue. Science as a meeting place.
Topic 8. Religious and scientific ideas about the cosmic and evolutionary. process
two disciplines. ethical issues. Borders. The role of the experiment. The integrity of nature. Fundamentals of ethics.
3.5. Approximate topics of essays, term papers and theses
1. Religion, magic, science.
2. Myth and science.
3. Mysticism and science.
4. The relationship of religion and science in the era of antiquity .;
5. The relationship of religion and science in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.
6. The relationship of religion and science in the era of modern times.
7. Basic elements of mythopoetic cosmogony.
8. Relationship between religion and science in the concept of W. Heisenberg.
9. Relation between religion and science in the concept of A. Einstein.
10. Relationship between religion and science in the concept of P. Teilhard de Chardin.
11. Relationship between religion and science in the views of Max Planck.
12. Sources of knowledge in religion and science.
13. Religion and science about the criteria for the truth of knowledge.
14. The principle of determinism and the idea of a miracle.
15. Space in religion and science.
16. Time in science and myth.
17. Time in science and religion.
18. Scientific understanding of number and religious symbolism of numbers.
19. Attempts to synthesize science and religion in the XX century.,
20. Hypothesis of Thompson - Clausewitz from the point of view of linear and non-linear thermodynamics.
21. Discussions between science and religion on the question of possible worlds.
22. Religious criticism of the concepts of Darwinism and their scientific evaluation.
3.6. An approximate list of questions for the test (exam) for the entire course
1. Form, harmony, measure - in the religious-mythological and natural-philosophical views of antiquity
2. The science of numbers and the mysticism of the numbers of the Pythagoreans. Divine and human in the knowledge of numbers
3. Non-Christian ideas about the Cosmos and the Earth (Genesis, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Apocalypse)
4. Sources of Knowledge in the Middle Ages: Experience, Reason and Revelation The Cosmos of Claudius Ptolemy and the World of the Middle Ages
5. The place of "natural sciences" in the medieval system of knowledge.
6. "Natural and supernatural models of matter" in the Middle Ages.
7. Teachings about matter, nature and space in the tradition of the Middle Ages.
8. Natural theology and "supernatural science" in high and late scholasticism.
9. Problems of motion, "emptiness" and infinite space as problems of theology and science
10. The problem of the center of the Universe in the religion and science of modern timesInfinite Universe by J. Bruno
11. Theophany, hierophany and the concept of the "center of gravity" of the Universe of Newtonian mechanics.
12. From the question "why?" "natural theology" to the question "how?" Sciences.
13. rationalistic justification of science by R. Descartes
14. Deistic and pantheistic ideas about God. Completion of the formation of a mechanistic picture of the world in the works of Lagrange and Laplace
15. Substantiation of "natural theology" based on the "second law of thermodynamics" Thompson-Clausewitz hypothesis. Mechanistic and thermodynamic models of the Universe
16. The relationship between religion and science at the end of the 19th century "Disputes about the essence of science at the beginning of the 20th century Problems of the method of theology and science: explanation and understanding
17. Analogies between quantum mechanical models of experiment and religious experience: N. Bohr and W. James.
18. Is divine knowledge of the world possible: discussion between N. Bohr and A. Einstein.
19. The principle of complementarity and dialectics of S. Kierkegaard.
20. Theological understanding of the scientific revolution of the XX century.
21. Antinomy and paradox in science and theology.
22. The problem of the irrational in the science of the XX century.
23. Non-classical thermodynamics and problems of creationism, finalism and teleologism. Problems of the origin of life and man in theology and evolutionary theories of the XX century.
24. Attempts to synthesize science and religion: the concept of evolutionary monism P. Teilhard de Chardin. Synthesis. Sri Aurobindo.
3.7. A list of sample control questions and tasks for independent work
1. Indicate the fundamental difference between ritual-symbolic and logical-discursive types of thinking.
2. In which of the listed phenomena "miracle" plays a great role: magic, religion, science.
3. In what hypothesis is the second law of thermodynamics combined with the proof of the existence of God. Give the basic mathematical concepts used to characterize God in Christianity.
4. In what religious tradition is the model of the Universe similar to wave scientific ideas. In what religious tradition is the model of the Universe similar to corpuscular scientific ideas. Who is the author of the principle of complementarity of religion and science. What are the main concepts of the synthesis of religion and science of the XX century. Give examples of antinomy in theology and science. Give examples of paradox in theology and science. Compare the atomic and dharmic models of matter. What are dharma elements.
5. Is the evolution in the concept of Teilhard de Chardin limited in time.
6. The concepts of useful and useless energy and the second law of thermodynamics.
7. Sources of knowledge in science and Christian theology. \
8. The main characteristic of the relationship between science and theology in Thomas Aquinas.
9. In what tradition was the question of God's ability to move the Universe resolved?
10. Compare the concepts: emptiness, infinite space, vacuum.
11.
Table 1
Maximum points for each current assessment
1 attestation 2 attestation 3 attestation Total
30 30 40 100
table 2
Types of control measures in points
№ Types of control measures Points Week №
1 Active work at the lecture 2
2 Workshop work on one question asked
8
10
3 Current verification work 5
4 Active participation in the discussion 7
5 Written homework 0-10
6 Create a project 5-12
7 Synopsis of the original source 10
TOTAL 35
8 Active work at lecture 2
9 Seminar work on one question asked
Seminar work on two questions asked
Workshop work on the three questions asked 6
8
10
10 Written homework 5
11 Active participation in the discussion 7
12 Test, test 0-25
13 Reviewing scientific literature (10 sources) 10
14 Coursework defense 15
TOTAL 65
TOTAL 100
4. The content of students' independent work
Independent work of a student with a teacher includes individual student consultations during the semester.
Independent work with the group includes ongoing consultations before semester control, tests or exams.
