The Relationship between Epistemology and Scientific Philosophy and It’s Modern Development (Гносеология мен ғылым философиясының арақатынасы және оның қазіргі дамуы)

If we regard epistemology as a "theory of knowledge", it is an "analysis and explanation of what is knowledge", and a philosophy of science as a "philosophy of science", it is an "analysis and explanation of what is science". Explanation", then, the philosophy of science and the theory of knowledge are the same type of philosophical research, except that science is contained in knowledge and is a model of knowledge. The philosophy of science is a special theory of knowledge, that is, the theory of scientific knowledge.

Knowledge is the result of cognition. The study of epistemology directly faces the result of knowledge, which is unlike the knowledge of opinion. And the study of philosophy of science directly faces the result of scientific knowledge, which is scientific knowledge, but the study of scientific knowledge must be carried out with the help of the epistemological approach. Therefore, epistemology and philosophy of science are inseparable from epistemology; conversely, in such studies of epistemology and philosophy of science, epistemology has also been deepened, but in different periods, the focus of epistemology and philosophy of science research is different. Therefore, different methods of epistemological research will also be adopted.

The research of epistemology is mainly carried out from the cognitive ability of people and in the sense of genetics. It starts from studying the origin of cognition to explore the validity, universal necessity, objective validity, etc. of cognition, and determine the scope of cognition. In Kant's words, it is to study the "origin, scope and objective validity" of relevant knowledge. This kind of research is carried out based on the natural sciences, especially physics, which are gradually separated from philosophy, as a model of knowledge. In this way, the epistemology has developed into a concrete scientific theory of knowledge, and the epistemology and the theory of knowledge overlap.

The mainstream of scientific philosophy and epistemology in the 20th century developed in the framework of analytical philosophy. Analytical philosophy focuses on logic, mathematics, and linguistics, with meaning and truth as its main objects of concern.

The mainstream of philosophy of science in the 20th century can be briefly divided into logical empiricism and post-empiricalism, or it can be subdivided into logical empiricism, historicism, new historicism, sociology of scientific knowledge, and post-modern philosophy of science. development stage. Although the internal development of logical empiricism has also changed it, it was Quine Willard Van Orman who publicly challenged it in the early 1950s. Quine denied the categorical separation of analysis and synthesis (the theory of knowledge that advocates naturalism). Hansen proposed the theory of observation penetration, which was also used by Kari Polanyi (proposed default knowledge) and Stephen Toulmin. In the mid-to-late 1950s, Thomas Samuel Kuhn Have a direct impact. The direct successor of Kuhn is the sociology of scientific knowledge, whose main viewpoint is social constructionism, advocating conventionism and relativism, and abolishing objectivity.

After entering the 1980s, philosophy of science merged phenomenology, hermeneutics and pragmatic philosophy, and took the practical philosophy in the form of new Kantian pragmatics as its theoretical basis. At this time, knowledge is not a product of pure experience but a consensus that has been constructed. The premise of construction is not a priori, but the existing historical, cultural and conceptual structure; and the consequence of construction changes the relationship between subject and object or the premise of further construction. In this way, construction, as a social practice, makes knowledge a dynamic process. Generally speaking, with the decline of logical empiricism, the development of philosophy of science has undergone many changes. Research methods have expanded from logical analysis of scientific statements and concepts to contextual analysis that emphasizes scientific experiments; basic beliefs have changed from rejection of metaphysics, Advocating the dichotomy of theory and observation, turning to observing the overall belief in permeating theory; the research field of vision shifted from static analysis of theoretical structure to dynamic analysis of theoretical changes and experimental work from the perspective of the history of science and sociology.

The above-mentioned transformation, in philosophy, means that the meaning has changed from the original analytic philosophy to the practical structure of pragmatic philosophy or the way of life of Wittgenstein's linguistic community and the lexical structure determined thereby. This shifts from semantics to pragmatics. This is the general trend of western philosophy research. Correspondingly, the logical language method of analytical philosophy will fade out, and the historical, social, cultural, and anthropological methods will emerge. Philosophy of science and epistemology are also moving forward in this trend.

As far as the theory of knowledge is concerned, although the achievements of logical empiricism are mainly in mathematical logic, including the logical aspects of possibility and verification, it needs to be proved by the concept of "evidence" or proposition (statement) when discussing the question of possibility and verification. The concept of sex is the premise, which makes this concept and its importance the focus of epistemology.

We have seen that after logical empiricism, the "impossibility" of its fundamentalist direct experience propositions was severely criticized by J.L.Austin and others, including the later criticism of L.J.Wittgenstein, which pointed out the direction for the development of epistemology under analytic philosophy. To a certain extent, the problem of knowledge is regarded as a problem of how to correctly use the concept of "to know" and confirm it. In the context of analytical philosophy, especially after Gettier's counterexample was put forward, it ushered in the contemporary era. The great development of epistemology.

On the whole, the debate on the basic issues of the theory of knowledge triggered by the discussion of the Gettier problem can be divided into two major schools of "internalism" and "externalism. Robert Nozick's "the subjunctive conditional theory of knowledge" and Alvin I. Goldman's "the causal theory of knowledge" are the main representatives of internalism and externalism respectively. In the recent period of time, under the background of the "turn in hermeneutics", the two schools have made new developments and produced many new branches.

As far as internalism is concerned, although different philosophers have put forward various expressions of internalism, their common basic point is that in the traditional epistemological way of thinking, confirmation is regarded as the inner spiritual activity of the knower, and belief confirmation is determined by its relationship with other beliefs or reasons, and the factors that determine confirmation are all internal and determined by the soul.

Externalism is more manifested as a deviation from traditional epistemological thinking. It goes out of pure internal consciousness to seek an explanation of the problem of corroboration. It believes that corroboration depends on or is accompanied by some nature that the subject cannot grasp. In the face of internalism The difficulties faced even require abandoning the traditional concept of corroboration and replacing the previous concept of “confirmed belief” with the “trustworthiness” of knowledge.

On the basis of criticizing internalism and externalism, Bruce Russell advocated that knowledge should be a combination of subjective and objective confirmation, and believed that "for knowledge, both subjective and objective confirmation are needed". It reflects the development trend of mutual absorption and mutual integration between internalism and externalism.

This development trend shows that the original argumentation tradition of epistemology is impossible, and it also shows that the question of "how do we know what we know" requires communication and understanding between different viewpoints and schools in order to reach a certain level. Kind of consensus.

From the above brief overview of the development of philosophy of science and theory of knowledge in the 20th century, we seem to see that after logical empiricism, philosophy of science and theory of knowledge develop in different directions; in fact, there are many similarities and differences. The characteristics of convergence.

Қуаш Раида, әл-Фараби атындағы Қазақ Ұлттық Университеті, филология факультетінің 1-курс магистрантты.

Жанатаев Д.Ж., әл-Фараби атындағы Қазақ Ұлттық Университетінің профессоры.

Әлеуметтік желілерде бөлісіңіз: