Epistemology

Methods of Scientific Knowledge

Conscious, goal-directed activity aimed at the formation and development of knowledge is regulated by specific methods. In a general sense, a method is a systematic approach to achieving a particular result. Given that the aim of science is knowledge, the scientific method constitutes a system of rational and practical operations directed at solving specific cognitive tasks.

In contemporary science, there exists a multitude of methods; thus, to organize this diversity, methods are classified according to several primary criteria. Based on the degree of generality, methods are divided into general scientific methods and methods of specific sciences. General scientific methods are the most universal, applicable across a wide range of disciplines. For instance, modeling is utilized in seemingly disparate fields such as physics, biology, history, and economics. Conversely, methods of specific sciences reflect the peculiarities of particular disciplines (or several related ones). For example, the method of hybridization is challenging to apply beyond the boundaries of biological sciences, while content analysis is less relevant in the natural sciences. Occasionally, alongside the concept of a method, the term methodology is employed. Methodology represents a specification of a method tailored to a narrower task. For example, in psychology, the survey method is employed to study various phenomena, yet a questionnaire developed for a specific purpose is often termed a methodology (such as the Bass and Darky methodology for diagnosing aggression or the Leongard methodology for determining character accentuation types).

Another criterion for classifying methods concerns the level of scientific knowledge where the methods are applied. According to this criterion, methods are divided into empirical and theoretical.

Empirical methods serve as means of obtaining experiential data and verifying theories. One such empirical method is observation—directly recording the sensorial properties of an object. Unlike mere observation, scientific observation is characterized by a clearly defined purpose, the use of auxiliary tools, systematicity, and control over the reliability of results. In modern science, observation often occurs not only through sensory organs but also through instruments. This raises the issue of potential interference with the object. One of the most significant characteristics of observation is that this method requires the researcher to maintain maximum detachment, merely documenting the objective state of the object without intervening. In many cases, this is indeed the case; however, for instance, in physics, when researching at the microscopic level, it is essential to consider the interaction of the means of observation with its object. A similar situation arises in the social sciences—when a psychologist or another researcher observes a person’s behavior, the individual may not behave as they typically would under ordinary conditions.

Another empirical method is measurement, which serves as a means of reflecting the characteristics of an object in numerical form. Using a unit of measure taken as a standard, measurement reflects the quantitative characteristics of the objects under study. Measurement enables the application of mathematical methods to the researched object, which usually significantly contributes to the advancement of knowledge—for example, the development of the natural sciences has occurred largely due to the ability to employ a quantitative approach. In the social sciences, measurement also plays an important role, though their objects are often harder to standardize. However, in modern social sciences, many instances successfully employ measurement procedures, one of the most common examples being sociological surveys.

Another empirical method is the experiment—gaining knowledge about an object through specially created conditions that ensure the manifestation of the researched phenomenon or process "in its purest form."

Unlike observation, the experiment entails a greater degree of researcher involvement, as scientists create artificial conditions that allow the researched process or phenomenon to manifest as fully as possible. On one hand, this enables a comprehensive investigation of the object; on the other hand, it raises the question of the correspondence of the experimental situation to the conditions in which the object usually exists. This is particularly relevant when the subject of study is a human being, as the experimental situation may influence the course of the researched process—for instance, in medicine, when studying the effectiveness of pharmaceutical drugs, the placebo effect can sometimes emerge, where improvements in a patient's condition result not from the action of the medication but from the patient's belief in the effectiveness of the new drugs. However, in the vast majority of cases, the experimental situation accurately models reality, making the experiment a reliable means of studying a wide array of subjects and phenomena.

Theoretical methods are employed for generalizing explanations, establishing regularities, and systematizing data obtained at the empirical level.

Among the simplest theoretical methods are analysis—mentally dissecting the whole into parts for the purpose of examining the individual properties of the object of study—and synthesis—the unification of the aspects identified through analysis into a coherent whole, revealing the interconnections among the object's characteristics. Analysis and synthesis are inversely related yet closely intertwined.

Another method is abstraction, which involves isolating the essential features of an object. In direct perception, objects are presented in their entirety, encompassing all their characteristics; however, for more effective knowledge acquisition, focus is directed only at the traits significant in a specific context. Through abstraction, concepts are formed. For instance, each student is a unique individual, yet the concept of "student" focuses on the traits shared by all students. Key categories of any science—such as "market," "price," and "demand" in economics—result from abstraction.

Related to abstraction is generalization, which extends the studied traits of a subset of objects to encompass the entire class of objects. For example, in an experiment, the researcher deals with a specific process occurring under particular conditions, yet the conclusions drawn are extended to other similar processes that take place under analogous circumstances. Generalization involves transitioning to a higher level of abstraction.

