Epistemology

Cognition as a Subject of Philosophical Consideration

One of the significant functions of philosophy is cognitive, which involves the investigation of knowledge, its limits and possibilities, and the identification of effective pathways to achieve reliable understanding. This concern is addressed by the theory of knowledge, which stands as one of the primary directions of philosophical inquiry. Synonymous with the theory of knowledge are the terms "gnoseology" and "epistemology." While these three terms are sometimes used interchangeably, subtle distinctions exist among their meanings.

What, then, is cognition? Cognition is a socio-historical process of acquiring, accumulating, and systematizing knowledge about nature, society, humanity, and the inner world of the individual. Throughout the history of human intellectual activity, on the one hand, humanity has achieved significant successes in explaining the studied objects, while on the other hand, it has often encountered difficulties and failures. This has led to the question of whether reliable knowledge of objective reality is possible. Depending on the answer to this question, two main directions are distinguished.

One of these can be termed epistemological optimism, which acknowledges the possibility of attaining knowledge that accurately reflects reality. This perspective aligns with the intuitively understandable belief that the world is accessible to cognition. Within the framework of epistemological optimism, there is an emphasis on the achievements of scientific progress, noting that historical development evidences a clear deepening and broadening of knowledge. Of course, it is recognized that difficulties exist in studying certain phenomena, but these challenges are viewed as temporary. The rapid development of science and technology seemingly supports epistemological optimism. Indeed, if one theory better explains a particular phenomenon than another, it signifies the attainment of more reliable knowledge; were the world unknowable, we would be unable to differentiate between more and less reliable theories. Yet, therein lies a problem: if the process of cognition involves a constant reassessment of previously acquired knowledge, this calls into question the possibility of attaining truth. What guarantees that the knowledge we consider true today will not be refuted by future advancements in understanding?

Thus, the other direction—agnosticism—denies the possibility of reliable knowledge, emphasizing the unknowability of the essence of phenomena. Proponents of agnosticism maintain that the results of cognition are always relative and may be revised in the future. In examining the history of science, they highlight not only numerous errors and dead ends in addressing specific problems but also the fact that the scientific worldview itself changes over time. This necessitates a serious reevaluation of the foundational concepts of science, as the scientific worldview is a fundamental cornerstone of scientific understanding. A vivid illustration of this approach is Thomas Kuhn's concept of scientific revolutions, where the development of scientific knowledge is viewed not as a continuous cumulative process, where new knowledge refines or supplements the old, but rather as paradigm shifts that are incommensurable with one another. If the emergence of new knowledge can lead to such a fundamental revision of previous understanding, this serves as an argument that the risk of unreliability is rooted in the very foundations of cognition.

However, an extreme manifestation of agnosticism would lead to self-refutation; for instance, if someone asserts, "Nothing can be known for certain," one might ask, "And do you know that for certain?" This results in a paradoxical situation: the assertion of the impossibility of attaining reliable knowledge itself claims to be reliable. Consequently, most forms of agnosticism are moderate in nature, where the possibility of cognition is not denied, but rather the naïve assumption that cognition reflects reality as it truly is. Moderate agnosticism can include skepticism—the doubt regarding the possibility of achieving reliable knowledge. Skeptics do not accept with certainty either the thesis of knowability or that of the unknowability of the world. They do not dispute that some results of our cognition may never be refuted in the process of further scientific development but contend that no reliable criterion exists to distinguish these results from those that will eventually be rejected.

Epistemological optimism expresses humanity's aspiration to acquire reliable knowledge about the world and corresponds to the worldview convictions of most scientists; however, it harbors the danger of dogmatism, associated with the perception that knowledge characteristic of a certain historical stage or scientific community reflects the world as it truly is. Agnosticism contains the danger of relativism, asserting the relativity of knowledge and the impossibility of achieving an objective reflection of the world. Nevertheless, moderate agnosticism, particularly skepticism, is associated with critical thinking, as the awareness of the uncertainty of attained knowledge serves as a safeguard against dogmatism, fostering scientific inquiry.