4.1. Calendar schedule for independent work of students in the discipline "Science and Religion"
Week Topic for self-study Number of hours Self-study Form of control Literature
(numbers of sources are indicated in the bibliography of working programs)
Without pre-feed-
tel with a teacher with a group
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1-17 Lectures
Practical lessons. 56
46 85,5 3,8 5,7
3, 8 o'clock. Individual student consultations during the semester
5.7 hours. Consultations in a group before semester control, credit or exam
1-3 Topic 1. Scientific and religious development of reality Area of interaction. 12 12 1.3 Questions
for semester control 1 -p.9-32
4-7 Topic 2. Scientific picture of the world. 12 10 1.2 Questions for semester control 4 -p.43-56
8-11 Topic 3. Humanity 12 10 1.2 Questions for semester control 1 -p.60-73
12-13 Topic 4. Theism 12 10 1.4 Questions
for semester control 2 -p.76-93
14 Topic 5. Divine activity 12 12.2 1 Questions for semester control 3 -p.95-103
15 Topic 6. Christian theology 12 11.3 1 Questions for semester control 1 -p.108-126
16 Topic 7. World religious traditions 12 10 1.2 Questions
for semester control 1 -p.129-134
17 Topic 8. In search of knowledge and wisdom 11 10 1.2 Questions for semester control 5 -p.136-152
Total: 95 85.5 3.8 5.7
5. Educational and methodological support
5.1. Main literature
1. Eresko M.N. Introduction to Dialogue Religious Studies [Text]: textbook / M. N. Yeresko. - Tyumen: Printer, 2006. - 204 p.
2. Ignatov S. B. Modern scientific picture of the world [Text]: a textbook for students of groups of additional education with the qualification "Teacher / Teacher of higher education", graduate students and doctoral students of pedagogical specialties / S. B. Ignatov, V. A. Ignatova; Tsogu. - Tyumen: Tyumen State University, 2010. - 240 p.
3. Ignatov S. B. Modern scientific picture of the world [Electronic resource]: a textbook for students of groups of additional education with the qualification "Teacher / Teacher of higher education", graduate students and doctoral students of pedagogical specialties / S. B. Ignatov, V. A. Ignatova ; Tsogu. - Electron. text data. - Tyumen: Tsogu, 2010. - el. opt. disc (CD-ROM).
4. Lobazova O.F. Religious studies [Text]: a textbook for students studying in the specialty "Social work", as well as humanitarian and social-humanitarian universities, colleges, lyceums and gymnasiums / O. F. Lobazova; Russian state social un-t. - 4th ed., Rev. and additional - M. : Dashkov i K?, 2008. - 488 p.
5. Pivovarov D.V. Philosophy of religion [Text]: textbook / DV Pivovarov; Ural State un-t im. A. M. Gorky. - M.: Academic Project; Ekaterinburg: Business book, 2006. - 640 p.
5.2. additional literature
1. Abramovich V. Under the banner of Nikola Tesla [Text] / Velimir Abramovich // Science and religion. - 2011. - N 11. - S. 28-29
2. Volkova L. Not a tambourine, but a computer! [Text] / Lilia Volkova // Science and religion. - 2011. - N 10. - S. 59
3. Gevorkyan E. The time of thin cows [Text] / Eduard Gevorkyan // Science and religion. - 2011. - N 11. - S. 26-28
4. Goncharov V.P. On the relationship between science and religion in the past and present [Text] / V.P. Goncharov // Social and humanitarian knowledge. - 2011. - No. 5. - S. 147-161.
5. Kostylev P. N. M. V. Lomonosov and the scientific study of religion [Text] / P. N. Kostylev // Bulletin of Moscow University. Ser. 7, Philosophy. - 2011. - No. 5. - S. 74-82.
6. Lobachev V. Times of crises and hopes [Text] / Valery Lobachev // Science and religion. - 2011. - N 7. - S. 2-6
7. Lotman Yu. M. Testing by progress [Text] / Yu. M. Lotman // Science and religion. - 2011. - N 7. - S. 6-9
8. Moskalenko M. R. Natural science picture of the world and religious extremism [Text] / M. R. Moskalenko // Alma mater: Bulletin of Higher School. - 2012. - No. 4. - S. 71-75.
9. Rashkovsky E. B. The fate of religions and revolutions: from reformation to postmodernity [Text] / E. B. Rashkovsky // World economy and international relations. - 2011. - N 6. - S. 99-107.
10. Sizintseva L. I. Fruits of wisdom [Text] / L. I. Sizintseva // Science and religion. - 2011. - N 10. - S. 29-31
11. Shtuden L. L. "Barrier of obstruction" for the new science [Text] / L. L. Shtuden // Science and religion. - 2011. - N 11. - S. 30-31
SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINE (from Latin disciplina - teaching) is the basic form of organization of professional science, uniting on a subject-substantive basis the areas of scientific knowledge, the community engaged in its production, processing and transmission, as well as the mechanisms for the development and reproduction of the corresponding branch of science as a profession. The concept of a scientific discipline is used as the maximum analytical unit of science research in works on science of history, philosophy, sociology, economics of science, and scientific and technological progress.
The formation of a scientific discipline took place along with the formation of the scientific profession back in medieval universities, this form of organization of science reached its modern development in the 17-19 centuries, based on the patterns of social organization characteristic of the Enlightenment, as well as on organizational innovations within European natural science (principles of British empirical schools, academies, scientific journals, etc.). The effectiveness of the disciplinary form of organization of science was especially clearly manifested in the fact that it turned out to be invariant with respect to the socio-economic and cultural environment and currently has practically no alternatives. According to the disciplinary principle, the organization of knowledge is built in the system of training specialists in all areas of professional activity (for example, medicine, engineering, art), which in the learning process must process large amounts of knowledge to transfer to new generations. The organizational mechanisms of a scientific discipline successfully ensure its unity, despite the fact that the specific events and processes that form it are dispersed in space and take place in a different socio-cultural and organizational environment. Such a high efficiency of the disciplinary organization is ensured by constant intensive work to maintain and develop the organizational structure of the discipline in all its aspects (organization of knowledge, regulation of relations in the community, preparation of a scientific change in relations with other institutions, etc.), and almost all participants in the disciplinary organization are involved in this work. community, no matter what specific scientific or scientific-organizational activity they may be underestimated at the moment. To carry out this work in the history of science, special mechanisms have been formed that are constantly being improved and developed.
