Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of trade union movement, humanitarian and socio-economic disciplines of the Orenburg branch of the Academy of labor and social relations

Candidate of Philosophical Sciences

The article studies the role of normativity in scientific cognition through analysis of the laws of science development. Based on the views of a number of philosophers and methodologists of science, the authors examine in detail the main features of science, revealing the features of norms in them. Characterizing the scientific normativity, they note that scientific knowledge tends to have a goal, an object and a subject of the research, methodological tools, value orientations, technical equipment. No less important are the requirements for the presentation of the material, the validity of knowledge, its system organization, etc. The authors believe that these basic rules of scientific knowledge allow forming of the appropriate samples. The article suggests that the normativity of scientific knowledge is the main feature that distinguishes this area of knowledge from others, that the scientific norm is a system-forming principle not only organizing and regulating the process of cognition, but also determining its boundaries. The study of the essential characteristics of norms makes it possible to assert that, despite the presence of rigid paradigmatic installations in their structure, they are the key to the development of science, the expansion of its boundaries.

Keywords: norm, boundaries, signs of science, the foundations of science, development, scientific cognition.

References

1. Goncharova, V.A. Norm and deviation in scientific cognition: the experience of epistemological analysis: author's abstract. of the dis…. Candidate of Phil. Sciences: 09.00.01 / Goncharova Valeria Aleksandrovna. – Magnitogorsk, 2012. – 16 p.

2. A short dictionary on philosophy. – Minsk: Publishing house «Harvest», 2008. – 832 p.

3. Kuhn, T. Structure of scientific revolutions / T. Kuhn. – Moscow: Publishing House AST, 2003. – pp. 9-268.

4. Lakatos, I. Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes / I. Lakatos // Kuhn T. the Structure of scientific revolutions. – Moscow: Publishing house AST, 2003. – pp. 269-453. 

5. Lectorskiy, V.A. Scientific and non-scientific thinking: moving border / V.A Lectorskiy // Science: possibilities and limits. – Moscow: Publishing house «Science», 2003. – pp. 20-35.

6. Mendeleev, D.I. Boundaries of knowledge are impossible to foresee / D.I. Mendeleev. – Moscow: Publishing house «Soviet Russia», 1991. – 592 p. 

7. Merton, R. Social theory and social structure / R.K. Merton. – Moscow: Publishing house AST, 2006. – 873 p. 

8. Mirskaya, E.Z.R.K. Merton and the ethos of classical science / E.Z. Mirskaya // Philosophy of Science. – Issue 11: Ethos of science at the turn of the century. – Moscow: IPh RAS, 2005. – pp. 11-27.

9. New philosophical encyclopedia: in 4 vol. – Moscow: publishing House «Thought», 2001. – Vol. 3. – 692 p.

10. Poincare, A. The value of science / A. Poincaré // About science. – Moscow: Publishing house «Science», 1990. – pp. 197-365.

11. Stepin, V.S. Specificity of scientific knowledge / V.S. Stepin // Science: Opportunities and Boundaries. – Moscow: Publishing house «Science», 2003. – pp. 7-20.

12. Tulmin, St. Conceptual revolutions in science / St. Tulmin // Structure and development of science. From Boston Studies on the Philosophy of Science. – Moscow: Publishing house «Progress», 1978. – pp. 170-189.

13. Feyerabend, P. Against Methodological Coercion / P. Feyerabend // Selected Works on the Methodology of Science. – Moscow: Publishing house «Progress», 1986. – pp. 125-466.

14. Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. – Moscow: Publishing house «INFRA-M», 1998. – 576 p.

15. Holton, J. Thematic Analysis of Science / J. Holton. – Moscow: Publishing house «Progress», 1981. – 383 p.