Scientific explanation and its types.

Explanation is the most important function of the person of knowledge, in particular scientific research, which consists in revealing the essence of the object under study. In real practice, O. research is carried out by showing that the object being explained obeys a certain law. The theorist of knowledge distinguishes structural explanations by answering the question of how an object is arranged; functional explanations - how the object operates and functions; causal - why a given phenomenon arose, why exactly a given set of facts led to such and such a consequence. At the same time, in the process of explaining, we use the already existing knowledge to explain others. The transition from more general knowledge to more specific and empirical and constitutes the procedure of explanation. Knowledge that serves as the basis for explanations is called explanatory. Knowledge, the cat they substantiate - explainable. Both laws and individual facts can act as an explanatory.

What gives us the process of explanation. It, firstly, establishes deeper and stronger links between different knowledge systems. Secondly, it allows the implementation of foresight and prediction of future situations and processes.

O. can be attributive, substantive, genetic (in particular, causal), countergenetic (in particular, functional), structural, etc. According to their mechanism, O. is divided into O. through its own law and O. with the help of modeling. O. is closely connected with the description, as a rule is based on it and, in turn, constitutes the basis for scientific foresight. Scientific foresight - based on the generalization of theoretical and experimental data and taking into account the objective laws of development, the prediction of unobservable or not yet established by experience phenomena of nature and society. N.p. can be of two kinds: 1) relatively unknown, not registered in the experience, but existing phenomena (deposit); 2) with regard to phenomena that are yet to arise in the future under certain conditions. N.p. always based on the extension of the known laws of nature and society to the area of ​​unknown or not yet arising phenomena, where these laws must remain in force. N.p. inevitably contains elements of probabilistic assumptions, especially in relation to specific future events and their timing. This is due to the emergence in the process of development of qualitatively new causal relationships and opportunities that did not exist before. In the final analysis, the criterion for the correctness of N.p. is always practice. The denial of the objective laws of reality leads to the denial of N. p.

In The Logic of Thinking, Popper outlined a model of explanation and foresight. “To give a causal explanation of an event,” Popper wrote, “means to deduce a proposition describing its use as deduction premises of one or more universal laws together with certain single propositions - initial conditions”

Let it be necessary to explain the event associated with the thread breaking. It is described by means of a single factual position (E). 1) This thread has broken. Suppose another event is known, that a weight of 2 kg was suspended from the thread, while the tensile strength is 1 kg. The last event can be described by means of a factual position (C). Now we are looking for the cause-and-effect law (З), cat. fixes that events of type (C) always trigger an event (E). Always, if the thread is loaded with a weight exceeding its tensile strength, the thread breaks. Popper's model of explanation is deductive, but it turns out to be so only at the end, while the process itself has an essential character. But no matter how important causal explanations are, it is wrong to reduce all types of scientific explanation only to causal ones. The main meaning of the explanation is to bring the object being explained under some law. This thesis was clearly formulated by Kant: “The explanation of a phenomenon is the establishment of links between various individual phenomena to several general facts (scientific laws).” The concept of explanation was developed mainly on the basis of the natural sciences. It is necessary to strictly separate the sciences of nature and the sciences of the spirit.

The main cognitive function of the science of nature is explanation. It consists in bringing a single object under a general law (concept, theory). Main cognizant. f-tion "sciences about the spirit" - understanding. Here, on the contrary, they strive to comprehend the meaning of the object under study precisely in its individuality. In other words, the explanation reasonably dominates as the meaningfulness of an existing object, which means that it allows you to understand it, and precisely for the purpose that it is. applies. Explanations are expressed not only in the sciences of nature, but also in the sciences of society.

As in the situation with explanations, the basis of the forecast does not have to be causal, i.e. those in which the cause of the predicted object is fixed in the initial conditions, and the law is causal. In principle, any type of scientific law can be used as a basis for foresight. Foresight is not a rush from the present to the future, but going beyond the boundaries of the observed world, more precisely, beyond the limits of the world under study. Sometimes the foundations of forecasts do without laws - the foresight of a law, its derivation from a multitude of empirical data of the same type. Also creatures-t intuitive foresight.

Definition (defenition), its role in scientific thinking. Types and rules of definitions.

