DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
34
PROGMATIC CHARACTERISTICS OF KNOWLEDGE IN MODERN
METHODOLOGY
Akhmedova Dilafroz Kudratullayevna
Independent researcher of the Navoi State Pedagogical Institute
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11171246
Annotation:
In this article, it is explained that the subject areas of private
sciences have become integration objects, and that taking into account the goals
and tasks of society is a very important integration vector. Also, internal and
external factors in the formation of fields of knowledge, the influence of the
results of interdisciplinary research on integrative fields of knowledge, the
formation of integral courses in the integrated knowledge system, and issues
were analyzed.
Keywords:
Personality, authenticity, ambiguity, psychology, sociology,
equality,
society,
taxonomy,
ontology,
behaviorism,
teractionism,
psychocentrism.
INTRODUCTION
Until now, it was believed that the functions of knowledge are universal:
the meaning of knowledge for all societies is the same, only its quantity differs.
Currently, when the countries of the world are rapidly developing, addressing
the problem of social functions of knowledge remains relevant due to three
circumstances. It is time to consider this thesis as part of a civilizational
approach, where the functions of knowledge in different societies can be
distinguished as a working hypothesis. The third case here is the change of
social theory, which proposes other models and approaches to explain the
processes and phenomena of social life. Therefore, the problem of knowing the
new quality of social functions is becoming one of the central topics of social
philosophy. This thesis also requires an examination of the theory of modern
society, according to which, with the diversity of social historical forms, a new
type of social form is being formed today.
ANALYSIS OF LITERATURE AND METHOD
The study of the role of knowledge in traditional society is carried out by
philosophers, anthropologists and post-positivists, and here it is worth
mentioning such scientists as P.P. Gaydenko, K. Mannheim, O. Shpengler, T. Kuhn
[1]. Knowledge in antiquity and the Middle Ages, as well as during the scientific
revolution in the modern era, was analyzed in the researches of D. V. Bekker, V.
A. Belov, A. P. Belousov, P. Berger, T. Lukman [2].
In the last three years, the theoretical, cognitive and socio-philosophical
aspects of the problem within the framework of the interaction of knowledge
DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
35
and science have been studied by scientists such as G. Masharipova, M.
Khandamova [3].
The study of the social functions of knowledge begins at the same time and
even earlier with the study of the society itself. If we consider society as the
beginning of scientific study, it should be studied as a natural reality from the
19th century. It was during this period that Saint-Simon, Comte, Spencer and
others formed the modern concept of society, which belongs neither to the
people nor to the state. But even in the 18th century, enlightened people created
the theory that a person becomes a free citizen only after getting acquainted
with the latest achievements of science. Here, knowledge is defined not only as a
means of liberating the human mind, but also as a condition for building a just
state and legal order.
DISCUSSIONS
The division of scientific knowledge into disciplines is related to the
strategic distribution of “angles of view” to objects, that is, to areas of reality. But
such a division is partially true. But even if the structure of scientific knowledge
perfectly reflects the structure of reality, the fact of division makes individual
elements (subject areas of special sciences) autonomous and hermetic. The
activation of interdisciplinary research and the formation of inseparable fields of
knowledge were connected with the following internal and external factors.
Internal factors should include, first of all, the needs of the science itself, the
logic of its development showed that the previous disciplinary differentiation
was fundamentally limited.
Interdisciplinary research makes it possible to “depressurize” them, and
the result of such research turns into integrative fields of knowledge. External
factors include:
1) the increased need for the interaction of narrow specialists in different
fields of knowledge (such interaction itself should be prepared, create
methodological and theoretical tools and mechanisms);
2) a change in the policy and ideology of higher education expressed using
the formula “from knowledge to skills” (this formula is incorrectly identified
with the formula “from theory to practice”. In fact, we are talking about the
transition from theoretical and practical knowledge to skills that connect theory
with practice).
It is easy to see that the above external factors are related to changes in
higher education policy and ideology. In fact, integrated courses need a certain
methodology, because a simple combination of knowledge, and especially its
DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
36
mechanical integration, is impossible. What are the knowledge requirements
and how can integrated training courses be formed?
An integrative knowledge system, like any other knowledge system, must
satisfy the following principles:
1. The theoretical and cognitive principle of truth and objectivity;
2. Authenticity, ambiguity, inconsistency and completeness of definition of
formal-logical principles;
3. Empirical principles of consistency, confirmation and falsification of
facts (experimental verification);
4. Pragmatic principles of explanatory power and technological efficiency.
Don’t forget the rules for adding knowledge systems. It is known from
logic that in some cases combining two truths does not give the truth (strict
disjunction), and combining two false statements does not lead to a true truth
(implication). Thus, the truth of ownership when including cognitive systems is
not the same as formal correctness.
First of all, it should be noted that integrated courses differ greatly in the
degree of possible integration of heterogeneous material. For example, courses
that include learning to introduce mathematical methods of information
processing in certain fields of knowledge do not imply deep integration. Such
courses include “mathematical methods of sociological research”, “legal
informatics”, “informatization of management” and others. In this case,
methodological problems do not arise, all solutions, such as formatting and
structuring of educational material, are only related to technology [4]. Didactic
units are formed on the basis of educational tasks, and the latter are completely
determined by the pragmatics of the primary material, that is, the needs that
make the use of mathematical methods relevant.