The central place is occupied by methodological and logical work on the organization of disciplinary knowledge, its actualization and transformation into a set of tools for conducting new research. This is necessary in order to formulate unresolved problems as “questions” to the reality under study, i.e. translate theoretical difficulties into the language of the actions of researchers and those means (observation, experiment, models, logical-mathematical or textual analysis) that this discipline has. At the same time, at the practical level, the relationship between the ideology of the given discipline and the reality it studies is also analyzed.
When this work is completed by a successful study, the next stage of scientific activity begins, in which the received answers of "reality" must be brought into connection with existing disciplinary knowledge. This requires certain changes in the knowledge system - its buildup, refinement, and sometimes quite a significant structural restructuring. In any case, its organization is subject to special scrutiny.
A systematic analysis of the architecture of a scientific discipline is regularly carried out at the macro level. It is also required for solving specific practical problems: preparing training courses, classifying specialties during major scientific congresses, etc. The purpose of methodological work is to clarify ideas about the structure of disciplinary knowledge and the place of this scientific discipline in the system of sciences, especially intensive processes of differentiation and integration of science. The specifics of work on the organization of knowledge also determines the nature of efforts to maintain professional unity in the scientific community of the discipline. This community brings together thousands of professionals working in different countries, socio-cultural systems and various immediate organizational environments (university departments, academic or federal laboratories and services, expeditions, etc.). Under such conditions, the effective and purposeful coordinated work of the community cannot be based on any institutions of power and control that involve direct coercion. The mechanisms of self-organization of the community, on which the system of social management is based, are forcedly simple and can operate quickly only because of the high degree of organization of disciplinary knowledge. Thanks to this, the common goal of the community and each professional included in it can be set - the increase and development of disciplinary knowledge. Accordingly, the discrete representation of one step towards this goal is determined - a specific contribution to this knowledge, and the main regulators: professional recognition, which is rewarded by the author of the contribution, or diffuse sanction - a harsh and immediate reaction of the community to the actions of its members, accidentally or deliberately hindering the achievement goals (plagiarism, falsification of results, publication of unverified data, etc.). In the examination, i.e. evaluating the result that claims to be a contribution to knowledge, in one form or another, all members of the community are required to participate. It becomes possible to provide competent criticism in such conditions only due to the organization and clear structure of the entire system of disciplinary knowledge and the corresponding hierarchical structure of the community. In this, the scientific community differs significantly from the communities of other creative professions, in which the institution of expertise (criticism) exists separately from the actual creative departments. This can be clearly seen already at the level of self-identification of community members. One and the same scientist rightfully considers himself, for example, a member of the community of mycologists in a discussion with algologists, a botanist in relation to zoologists, a biologist in polemics with a physicist or philosopher, etc.
An indispensable condition for effective interaction between participants and institutions of a scientific discipline is the maximum transparency and accessibility of information about the state of knowledge and the community for all its members. The key role in this is played by the knowledge representation system, and the array of disciplinary publications acts as a receptacle for information about the state of knowledge, methods of its processing, grouping and relations of participants in working with knowledge at any given time. The spatio-temporal structure of the array makes it possible to separate the actual knowledge of the discipline (which is currently being processed) from the disciplinary archive, and for each participant to work with a relatively small fragment of knowledge and make their contribution quite economically both due to the developed rubrication of disciplinary publications, and for account of a system of references that determine the spatial "coordinates" of each piece of knowledge in the space of a wider disciplinary environment. Thanks to such a knowledge representation system, the constantly replenished content of a scientific discipline at any given time can be formulated in the form of a certain compendium, in terms of its volume available for assimilation by one person, and the completeness of this assimilation is such that it allows a beginner to quickly become a full-fledged participant in research. Actual operational interaction within a scientific discipline implies a well-structured and technologically equipped system of scientific communication - professional communication of scientists, which is the main means of self-organization of the disciplinary community. See also Art. The science.
E. M. Mirsky
New Philosophical Encyclopedia. In four volumes. / Institute of Philosophy RAS. Scientific ed. advice: V.S. Stepin, A.A. Huseynov, G.Yu. Semigin. M., Thought, 2010, vol. I, A - D, p. 672-673.
Literature:
Mirsky EM Interdisciplinary research and disciplinary organization of science. M., 1980; Scientific activity: structure and institutions. M., 1980; Ogurtsov A.P. Disciplinary structure of science. M., 1988; Petrov M. K. Socio-cultural foundations for the development of modern science. M., 1992.
Science as an object of multidisciplinary study
There is a group of philosophical disciplines, the name of which is often used as a single term: "philosophy, logic and methodology of science." This is a complex philosophical direction that deals with a multilateral analysis of scientific activity: the problems of its structure and dynamics, the study of socio-cultural prerequisites and conditions for scientific knowledge.
The very concept of science is ambiguous. It is customary to distinguish between the following perspectives:
- 1) science as a system of knowledge;
- 2) science as an activity;
- 3) science as a social institution;
- 4) science as a cultural and historical phenomenon.
It is also possible to single out two most general contexts to which, with a certain degree of conventionality, one can reduce the philosophical analysis of scientific activity: 1) cognitive and 2) socio-cultural contexts of scientific knowledge.
To the cognitive plane (lat. cognitio- cognition) refers to a range of topics covering the internal conceptual issues of science. This traditionally includes epistemological, or epistemological (from the Greek. episteme- knowledge, cognition), methodological and logical aspects. However, scientific knowledge is also characterized by complex relationships with social, historical, cultural and other factors. These relationships are attributed to the socio-cultural context of the analysis of science.
Science is studied not only at a generalized philosophical level. It is also the subject of special disciplines: sociology, economics, psychology, history, etc., where the corresponding areas are developed (sociology of science, economics of science, etc.). Today there is an extensive complex direction that unites various disciplines with the aim of a multilateral study of science, - science of science. Within the framework of science of science, the philosophy of science and special areas of science of science interact closely.