The process of cognition involves the presence of a subject (the knower) and an object (that which is known). The subject of cognition is the individual, relying on the cognitive procedures developed by society. The subject can be either an individual or a collective (for instance, a research laboratory). If one considers knowledge as a contribution to humanity's spiritual treasury, then in this broader sense, humanity as a whole can be deemed the subject of cognition. The distinction between individual and collective subjects is relative. A scientist investigating a new problem draws upon the knowledge acquired by other researchers, thus even in individual research, there exists a collective dimension. Conversely, science, as a product of collective efforts, consists of the contributions of individual scholars.

The object of cognition encompasses the phenomena, processes, and aspects of reality toward which the cognitive activity of the subject is directed. Objects of cognition may include not only material but also spiritual (ideal) phenomena: ideas, fantasies, beliefs, etc. Occasionally, the term "subject of cognition" is used synonymously with "object of cognition"; although they may be interchangeable in certain contexts, a detailed examination reveals a distinction. The object of cognition is that fragment of reality upon which the cognitive efforts of the subject are focused. However, it may sometimes be necessary to specify which particular aspect of the object interests the researcher, thereby identifying a specific facet within the object that constitutes the primary subject of research interest. A single object may be studied by multiple sciences, but from different perspectives: for instance, society can be the subject of study in history, sociology, and economics, yet each of these disciplines will focus on different aspects of society. Thus, the concept of the object of cognition reflects a particular element of reality, independent of the subject, whereas the subject of cognition indicates the manner in which the subject comprehends reality.

A person can serve as both the subject and the object of cognition. For example, in psychological studies, the participants of the experiment are objects of cognition, while the researcher is the subject. The notions of subject, object, and subject matter of cognition can be illustrated through the following example. Suppose a collective of medical professionals investigates the efficacy of certain medications, incorporating them into a treatment regimen for a group of patients. The subject of the research would be the collective of medical professionals, the object of the research would be the patients, and the subject matter would be the action of the medications for a specific condition. This example can be expanded: suppose a researcher interested in the effectiveness of scientific activity observes the work of the medical professionals, specifically seeking to understand the role of informal communication within the scientific collective. In this case, the researcher becomes the subject, the collective of medical professionals serves as the object, and the subject matter, in this instance, would be the informal communication among the members of the medical research collective.

In the acquisition, verification, and application of knowledge, practice plays a crucial role. The significance of practice is particularly emphasized within the framework of Marxism. Practice is a purposeful activity of the individual aimed at transforming the world. In a broad sense, practice encompasses a diverse array of human activities—from everyday skills that are automatically employed in routine tasks to complex scientific experiments. Cognition largely relies on practice, as reflected in the well-known principle of testing theories in practice; moreover, practical needs often serve as the impetus for cognition, as exemplified by technological advancements.

The structure of practice can be divided into two levels. The first level involves the reproduction of familiar actions that have previously been successfully employed to achieve a specific result. This level reflects routine activity, for example, when a person has mastered the rules for using household appliances and follows a standard algorithm each time they use them. The second level, transformation, is characterized by a departure from the known, seeking new possibilities and methods for transforming the world. At this level, a creative approach is evident, where the individual does not replicate an already familiar algorithm but instead searches for new, more effective avenues for their activities.

Depending on the subject of human transformative activity, three components of practice are distinguished: 1) material-objective, 2) social, and 3) individual-personal. A necessary balance among these components is essential, as an excessive emphasis on any single aspect (for instance, the material-objective) leads to one-sidedness.

Regarding cognition, practice serves several functions. It is foundational to the process of cognition (for cognition relies on practice). Furthermore, practice is the driving force and condition of the process of cognition, as the level of cognitive development is always closely linked to the degree of practical mastery of the world. For instance, the most advanced equipment enables experiments that were unattainable just a few decades ago. Another function relates to the fact that practice is the ultimate goal of cognition, as cognition is pursued to satisfy certain practical needs. Although sometimes the stimulus for cognition may arise from a purely intellectual interest in a particular issue, the vast majority of research is applied in nature, aimed at addressing pressing societal problems (for instance, developing more effective medications, improved technology, enhancing labor productivity, etc.). Ultimately, practice serves as the criterion of truth, as theoretical knowledge, in most cases, presupposes practical verification.