Generalization underpins another method, induction, which is the movement of thought from the specific to the general. This method entails deriving general principles from individual cases—for instance, a businessman receives a batch of goods, selectively inspects some samples, confirms their quality, and concludes that the entire batch is of good quality. Induction generally yields only probable conclusions—for example, within a batch of goods, there may be defective items that the businessman simply did not encounter. Consequently, induction has often faced criticism, with D. Hume famously highlighting its shortcomings. Nevertheless, induction remains significant in formulating hypotheses and organizing individual facts; thus, various methods have been developed to enhance its reliability. Even if induction does not yield entirely trustworthy conclusions, it is employed in cases where it is impossible to study the entire class of objects, necessitating a reliance on selective research.

The inverse of the inductive method is deduction—the movement of thought from the general to the particular. Here, knowledge of a general law leads to a conclusion about a specific case. For instance, if it is known that all metals are conductors of electricity and that copper is a metal, it follows that copper is a conductor of electricity. Unlike induction, deduction provides certain conclusions. Therefore, deduction is sometimes regarded as synonymous with theoretical inference in general. The advantage of deduction lies in the reliability of the conclusion, for if the initial knowledge is true, the deduction cannot be false. However, the truth of the general law upon which the deduction is based is typically established not through a deductive route.

Another method is analogy—transferring a characteristic from one object to another based on the similarity of these objects in other respects. Analogy is widely employed not only in scientific inquiry but also in everyday life. For example, when an employer hires a graduate from the Kyiv National Economic University, they find that the individual is well-educated, active, goal-oriented, and diligent in their work. The next time they receive a resume from another graduate of the same university, the employer will expect that this individual will also exhibit such qualities. Like induction, analogy usually yields not certain but merely probable conclusions; however, it is highly fruitful for generating hypotheses.

Modeling relies on analogy—the creation or utilization of a particular object that represents important properties of the original relevant to the investigation. Modeling is employed in situations where direct study of the object is impractical. For instance, large-scale social processes cannot be the subject of experimentation, but they can be modeled. At the current stage of cognitive development, computerization opens new possibilities for modeling.

The axiomatic method involves accepting initial axioms and subsequently deriving other statements from them using clearly defined rules. This method is applied in mathematics and mathematical logic, which is why it is sometimes referred to as deductive-axiomatic.

One of the most prevalent methods is the hypothetico-deductive, which entails formulating hypotheses concerning the subject of study, deriving conclusions from them through deduction, and verifying these conclusions in practice. If the results obtained support the hypothesis, this serves as an argument in favor of its validity. This method most vividly reflects the idea of empirical verification of theories. However, the hypothetico-deductive method allows one to only reasonably question, rather than conclusively confirm, the hypothesis.

The systemic method views a complex object as a cohesive set of elements, between which interaction and interconnection exist. This method emphasizes the integrity, hierarchical nature, and interrelationship of the components of the object, which yield an integrative effect. The systemic approach is widely applied in both the natural and social sciences. An example of a system is society.

Thus, knowledge is the subject of investigation in the theory of knowledge, epistemology, and gnostics. There are two main approaches concerning the possibility of attaining reliable knowledge of objective reality: epistemological optimism (which recognizes the possibility of achieving knowledge that adequately reflects reality) and agnosticism (which denies the possibility of reliable knowledge about reality). The process of knowledge involves the presence of a subject, as well as an object and the subject matter of knowledge.

In knowledge, practice plays a crucial role; within its structure, one can distinguish between the utilizing and transforming levels. The structure of knowledge comprises two levels: the sensory level, represented by sensations, perceptions, and representations; and the rational level, represented by concepts, judgments, and inferences. In knowledge, logical and intuitive factors interact. Intuition plays a significant role in the emergence of new ideas, while logic is essential for their verification and justification. The primary aim of knowledge is to attain truth. Several theories of truth highlight different criteria of truthfulness: the correspondence theory (the alignment of knowledge with reality), the coherence theory (consistency and non-contradiction), the pragmatic theory (usefulness), and the conventionalist theory (consensus within the scientific community). The most refined manifestation of knowledge is science; however, there also exist non-scientific, anti-scientific, and pseudo-scientific concepts. The main functions of science include cognitive, cultural-worldview, practical, critical, and educational functions. Within the structure of science, one can distinguish between fundamental and applied research. The levels of scientific knowledge are empirical and theoretical. Scientific knowledge relies on a variety of methods, which can be divided into general scientific methods and those specific to individual sciences, as well as empirical and theoretical methods. The primary empirical methods are observation, measurement, and experimentation. The key theoretical methods include analysis, synthesis, abstraction, generalization, induction, deduction, analogy, modeling, the axiomatic method, hypothetico-deductive, and systemic methods.