The definition is a logical operation that consists in giving an exact meaning to a linguistic expression, which allows, when necessary, to highlight or clarify the meaning of this expression. The task of the definition is to identify a system of features that is common and distinctive for the objects denoted by the term. In scientific knowledge, this task is often reinforced by the requirement to find a system of essential features of these objects. Logic indicates the methods and rules for determining, systematizes typical errors that occur when these rules are violated. The selection of a system of essential features of certain objects is the task of specific sciences. The definition in which the system of existing features of objects is indicated is the result of a complex process of cognition. However, the entire content of the concept of objects is not disclosed, but only the main content. Very often, definitions are preceded by techniques: An ostensive definition is an explanation of words or phrases by directly indicating objects, actions or situations denoted by words or phrases. Description - is used at the empirical level of knowledge, when the properties of objects studied by science are revealed (they can distinguish and not distinguish, exist and non-exist, but the distinction is not made in the description). Characteristic - reveals all aspects of the subject, important in some respect, but not necessarily distinguishing the subject from others. Comparison (e.g. anger is similar to short-term insanity).

Kinds of definitions: (1) Nominal definitions are agreements about the meaning of newly introduced language expressions, as well as an agreement about which of the various available senses the expression should be used in a given context. (2) Real definitions in which the exact meaning is given to expressions whose meanings are already known with a greater or lesser degree of certainty. Through real definitions, concepts are introduced about the objects denoted by the term, i.e., the problem of identifying a system of features that is common and distinctive for these objects is solved. Nominal definitions cannot be evaluated as true or false. Real definitions are judgments, so they can be true or false. Definitions are divided into nominal and real according to the function they perform in cognition. It is also possible to subdivide definitions into two types according to their form: (1) explicit - have the structure "A is B" or "A if and only if B", where A is the expression being defined, and B is the defining one; (2) implicit definitions do not have this form.

Explicit definitions suggest the allocation of definitions through the genus and specific difference. That set of objects, among which it is necessary to distinguish the objects of interest to us, is called the genus. That system of signs, with the help of which the defined objects are distinguished from other objects of the genus, is called species difference. Consider the following definitions: (1) in attributive-relational definitions, properties and qualities are specific differences. Quality is something that belongs to the object itself. Property is a manifestation of quality in interaction with other objects. The presence of free electrons in metals is their quality. The conductivity of electricity is a property that is a manifestation of a specified quality in interaction with an electric field. (2) in genetic definitions, the way of origin, formation, construction of objects acts as a specific difference (for example, a circle is a figure obtained as a result of rotation of a straight line segment around one of its ends in a plane). (3) definitions are operational in which objects are distinguished by indicating operations by which these objects can be recognized (for example, acid is a liquid when immersed in which litmus paper turns red).

Implicit definitions.(1) Definitions through relation to the opposite. They define two terms at once by indicating the relationship of objects designated by one of these terms to objects designated by another of these terms (for example: a cause is a phenomenon that, under certain conditions, necessarily causes another phenomenon, called a consequence). (2) Contextual definitions. They clarify the meaning of the context in which the term being defined is included (for example, the assumption "p" is true if and only if p).

Definition rules. Formal-logical rules of definition. Rule 1. The definition must be proportionate, that is, the values ​​(volumes) of the defined and defining expressions must match. Possible errors: (a) a definition that is too broad - a definition that is wider than that defined in terms of volume (man is a bipedal featherless animal), (b) a definition that is too narrow - that defines a volume that is less than the volume of the defined one (for example, death is the natural end of any living being (and not natural? ), (c) intersecting definition - the volumes of the defining and the defined are in relation to the intersection (for example, a philosopher is a person developing scientific methodology), (d) to define “anyhow” (an example about a Frenchman when an encyclopedic definition of cancer was given). Rule 2 The definition should not contain a circle.The error “circle in itself" arises - the defined is determined by the defining, and the latter is determined directly or indirectly by the first (for example, Logic is the science of correct thinking; Correct thinking is logical thinking. A variation of this error is tautology - when the defining repeats the defined but, perhaps, in other words (for example, Mathematics - this about what mathematicians do). Rule 3. The definition is clear, that is, the meanings and meanings of the terms included in the defining one are known (for example, beauty is an individually unique expression of a generic one). Rule 4. Nominal definitions cannot be taken as real (for example, let there be a nominal definition: “God is a perfect being”, another nominal definition “a perfect being is one that has all the properties of an objectively existing object, as well as the properties of omniscience, omnipotence etc. "Can we take these definitions as premises and conclude that God exists? If these premises turn out to be true judgments, then the conclusion will be true. But since the definitions are nominal, they cannot be considered either true or false and cannot draw that conclusion).

