Methodological Foundations of Social Philosophy

Social and Human Sciences and Philosophy

An examination of this matter necessitates, first and foremost, a clarification of the specificity of social and human sciences. To this end, natural sciences are often contrasted with social and human knowledge. However, as noted by the renowned Russian philosopher V.S. Stёpin, “it is more productive to compare social and human sciences on one side, and natural sciences on the other. Both types of scientific knowledge share similarities and differences. Their similarity lies in the fact that they are two varieties of scientific inquiry. Their difference, however, resides in the specificity of their subject area and methods of investigation. In social and human sciences, the subject encompasses humanity, its consciousness, and often manifests as a text imbued with human significance. The fixation of such a subject and its study require unique methods and cognitive procedures.”

Philosophy is sometimes included among the social and human sciences. At least, such a tradition has long existed in many of our higher educational institutions. However, this is far from the case. The social and human knowledge possessed by humanity “encompasses the results of scientific research, yet is not limited to them, as it presupposes other, non-scientific forms of creativity.” It also includes philosophical knowledge. Nevertheless, philosophy and science, including social and human sciences, while structurally similar, exhibit significant differences.

Philosophy constitutes a distinct form of understanding reality, characterized by the recognition of the ways in which humanity engages with the world. Ultimately, the specificity of philosophy is grounded in the fact that reflection becomes its core content and purpose. Researchers, including A.N. Kocherhin, delineate several moments concerning the specificity of science and philosophy.

If scientific thinking is object-oriented, embedded within the clear parameters of its subject, philosophical thinking operates based on comparisons, contrasts, and transitions from one domain of inquiry to another. Scientific thought functions within the norms of a specific science, programmed by the rules of scientific investigation (the regulations governing operations within mathematical systems, the manipulation of various symbols, models, drawings, maps, and so forth). In contrast, philosophical thought adheres to the rules of logic and common sense, thus programmed less stringently than scientific thought.

Scientific thinking is grounded in scientific concepts, while philosophical thought is based on philosophical categories that are not as rigid as their scientific counterparts. This flexibility enables philosophical categories to delineate the direction of scientific inquiry in situations where scientific concepts fail to yield clarity. Importantly, it must be noted that philosophical categories, as a result of assimilating the unknown, cannot be employed arbitrarily—they are utilized only within a specific semantic field of meanings.

Philosophical thinking is tied to goal-setting and the formation of values, whereas scientific thought realizes already established goals, tasks, or value systems. Scientific inquiry abstracts from any manifestations that characterize human relations with the world. Conversely, philosophical thought is reflexive; it is directed not only at the object but also at the process of its study, reflecting a specific relationship to the object.

Scientific production, including social and human sciences, stands in contrast to charlatanism as a reproducible form of production. Therefore, science constructs universal, objective knowledge about reality, enabling predictions regarding the development of phenomena under study, including social phenomena. Philosophical reflection, however, is a specific phenomenon within the realm of spiritual engagement with the world, which does not coincide with empirical knowledge. The object of reflection is the relationship between internal experience and external reality. In reflecting, we perceive reality not as it is in itself, but as it presents itself relative to our consciousness, as represented in the forms of thought. Philosophy belongs to the sphere of social consciousness, recording a particular mode of engaging with reality.

Science and philosophy also differ in their objects and subjects of investigation. While the object of science pertains to natural-historical phenomena, the object of philosophy encompasses mental, theoretical models representing the world in relation to humanity or humanity in relation to the world. The subject of science comprises the laws and regularities governing the development of the natural-historical phenomena under investigation. In contrast, the subject of philosophy consists of the fundamental determinants that optimize the development of worldviews, ensuring the alignment of mental, theoretical models that reflect the real world, including social reality, the search for which is informed by the societal needs for social harmony.

Philosophy and science share a common aspiration for veracity and rational explanation of the world. However, while in science this is associated with the pursuit of truth, in philosophy, credibility is augmented by elements of conviction; thus, knowledge and belief coalesce, leading to a more pronounced ideological aspect in philosophy compared to science.

Moreover, the laws uncovered by science allow for predictions regarding how the phenomenon under study will evolve. Due to the generality of philosophical principles, however, they do not afford such opportunities; instead, they enable the forecasting of the paths for exploring the phenomena under consideration. This circumstance, while capturing the distinctions between philosophy and science, simultaneously indicates their close interrelation: science, including social and human sciences, cannot advance without philosophy, which plays a role in the preliminary assimilation of the unknown, methodology, and worldview.

Philosophy manifests as an explication, that is, an explanation, elaboration, and reconstruction of the structures defining humanity’s relationship to the world in all its diverse manifestations. It operates as a unity of three aspects—ontological, epistemological, and praxeological—realized specifically in the process of reflecting on various forms of social consciousness: scientific, religious, political, legal, moral, and aesthetic.

In particular, philosophical analysis of any science or its specific domain involves a contemplation of the essence, refinement of the scientific worldview, certain of its structural components, aligning them with the scientific data obtained, and identifying the determinants that facilitate the optimization of the process of further scientific inquiry and practical application of the results acquired.

The presence of a mutable natural world, which is known and transformed by humanity, and the need to harmonize the relationship between humanity and nature, underpin the necessity for the philosophy of natural science. The existence of the social world, social material, humanity, and the evolving societal organisms necessitates social philosophy to harmonize social relations.