In the same way, there is no sharp boundary between the cognitive and socio-cultural contexts of the analysis of scientific knowledge. An important trend of recent decades is their steady convergence.
Philosophy of Science: Formation and Stages
The philosophy of science as an independent line of research began to take shape approximately from the second half of the 19th century. Its origins were such prominent scientists as G. Helmholtz, E. P. Duhem (Duhem), E. Mach, K. Pearson, A. Poincaré and others.
A number of prerequisites contributed to the formation of this separate area of philosophical analysis: at this time, science acquires serious social significance, expands the scope of its activities, deploys its own institutions, and makes a series of fundamental discoveries. Simultaneously, there is a gigantic complication of scientific knowledge, it becomes less visual, more and more abstract. Since the beginning of the XX century. in connection with the creation of the special theory of relativity and the appearance of the physics of the microcosm, a crisis of classical physics and the worldview associated with it arises. Hence, the problem of substantiating scientific knowledge and comprehending the scientific method acquires particular urgency.
In the subsequent development of the philosophy of science, the following stages are distinguished.
1. An important program of the philosophy of science in the first half of the 20th century. the so-called logical positivism, or neopositivism. The ideas of neopositivism were especially influential in the 1930s and 1940s. Among its leaders, the most famous are K. Hempel, R. Carnap, O. Neurath, G. Reichenbach, M. Schlick, G. Feigl. Organizationally, the neopositivist movement is associated primarily with the Vienna Circle and the Berlin Group of Philosophers of Science.
The main belief of the neopositivists was that science has a certain rigid logical and methodological structure. The neopositivists were based on very strong assumptions. From their point of view, there is a single scientific method common to all sciences, and, accordingly, a kind of "reference", the only possible science. Scientific activity is unambiguously defined by the following logical and methodological scheme:
FACTS -> METHOD THEORY.
It means that:
- 1) there is a neutral basis of facts; facts are the results of observations and experiments;
- 2) there is a single methodological standard for working with empirical material; due to the application of the scientific method, the correct processing of facts occurs;
- 3) the end result of the activity is a scientific theory as reliable, substantiated theoretical knowledge; theory is an adequate description and systematization of empirical material.
Such a set of ideas can be considered a kind of ideal model of scientific character. Errors and misconceptions in science, from this point of view, are always just a consequence of the departure from the ideal model of scientificity. The neopositivists considered their task to be the identification, detailed study and precise presentation of the ideal of scientificity and all the components related to it. The neo-positivists were going to clarify, clarify and present in the form of strict formulations what the scientific method and logically irreproachable theory are, as well as highlight the logical structures of explanation, justification, confirmation. The main means for carrying out the neo-positivist program was the logical analysis of the language of science.
2. However, in the course of logical and methodological research, the initial assumptions of the neopositivists were weakened and blurred. For example, it was realized that it was impossible to achieve the ideal of a complete substantiation of a scientific hypothesis, and scientific concepts do not have such a clear content that could be exhaustively specified.
In other words, the implementation of the program of a strong scientific model has encountered numerous difficulties.
Gradually, the original concept of scientificity began to be criticized, including by the neopositivists themselves. Around the 1950s the revision of neo-positivist principles begins. But the complete collapse of this program occurs in the 1960s. At this time, a much more complex vision of science was achieved, including the denial of the neutrality of the empirical basis, the existence of the only correct scientific method, and the inviolability of scientific theory.
The new period in the philosophy of science, which began in the 1960s, is called post-positivist.
W. Quine, T. Kuhn, W. Sellars, P. Feyerabéid and others played an important role in criticizing the key neopositivist positions and in establishing a new view of science. A long-time opponent of neo-positivism was also Karl Popper, whose ideas gained significant influence in the post-positivist period.
In the 1970s Finally, there is a general opinion that positivism in the philosophy of science has come to an end. In 1977, F. Suppe described the history of the neo-positivist movement and concluded that the era of neo-positivism was over.
3. In the general post-positivist perspective, one can single out a period that is appropriate to call modern. It originates around the 1980s and 1990s.
If in previous decades (1960-1970s) researchers focused mainly on criticizing neopositivism, then the newest stage is the time to realize the results of past discussions, as well as to understand the complexity of new problems facing the philosophy of science. Through the efforts of researchers, an extremely complex and multifaceted image of science has been outlined. New promising approaches to the study of scientific activity have appeared.
At the present stage, along with the concepts of the classics of the philosophy of science, the ideas of such researchers as II. Achinstein, R. Geer, F. Kitcher, N. Cartwright, W. Newton-Smith, B. van Fraassen, J. Hacking and many others.
In what follows, we will refer in more detail to both the program of the neopositivists and the main ideas of their opponents.
At the present stage, philosophical directions are also intensively developing that study special sciences and areas: the philosophy of biology, quantum mechanics, medicine, economics, etc.
Methodology of science
The term "methodology" has two meanings.
First, a methodology is a set of rules and regulations that underlie a certain type of activity.
Secondly, methodology is a special discipline, a special line of research. The subject of methodological analysis is human activity in a particular area.
The concept of "method" (Gr. methodos- path to something, following) means any consciously applied way of solving problems, achieving the desired result.
The methodology of science as an independent area of research seeks to clarify the content, possibilities, boundaries and interaction of scientific methods. It develops a system of methodological concepts that reflect in general terms the prerequisites, means and principles of scientific knowledge.
The task of this discipline is not only to clarify and study the existing research tools, but also to try to improve them, to contribute to the development of scientific methods; it involves an active critical approach to scientific knowledge.
Initially, the methodology of science developed, rather, as a normative discipline, as if dictating to the scientist the “correct” methods of cognition, setting him a rather rigid framework and evaluating his actions. However, since the second half of the XX century. in methodological research, there is a shift from regulatory strategies for descriptive, i.e. descriptive.