When making definitions, it is also important to be guided by the requirement to disclose only the main content of the defined term.

Classification as a method of scientific knowledge. Natural and artificial classifications.

Classification (from Lat. classis - category, class facio - I do, lay out), the division of a set (class) of objects into subsets (subclasses) according to certain criteria. In scientific K, the properties of an object are put in a functional connection with its position in a certain system. Distinguish between artificial and natural K: in contrast to the artificial (as a rule, it is based on not significant similarities and differences of the object, for the systematization of objects, alphabetical catalog), in nature K, by the maximum number of essential features of the object, its position in the system is determined (for example, the natural system of organisms, the periodic system of elements of Mendeleev). The development of science is associated with the transition from descriptive K (which organize the accumulated empirical results in a convenient form) to structural (essential) K (allowing to reveal the essence of the objects being classified).

K always establishes a certain order in the area under study, divides it into groups in order to order the area and consider it foreseeable. The logical basis of classification is the logical operation of dividing the scope of a concept. A concept is a form of thought, which is the result of a mental selection of the same type of objects of a certain set according to common and essential features. Concepts are expressed by separate words and phrases. Each concept has scope and content. The scope of a concept is a set of objects of a concept. The content of a concept is a set of features, on the basis of which objects are distinguished and generalized in a concept. M / y the content and volume of the concept have a connection in the form of the law of inverse relationship: the greater the content of the concept, the smaller the range of objects appearing in it, and vice versa, the greater the volume, the narrower the content. The division of the scope of the concept is the division of the scope of the concept into subclasses, representing subspecies of objects of mental concepts. This operation includes: (1) the basis of division of the concept - this is the attribute by which the division is made, this is a variable attribute, (2) the divisible concept - this is the volume that needs to be divided into subclasses, (3) the result of division. Distinguish between correct and incorrect division, and in order for the division to be correct, it is necessary to follow the rules: 1) the division should be carried out only on one basis; 2) the phenomenon db is proportionate or exhaustive, i.e., the totality of fission volumes d.b. equal to the original division volume; 3) division with an excessive member is unacceptable; 4) division members must mutually exclude each other; 5) division d.b. continuous, i.e., you cannot make jumps in division. There are two types of division: (1) By the type of change in some attribute. (2) Dichometric division is a division in which the presence or absence of a given characteristic serves as the basis for division.

Classification is the operation of dividing the scope of a concept. This is either a single division or a collection of divisions. Classification is understood as a multi-level and branched system. Classification is usually called the division of objects that are the objects of study of a particular science. K usually does not use diachometric division (in other words, the volume of the divisible concept is divided into two contradictory concepts: A and not-A; further, it is possible that A is divided into B and not-B, etc.). An example of classical K is the periodic table.

Sometimes classification and division are confused, they are considered as synonyms. They are similar in many ways, but there are differences to be seen.

The above types of division can indeed be characterized as types of the so-called taxonomic classification. However, meriological classifications are becoming more widespread. In contrast to the taxonomic division, in the process of which the types of objects of a certain kind are revealed, in the meriological division, parts of the object are distinguished. For example. The machine gun consists of a stock, breech, barrel and other parts. It can be considered that the taxonomic and meriological divisions are interconnected and have mutual transitions. But it should also be said that the logical procedures for the division of concepts and classification are finally developed.

Deduction and induction as methods of scientific knowledge.

The question of the use of induction and deduction as methods of cognition has been discussed throughout the history of philosophy. Induction was most often understood as the movement of knowledge from facts to statements of a general nature, and under deduction - the movement of thought from general statements to less general ones, including statements about individual objects. Often these methods were opposed to each other and considered in isolation from other means of cognition. So F Bacon considered induction as the main method of cognition, and R Descartes - deduction together with intuition. However, in the modern era, these extreme points of view began to be overcome. So, Galileo, Newton, Leibniz, recognizing experience, and hence induction, a large role in cognition, noted at the same time that the process of moving from facts to laws is not a purely logical process, but includes intuition. They assigned an important role to deduction in the construction and testing of scientific theories and noted that in scientific knowledge an important place is occupied by a hypothesis that cannot be reduced to induction and deduction. However, it was not possible to completely overcome the opposition between inductive and deductive methods of cognition for a long time. In modern scientific cognition, the opposition of induction and deduction as methods of cognition loses its meaning, since they are not considered as the only methods. In cognition, other methods play an important role, as well as techniques, principles and forms (for example, abstraction, idealization, problem, hypothesis, etc.).