A different situation arises when the subject areas of special subjects
become objects of integration. Here we are already talking about deep
integration, which includes the formation of a new ontology. A classic example is
the courses “social psychology”, “cultural anthropology”, “cultural sociology”,
“physical chemistry”.
As a rule, deep integration can be used when combining the subject areas
of related disciplines, because the formation of a new ontology involves reducing
one ontology to another or creating new ontologies by “destroying” the original
ones. Social psychology, presented in three different versions in the scientific
community, is an obvious example here.
DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
37
There is a tradition that defines social philosophy as a branch of
psychology that examines the mental activity of an individual during
interactions with other individuals and groups of individuals, as well as official
organizations. In this case, we are talking about the reduction of the social
ontology to the ontology of the person, that is, in fact, we are thinking about
subordination to the psychology of sociology. Concepts and concepts born in the
depths of sociology are used in the schemes of social psychology. But it is worth
noting that their ontological status changes radically, they become external
appendages according to the psychological conceptual scheme.
An example of the most typical embodiment of this scheme is social
psychology built within the framework of behaviorism. Personality is
determined by observed behavior, that is, it is seen through the manifestation of
activity. Based on the person thus understood, social reality is defined as a set of
structures and institutions.
Social philosophy approaches the formation of this discipline in structural
functionalism, where the individual is defined as one of the subsystems of the
social system, that is, he participates as one of the elements of society. In this
case, we have the superiority of sociological ontology over psychological
ontology.
The result of the choice between psychology and sociology is that the
subject area of the integrated discipline and then the structure of the training
course copy the subject area of the corresponding discipline (psychology or
sociology). These are the inevitable consequences of reducing one ontology to
another. But, as noted above, there is another way of science and disciplinary
integration, when a new integral ontology is created by canceling previous fields
of science.
This was done by the creators and supporters of teractionism, who not
only built a new ontology, but also excluded from it all the basic concepts of
sociology and psychology. Here, sociology and psychology are already becoming
branches of social psychology, which fundamentally changes both the strategy
and tactics of building the educational course. Didactic units are determined by
the content of the new science, the logic of its presentation is determined by a
new axiomatics and a new set of hidden ontological assumptions.
The main social crisis affecting modern social systems is the crisis caused
by the global transition from traditional (agricultural) societies to modern
(industrial) societies. In a number of European countries, this transition took
more than a century, but it was only in the twentieth century that it became
DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
38
decisive for most societies around the world. It is this process that determines
the logic, dynamics and possible systemic and structural consequences of crisis
events in various spheres of social life.
If we insist on psychocentrism, Tom extends the methods of psychology to
sociological questions. If we are sociologically centrist, then we apply theoretical
frameworks and conceptual frameworks specific to sociology to the explanation
of mental phenomena. The final choice between these strategies can be
abandoned and psychocentrism recommended for the faculty of pedagogy and
psychology, and sociocentrism for the faculty of history and law. And we can
assume the organization of one course using the two named strategies. True, in
this case, the content of the course will be deprived of the much needed
conceptual and methodological unity, because two deductive - axiomatic
systems are implemented simultaneously within the framework of one
discipline. This inevitably leads to contradictions and disagreements.
Modern civilization is often called man-made. This means that if earlier
civilizations gave birth to technical adaptations, now technology itself creates
civilization, determines the logic and speed of its development. Modern society
is called industrial, then post-industrial, then information, then rational. And in
each case, it is shown against an earlier society called traditional or agrarian.
Previously, social development was mainly determined by phenomena
such as democracy, dictatorship, oligarchy, liberalism, communism, capitalism,
conservatism, nationalism, etc. Today, according to the correct opinion of S.
Huntington, they belong to the second fund, and opposition to modernity and
traditionalism quickly came to the fore.
This American political scientist and futurologist said that the following
are characteristic of a traditional society:
1) dominance of ascriptive, partial, diffuse motivation models;
2) stability of social groups and limited spatial mobility;
3) relatively stable and simple professional finish;
4) motivational system based on ascriptive situations with diffuse
interaction.
The following are typical for modern society:
1) the predominance of success-oriented, universalistic and specific
motivational models;
2) high level of social mobility, including vertical nature;
3) the system of highly developed and separated professions from other
social structures;
DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
39
4) stratification of “equality” based on achieved conditions;
5) the dominance of associations, that is, non-descriptive structures.
An important aspect of the problem under consideration is technology
integration. It is known that the structure and content of knowledge is
characterized by the following elements:
1) hidden ontological assumptions that play the role of axioms;
2) rules of deductive conclusion;
3) explanatory ideals and norms;
4) forms, types and levels of knowledge.
Accordingly, materials must be coordinated in this scheme. The
coordination of axiomatics is understood above, and the rules of inference can
differ only in strictness, which in turn is determined by the level of
formalization.
Explanatory ideals and norms depend on what type of science a particular
field of knowledge belongs to. For example, in natural science, it is customary to
distinguish three types: mathematical, taxonomic and distinctive - descriptive.