Methodologists are now more studying and describing how science actually works, not trying to impose on scientists any notions of "right" and "wrong" actions. But, of course, the analytical-critical style in relation to real scientific practice is also preserved in the modern methodology of science. Today, there is a growing understanding that this discipline should not so much be aimed at developing specific recommendations for scientists, but rather be actively involved in a broad discussion along with representatives of the private sciences and on the principles of equality with them of their methodological problems.
With a certain degree of conventionality in the methodology of science as a philosophical discipline, one can distinguish between "general methodology", which studies the most general features of scientific activity (for example, it deals with general issues of experimentation, modeling, measurement, axiomatization, etc.), and "methodology of particular sciences", analyzing narrower questions that relate to specific scientific fields and directions.
The development of methodological knowledge is closely connected with the general advancement of science. Scientific achievements have, in addition to the theoretical, substantive, content side, also a methodological side. Together with new scientific theories, we often acquire not only new knowledge, but also new methods. For example, such fundamental achievements of physics as quantum mechanics or relativistic theory were also of great methodological significance.
The fact that the development of philosophical and methodological knowledge is extremely important for science is proved by the fact that many prominent scientists specifically refer in their works to the fundamental general methodological issues of science. For example, it suffices to recall such scientists as II. Bohr, G. Weil, W. Heisenberg, A. Poincaré and A. Einstein.
The logic of science
In the XX century. received strong development mathematical logic - an independent direction that has applications in many areas of scientific and practical activity. The appearance of mathematical logic was a revolution in logic and science in general. Among other things, it stimulated the development of methods for the logical analysis of science.
Now the area called "the logic of scientific knowledge" can hardly be called a single discipline with a clearly defined subject. It is a combination of various concepts, approaches and models relating to various forms and processes of scientific knowledge.
In the logic of science, the formal aspects of scientific activity are studied: this is the language of science itself as a system of concepts, the logical characteristics of scientific theories (such as consistency, completeness, independence of axioms), as well as meaningful reasoning, argumentation structures and other problems. Such important scientific concepts as necessity, possibility, probability, plausibility, etc. are specified.
The arsenal of modern logical and mathematical tools is also very wide. The use of traditional artificial logical languages (“calculus”) continues. New areas are also developing: the logic of norms, epistemic models of cognition, many-valued logics, etc.
Logical methods of processing and researching scientific knowledge today have acquired particular importance in connection with the formation of the so-called knowledge engineering and the development of computer technologies based on advances in artificial intelligence. The development of logical methods contributes to one of the most important trends in modern science - its informatization and computerization (see paragraph 6.1).
- At the same time, supporters of this program began to call themselves "logical empiricists."
The main thesis of this chapter is that political science as an independent scientific discipline is becoming an increasingly mature branch of knowledge that requires high professionalism. Before proceeding to a discussion of the range of problems outlined above, it seems necessary to briefly dwell on some key issues.
What criteria are applied in defining political science as a scientific discipline? What is politics? In what sense can the study of politics claim the status of a science?
A. The nature of science
We are accustomed to understand by "disciplines" certain branches of scientific knowledge. Nevertheless, it is worth paying attention to a broader interpretation of this term. In the Concise Oxford English Dictionary, the word "discipline" has several meanings, including this term is understood as "an integral part of learning; spiritual and moral education, the absence of which is fraught with disasters; military training, drill; order maintained among schoolchildren, soldiers, prisoners, etc.; a system of rules of conduct; control exercised over the parishioners of the church; corporal punishment; (church) imposition of penance.
The last dictionary meaning is distantly related to academic disciplines, but the influence of most of the others can be traced in this case quite clearly. Academic "discipline" has little to do with the concept of "punishment", at least in the truest sense of the word (Foucault, 1977). However, the community of scientists, collectively constituting a particular scientific discipline, actually exercises the functions of control both over the researchers working in this field and over those who are going to join them, and in the second case, the nature of such control is much more stringent. The “order of things” maintained in this case, of course, is different from that which takes place among schoolchildren or soldiers, and the training of future scientists cannot be compared with military drill. And yet there are clearly expressed, although changing over time, generally accepted ideas about “what is good and what is bad” for a particular branch of scientific knowledge, as well as a certain set of necessary techniques, without which it is impossible to master the skills of work in this area.
The debate surrounding the traditional definitions used to characterize academic disciplines stems from the same conceptual sources. Many, for example, prefer to see political analysis as more of an "art" or "craft" than a science per se (Wildavsky, 1979). However, based on the proposed analogy, politics as a craft can only be mastered to perfection in the same way that mastery is achieved in any other craft, i.e. due to the period of apprenticeship (in the academic craft - "study") under the guidance of a recognized "master". Others (including M. Weber) believe that the study of politics, however, as well as other areas of academic research, is a "vocation" (Weber, 1946). Obviously, this is more of a vocation than a craft, but at the same time, it is not so much a hobby as a job; moreover, in both the religious and academic sense, the “calling” in question is the service of a higher power (whether it be the academic community or the Lord God). It is no coincidence that most of us usually refer to academic disciplines as "professions". This idea was beautifully expressed by D. Waldo (Waldo, 1975, p. 123), wittily remarking: “sciences know, but scientists profess” (Waldo, 1975, p. 123). Scientists, indeed, profess a code of their collective faith.
The vast majority of scientific disciplines can be represented in the guise of some harsh and demanding guards. However, the disciplinary traditions and the practices they define, which so powerfully shape us and impose their limitations, simultaneously provide truly inexhaustible creative possibilities. The framework and barriers created by the structure of disciplinary traditions, both consciously and unintentionally, focus attention on research tasks and facilitate collaboration. The rules of the game imposed by the disciplinary structure enable mediocre performers to succeed in their tasks thanks to a solid foundation laid by outstanding scientists, while experts in their fields get the opportunity to move science further, relying on the efforts of numerous less gifted professionals.
Thus, a discipline - both in the academic and in the broader sense of the term - is a classic example of a self-limiting mechanism. The subordination of the performer to the discipline of discipline, or, in the words of M. Dogan (Chapter 3 of this ed.), the total scientist, undoubtedly leads to an improvement in the quality and increase in the efficiency of work, both personally and collectively. This applies to the "luminaries", and to the "Negroes" of science, and to its "Young Turks", and to the "gray-beards".
Branches of academic knowledge are both a "profession" and a discipline. First of all, it should be noted that "professionals" have a fairly high social status; the creation of national and international "professional associations" is not least aimed at securing and protecting this status, as well as the income of the professionals who are their members. At the same time, the term "professional" - and this is much more important - indicates a certain attitude of a person towards his work. Scientists are united in a self-organized community focused on performing well-defined tasks or functions. The professional community is characterized by other tasks and functions, and to a large extent limits itself to voluntary commitments to comply with very specific standards and norms of behavior. Professionals who join it are subject to these standards and norms, while those who leave are evaluated according to the criteria accepted in this community. These professional standards and norms form the basis not only for members of the community to evaluate each other's performance; they become their internal "critical attitude" in relation to their own achievements.
Naturally, the specific standards and norms of behavior of representatives of various specialties within the same discipline can vary significantly. But every profession has a concept of "minimum professional competence" embodied in the ritual of "qualifying examinations" that all young North American scholars who decide to devote themselves to the study of political science must pass after completing their postgraduate studies. In addition, representatives of all these professions are united by the idea of a special "role responsibility" that lies with each of the members of this academic community. The professional ethics of scientists in this category does not touch on the problems of life and death in the sense that, say, in the activities of doctors or lawyers. Practically all academic professions are characterized by more and more formalized codes of ethics, the norms of which are mainly related to issues related to uniform standards of conduct and publication of research results; it is implied that all professionals must abide by them honestly (APSA, 1991).
Speaking of the increased "professionalism" of political science in general, we mean, firstly, the established agreement on the "uniform approach" necessary to determine the level of "minimum professional competence" required for professional work in this field; secondly, the ever-increasing spread of the evaluation of results (and to a greater extent one's own than others') from the standpoint of ever-increasing requirements for professional skills.
If there are some general ideas about minimum standards, then opinions about the upper bar of professionalism are many and varied. And yet, as in medicine, each of the sub-disciplines of political science has its own internal standards of excellence, on the basis of which the merits of its representatives are assessed accordingly. As in medicine, in political science there is a certain scale of priorities that allows you to determine the place and significance of all its subsections, which together form a single whole.
B. What is politics?
The above remarks in general terms are applicable to almost all academic disciplines, which differ significantly among themselves mainly in terms of the tasks they face and the methodologies used to solve them. Although, as we are about to prove, political science has a number of useful techniques that are used by researchers working in most of its subdisciplines, H. Alker (ch. 35 of this ed.) is undoubtedly right in noting that this branch of knowledge has no a single methodology, like some other scientific disciplines, and even more so does not try to determine the tasks facing it based on its own methodology. The goals of political science as an independent discipline, rather, are determined by the subject of its study, the interest in "politics" in all its diversity of manifestations.
It seems that "politics" can most accurately be described as the limited exercise of social power. According to this definition, the study of politics - both academic and practical - could be defined as the study of the nature and sources of these restrictions and the technique of applying social power within these restrictions.
By defining politics in terms of power, we follow our many predecessors. Now it is no secret to anyone that the conceptual understanding of the concept of "power" is fraught with many hidden dangers. Being quite well aware of the complexity of this problem, we would not like to wallow in a quagmire of fruitless discussions, believing that the neo-Weberian definition of power given by R. Dalem remains relevant. In accordance with it, someone X has power over a certain Y insofar as, firstly, X in one way or another can force G to do something that, secondly, is in the interests of X and that, thirdly, Y himself would otherwise not would do.
Our approach to the problem diverges from the traditional one, since in it politics is defined through the concept of restrictions in the exercise of power. From our point of view, unlimited power is nothing more than ordinary brute force. It has nothing to do with political power as such, except perhaps for individual deviations, the scope of which is rather narrow. Brute force in its purest form is the subject of the study of physics (or of its social counterparts such as military science and martial arts), but not of political science. The essence of politics, it seems to us, lies precisely in the restrictions imposed on politicians, and in those strategic maneuvers that are undertaken in order not to go beyond the limits outlined by them. It seems to us that it is precisely the analysis of these restrictions: where they come from, how they operate, what steps political agents can take without going beyond them - and lies at the heart of the study of politics.
In this case, with a broad understanding of the term "politics", we are talking about the use of social power (and not about the "execution" of its functions, as is typical for a narrow understanding of this term), about the many opportunities for maneuvering that political agents have within the existing restrictions. . By this we mean not only their intentional actions, but also those unforeseen consequences that may arise as a result of these purposeful actions (Merton, 1936). In addition, both hidden, behind-the-scenes political manipulations and overt political games taking place in plain sight are assumed (Schattaschneider, 1960; Goodin, 1980; Riker, 1986). Our definition of politics includes passive and active actions of the authorities, internalized norms of behavior, as well as external threats on an equal basis (Bachrach and Baratz, 1963; Lukes, 1974). In addition, a broad understanding of politics also contains the infamous “law of expected reactions”, as well as the consequences of untimely or not taken decisions at all and preferences prevailing among the general population (Laclau, Mouffe, 1985).
Here it is appropriate to make one more remark, which is directly related to our concept. In defining politics (and the subject of political science), we deliberately disassociate ourselves from the purely distributive tradition contained in G. Lasswell's classical interpretation of "politics": "who gets what, when and how" (Lasswell, 1950). It is likely that the consequences of all political actions are to some extent related to the distribution of wealth; perhaps it is also true that this is the main reason for our interest in this phenomenon. But if we consider the meaning that this act has for the actor himself, then many political actions, at least at the initial stage, turn out to be unrelated to the process of distribution. Moreover, even at the final stage of some political processes of great social significance, neither objectively nor subjectively they can be reduced to banal issues related to the division of the public pie. Distributive, regulatory, redistributive and identifying - each of these varieties of politics can only have its own distinctive features (Low, 1964; Sandel, 1982). The arguments of the supporters of the concept of distributive policy, which, according to economists, follows from the concept of general welfare, are just empty rantings about how close society has come to the cherished goal defined by V. Pareto. At the same time, the very question of the possibility of creating such a society is a rather controversial problem, the solution of which largely depends on political maneuvers of a completely different kind, which often - at least at first - have nothing to do with distribution. The importance of the issue of distribution in the study of political problems is obvious, but our approach to research in this area should not be a priori tied to the analysis of the totality of complex political processes exclusively from these positions.