RESULTS
As mentioned above, the highest achievement of science is mathematical
science. Mathematization of nature was carried out not only in Newtonian
mechanics, but also in Maxwell’s electrodynamics, Einstein’s theory of special
relativity and all other theories of modern physics. The mathematization of
chemistry, biology, or geology was less impressive in scope and importance. The
most mathematical of all sciences of this nature is chemistry, which actually
combines with physics at the atomic - molecular level. There are also
mathematical equations in biology, but they are only a spread of the methods of
probability theory and mathematical statistics. Geology, astronomy, geography,
and other natural sciences interact with mathematics in statistical calculations
or in connection with physics. Basically, they work with knowledge of classes
and species (taxonomy) or description of single phenomena (description).
Even the higher mathematical theories of modern physics are not reduced
to a set of equations - they are filled with classifications and operations
describing the studied objects. Biological theory is primarily a classification,
although some models explaining the mechanism of biological phenomena are
important here.
Coordination of this type of knowledge within each discipline is carried
out in a special way, subject to the goals of integration. The integrated course is
created for educational purposes only and does not carry an independent
DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
40
cognitive load. Integration is not possible without the process of knowing,
because scientific knowledge is not reducible to information, although it can be
represented as an array of information. When translating knowledge into data, it
is inevitable to lose a very important component of this knowledge.
At this stage, taking into account the goals and tasks of society creates a
very important integration vector, which affects the construction of the entire
knowledge complex. Erudition and a broad view of things are really important,
but according to them, integral knowledge should develop students’ discursive
thinking skills, introduce them to argumentation methods and research, form
the idea of polemics and reasoning.
This was done by the creators and supporters of teractionism, who not
only built a new ontology, but also excluded from it all the basic concepts of
sociology and psychology. Here, sociology and psychology are already becoming
branches of social psychology, which fundamentally changes both the strategy
and tactics of building the educational course. Didactic units are determined by
the content of the new science, the logic of its presentation is determined by a
new axiomatics and a new set of hidden ontological assumptions.
CONCLUSION
To conclude, science and education are becoming the most important
means of breaking and introducing social technologies. It is precisely this that
distorts the impact of the educational process on all age groups of society and
makes it truly continuous. Science in postindustrial society and postmodern
culture begins to play the role of a social mediator and performs constructive
adjustment functions. In the new era, the development of interdisciplinary
research has stimulated the formation of fields of knowledge in different ways.
In the process of activation of interdisciplinary researches, the formation factors
of the fields of knowledge were studied and the features of the integrated
knowledge system were analyzed.
The interdisciplinary nature of the work allows for interesting and deep
generalizations, and reference to the theory of knowledge and cognitology made
it possible to understand the logic of the functioning of knowledge in the general
space of socialism. A characteristic feature of modern science is the
interpenetration of various fields of knowledge, their methods and methods of
explanation. This is why the last two theses on social technology, science and
education are so important. Post-industrial society is created as a result of
shifting the center of gravity from the sphere of industrial production to the
sphere of social and intellectual technologies.
DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
41
References:
1.
Гайденко П.П. Социология Макса Вебера / Вебер М. Избранные
произве¬дения. - М.: Прогресс, 1990. - С.23.; Манхейм К. Диагноз нашего
времени. - М.: Юрист, 1994 - С. 220.; Шпенглер О. Закат Европы. Т. 1. - М.:
Мысль. - 1993. - С. 151.; Кун Т. Структура научных революций. - М.:
Прогресс, 1975 - С. 252.
2.
Беккер Д. В обществе об обществе // СОЦИО-ЛОГОС: Пер. с англ., нем.,
франц. / Сост., общ. ред. и предисл. В.В. Винокурова, А.Ф. Филип¬пова. - М.:
Прогресс, 1991. - 480 с.; Белов В. А. Ценностное измерение науки.-М.: Наука,
2001. - 122 с.; Белоусов А.П. Институциональные ценности в общественном
сознании нового поколения россиян. Автореф. дисс. ... канд. философ, наук.
— Ставрополь, 2003. - 25 с.; Бергер П., Лукман Т. Социальное
конструирование реальности: Трактат по социологии знания. - М.: Медиум,
1995. - 213 с.
3.
Masharipova G.K. Xorazm Ma’mun akademiyasi allomalari tabiiy-ilmiy
merosining ijtimoiy-falsafiy tafakkur taraqqiyotiga ta’siri. Fals.dok. diss. –
Toshkent, 2020. – 302 b.; Xandamova M. Abu Rayhon Beruniyning ijtimoiy-
falsafiy qarashlari. Fals.fan.bo’yicha yozilgan diss. avtoreferati. – Samarqand,
2021, 51-b.;
4.
Huntington S. The change to change // Comparative politics in the post-
behavioral era. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner, 1988. Цит. По Ионин Л.Г.
Социология культуры. - М., 1996. -С. 37.
5.
Huntington S. The change to change // Comparative politics in the post-
behavioral era. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner, 1988. Цит. По Ионин Л.Г.
Социология культуры. - М., 1996. -С.38.