B. Some Approaches to Political Science
Much has been written about whether political science is a science in the true sense of the word. The answer to the question posed largely depends on what exactly is invested in the concept of "science". It seems to us correct to define science rather briefly as "a systematic study aimed at creating an increasingly differentiated set of ordered ideas about the empirical world." Based on this deliberately laconic formulation, there can hardly be any doubt that the study of politics can claim the status of a science.
However, many invest in this concept a different meaning. Thus, for example, a logical positivist, when defining "science", could compile a whole list of "comprehensive laws", the violation of at least one of which would not allow any branch of knowledge to receive this high status. It is obvious that to satisfy all the conditions listed in such a list, political science, most likely, would not be able to. The fact is that, despite the existing systematization of the fundamental truths of political science, its conclusions, by their very nature, will inevitably remain highly probable. The terms "always" and "never" with which the logical positivist is accustomed to deal when developing his universal laws are rarely used in the world of politics, where situations prevail that are described only in terms of "more or less probable."
The reason for this state of affairs is not that the explanatory models are incomplete, and not that the operating factors have not yet been identified. Although, of course, these arguments should be recognized as fair. The deep reason for the unacceptability of the positivist approach to the study of political science lies in the impossibility of an unambiguous interpretation of the very subject of study. The universal law model may or may not (but that is another problem) be successfully applied to the study of the motion of billiard balls under the action of the laws of Newtonian mechanics: in this case, the consequences of each action can be predicted with complete accuracy, and their causes can be exhaustively explained by the forces that have an external impact on such "actors". However, although human beings are, of course, the object of influence of certain causes, at the same time they also act as goal-setting actors capable of cognition and action based on it. "Belief", "purpose", "intention", "meaning" - all these factors are crucial in explaining human actions, which differ significantly from the "actions" of billiard balls. The objects of study of political science, like all other branches of social knowledge, have a completely different ontological status than billiard balls. Therefore, the model of universal law developed by logical positivism is absolutely unacceptable in the study of human society, as, however, it may partly be so in the case of billiard balls.
It's no secret that today the domestic higher education is in a state of crisis. After receiving the coveted diploma, most graduates have to acquire the knowledge necessary for work on their own. One of the main reasons for this situation is the lack of a mechanism for rapid adaptation of the content of the taught academic disciplines. Don't know what the term "academic discipline" means? Then let's learn more about it and its content, subject and other features. And also consider how it differs from a scientific discipline.
(W.D.) Academic discipline is…
This phrase refers to systematized information, skills and abilities isolated from some area (technology, art, science, production activity, etc.) in order to study it in an educational institution.
To make it easier to remember the meaning of the concept under consideration, it is worth knowing that the noun “discipline” came into the Russian language from Latin (disciplina) and in translation means “teaching”.
In simpler terms, an academic discipline is a specific subject that is studied in schools or universities. For example: mathematics, law, sopromat, computer science and others.
Educational (academic) course and subject
The concept under consideration is quite closely related to the subject and the course.
An academic discipline is a synonym for the first of the above terms, which also represents pedagogically adapted and systematized information, skills, and skills that demonstrate the main essence of the science being studied.
An academic course is a structural unit of the organization of the entire educational and educational processes in a university or school within a particular discipline. The training course begins and ends during one semester, less often - several years.
Educational and scientific disciplines
Having learned the answer to the main question “academic discipline - what is it?”, It is worth considering more carefully the connection of the term under study with such a concept as “scientific discipline” (N.D.).
This is the name of the main form of organization of a certain science. It unites on a subject-content basis various areas of scientific knowledge, as well as a community of scientists involved in their production, analysis and transfer to society.
In the sphere of interests of N.D. also includes the mechanisms of evolution of a certain scientific branch as a practical profession.
The main difference between a scientific and academic discipline is that the first of them is focused on scientists-researchers, and the second - on students (pupils, students).
Despite the different orientations, these concepts are closely related and often intersect. Although at first glance it seems that N.D. is primary, and U.D. is secondary, throughout history they have constantly intertwined and complemented each other.
As an example of the connection between the phenomena under consideration, one can cite a branch of mathematics familiar to all schoolchildren - geometry. It is both a science and an academic discipline.
As a scientific discipline, geometry deals with the study of spatial structures and relationships, as well as their generalization.
Based on the knowledge obtained by scientists in this area, an academic subject was created - geometry. It is designed to develop logical, imaginative thinking in students, to form their spatial representations, as well as to develop the skills necessary for practical activities in the future.
At the same time, some people who studied geometry become scientists in the future who can make new discoveries in this area.
"Three pillars" of academic disciplines
Each academic discipline is based on three components.
- Directly the subject of the discipline itself (its essence).
- Set goals and objectives - what should students achieve after completing the study of U.D.
- The relationship of the academic discipline with other subjects, as well as its place in the program of the educational institution and the chosen specialty.
Any U.D. is based on information provided by previously studied subjects. At the same time, it itself serves as a support for mastering the data of subsequent disciplines in order to acquire a certain academic level. Such a system resembles a house of cubes. As a rule, if you pull one out, the structure may fall apart.
Information about any academic subject and its "three pillars" can always be found in the introductory lecture to the discipline, the preface to the textbook, various encyclopedic or dictionary articles.
As an example, consider the components of such a U.D. as "Pharmaceutical Chemistry".
The subject of this discipline is the study of methods for obtaining drugs, as well as their composition and properties.
The objectives of the study of "Pharmaceutical Chemistry" are:
- creation of a scientific base for obtaining medicines with the necessary healing abilities;
- establishing the relationship between the chemical formula of a medicinal substance and its effect on biological organisms.
Position of "Pharmaceutical Chemistry" in the system of sciences: this subject is based on knowledge from such U.D. as organic, inorganic, physical and colloidal chemistry, as well as biochemistry. In addition, the information provided by this W.D. students, is the base for "Technology of drugs" and "Pharmacology". Also "Pharmaceutical Chemistry" is related to physiology, therapy and similar biomedical disciplines.
Additional components of U. D.
In addition to the above "three pillars", each academic subject consists of its language, history, facts, theory, practical application and methods of the academic discipline.
The language of U.D. is very important for its development, since it is also used in scientific disciplines (the difference between these concepts is in the fifth paragraph). This is the name of the specific terminology of this industry. Its components are not only specialized terms, but also various symbols (most often of Greek or Latin origin), symbols and abbreviations, mathematical apparatus, and the like. In general, everything that is used in this area in addition to the usual language.
By studying the history of U. D., one can trace how it reached the modern level. Moreover, the chronology of mistakes or misconceptions is sometimes no less informative and instructive than the narrative of achievements.
A tangible part in the educational material of the discipline is given to the facts. Information about them is acquired through observation or experimentation. The importance of factual material lies in the fact that they act as practical examples that illustrate theoretical data. They serve as evidence of the importance of the existence of this discipline.
The theoretical basis of U.D. is based on statements (postulates). With their help, a model of reality is formed, which is characterized by a simplification of objective reality. This method makes it possible theoretically to formulate laws that reflect the relationship between phenomena.
Theories find their way into practice by solving certain problems based on given algorithms.
An important role among the components of U. D. belongs to its methods. They fall into two categories:
- Aimed at studying the subject itself as an academic discipline (didactic).
- Aimed at the development of related science. The latter are necessary for obtaining experimental data, constructing evidence or denying theories, and solving practical problems.
Types of academic disciplines
In secondary educational institutions, such U.D., as a rule, are introduced in high school, when students are distributed into specialized classes with in-depth study of certain subjects.
Tasks and goals of the academic discipline
In general, each W.D. It is aimed at teaching new knowledge, as well as developing in students certain practical skills for implementing the information received. That is, for any academic discipline - tasks and goals - this is a set of requirements for the results of its development.
At the same time, each individual U.D. has its own goals and objectives based on its specifics.
For example, when studying a discipline called "World History", students are given the following tasks:
- consider the main stages in the development of states;
- compare their social, economic, political and legal systems, culture and daily life.
If we are talking about studying the chronology of a particular country, then all of the above tasks are supplemented by a comparison of the historical processes taking place in it, with the events that took place in the same period outside it.
As for the goals of studying W. D. "World History", they are as follows:
- Assimilation of acquired systematized information about the history of human civilization.
- Stimulating the development of students' abilities to realize the historical conditionality of phenomena in the world, to determine their own position in relation to the past and modern surrounding reality, and to correlate their views and principles with historically emerged worldview systems.
- Mastering the skills/skills of searching, systematizing and comprehensive analysis of historical information.
- Formation of the ability to consider events/phenomena from the point of view of their historical conditionality. And also to compare different versions and assessments of events and activities of prominent personalities, to determine their own attitude to the debatable problems of the past and the present.
If the history of the native country is considered, then all the listed goals will be adapted to its chronology. In addition, one more thing will be added - the education of civic consciousness and an active position, national identity.
Academic discipline program
All information about the studied U. D. is contained in a specialized state document. It is called the "Working Program of the Academic Discipline". It is she who is guided by the teacher, when teaching his wards.
The structure of the U.D. program
As a rule, each university draws up its own program of academic discipline. At the same time, it must necessarily comply with the unified state educational standards.
Typically, the program consists of four sections:
- Passport. It describes the scope of U.D., its goals and objectives, its place in the structure of the main professional educational program, as well as the total number of academic hours allotted for the study of this subject.
- Structure and content. This section describes the types of study work and the amount of time allocated for them. It also details the content of the curriculum.
- Implementation conditions. This section provides a list of material and technical support necessary for the student to fully master the subject being studied. Also here is a list of literature on the discipline. Moreover, there is a separate list for students, separately for the teacher.
- Control and evaluation of the level of development of the material presented. This section describes what pupils / students should learn and how the teacher will test their knowledge (oral surveys, tests, independent work, etc.). Also, there must be criteria for assessing knowledge and skills; the procedure for the formation of grades for the discipline.
In addition to the above items, some programs may contain additional information, such as examples of assessment tools for monitoring and validation. As well as data on the applied educational technologies (may be supplemented by methodological recommendations).
Civil law as an example of a scientific and academic discipline
Having studied the main features of such a concept as U. D., it is worth considering an academic discipline as a practical example.
As a civil science, this subject specializes in considering the patterns of civil and legal regulation of relationships in society. The result of such a study is the emergence of an academic discipline on civil law. It consists of a system of related and consistent concepts, views, judgments, ideas, concepts, and theories.
The subject of this U.D. is the norms of civil law.
The objectives of the study are the development by students of the basic provisions and concepts of civil law science. As well as an analysis of the main body of civil law and the practice of its application.
The task of "Civil Law" as an academic discipline is to train specialists who are able to solve practical legal civil problems in the shortest possible time, using the acquired knowledge.
Depending on the specialty of training, this U.D. is allocated a different number of academic hours. For example, students in Law and Welfare Organization devote 239 hours to studying this subject during one semester. And for the specialty "Jurisprudence" 684 hours were allocated for the study of civil law over four semesters.
As for the conditions for the implementation of "Civil Law" as an academic discipline, after completing this subject, the student must know not only all the provisions of the civil code, but also the basic laws governing civil law relations in the state. Also, the student must be guided in the main provisions of the guidelines of the Supreme and Supreme Arbitration Courts on civil law issues.
In the specialty "Law and organization of social security" after completing the course, students take the final exam. And at "Jurisprudence" each semester in turn ends with a test or an exam.