Induction is a conclusion in which the conclusion does not follow logically from the premises, and the truth of the premises does not guarantee the truth of the conclusion. From true premises, induction produces a probabilistic conclusion. General induction is an induction in which one moves from knowledge about several objects to knowledge about their totality. This is a typical induction. It is general induction that gives us general knowledge. General induction can be. is represented by two types: (1) full induction is a conclusion from knowledge about individual objects of a class to knowledge about all objects of a class, involving the study of each object of this class: A1 has a feature B, A2 has a feature B,..., An has a feature B , the set A1,..., An is the whole class A => it is probable that all objects of type A have a feature B; (2) Inference from knowledge of only some items of a class to knowledge of all items of a class is called incomplete induction.

Statistical incomplete induction. A sample of An + n is made from the set of objects A, in this sample the elements A1, ..., An have a feature B, and the elements An + 1, ..., An + n do not have a feature B, this implies that the objects A can have property B with probability n/(n+n) – the total number of observations.

Unlike inductive reasoning, which only suggests a thought, through deductive reasoning, one deduces a thought from other thoughts. Deductive inferences: conditionally categorical, divisive-categorical, dilemmas, conditional inferences, etc.

Explanation is a function of theory. The nature and types of explanation.

Sciences

Explanation and understanding - a consequence of communication

EXPLANATION, UNDERSTANDING, INTERPRETATION IN SOCIAL AND HUMANITIES SCIENCES

CHAPTER 24

Literature

Topics of reports and abstracts

1. The problem of the boundaries of cognitive relativism in the humanities.

2. Classical and post-non-classical concepts of truth in the context of humanitarian knowledge.

3. Justice and truth.

4. Good and truth as classical and non-classical regulators of knowledge. Their correlation in the qualification of a legal fact.

1. Gaidenko P.P. Scientific rationality and philosophical reason. M., 2003.

2. Ilyin V.V. Criteria of scientific knowledge. M., 1989.

3. Mikeshina L. A. Methodology of scientific knowledge in the context of culture. M., 1992.

4. Mikeshina L. A. Philosophy of knowledge: polemical chapters. M., 2002.

5. Moiseev N. N. modern rationalism. M., 1995.

6. PutnamX. Reason, truth and history. M., 2002.

7. Ricoeur P. Fair. M., 2005.

8. Rawls D. The theory of justice. Novosibirsk, 1996.

Explanation is a cognitive procedure aimed at enriching and deepening knowledge about the phenomena of the real world by including these phenomena in the structure of connections, relationships and dependencies that reveal the essential features of the phenomenon being explained. The structure of the explanation includes: a) initial knowledge about the phenomenon being explained; b) knowledge used as a condition and means of explanation; c) cognitive actions that make it possible to apply these ideas to the phenomenon being explained. The need for explanation arises in the process of discovering new facts, processes in nature, solving problems, the purpose of which it is. This is the internal laboratory of a scientist, which is the content of a problem, a “puzzle”, or a serious scientific problem. But now the problem is solved, and then there is a need to represent your discovery to the scientific community, to present it for the purpose of critical approbation. In this sense, explanation appears as the content and prerequisite of scientific communication. In scientific communication, explanation and understanding are interdependent procedures. Understanding involves the explication of the meaning of a scientific text containing the components of the explanation structure listed above.

Theory is “a set of views, ideas, ideas aimed at interpreting and explaining a phenomenon” (New Philosophical Encyclopedia. M., 2001. T. IV. C. 42). As follows from the definition of a theory, explanation is its most important function. The possibilities and types of explanation in the natural and social sciences are different. In natural science, the following types of explanation are distinguished:

1. Hypothetical-deductive method. In this model, theory, law acts as a means of explanation, and a logical method of deduction (deduction of knowledge regarding the phenomenon being explained) acts as cognitive actions. The satisfaction of such an explanation is regarded as proof of the truth of the theory or law.

2. A probabilistic-inductive (statistical) model of explanation, based on the establishment of common recurring features observed in a certain class of phenomena and the assignment of the explained phenomenon to this class. In social and humanitarian knowledge, the classical deductive-nomological model of explanation has limited possibilities, since the circle of laws is also limited.

features that characterize social phenomena. For example, in economic theory, an explanation of inflation, its causes, based on the objective processes of economic activity, can be given. Ways of explanation that are much more effective are rational an explanation, the initial premise of which is the recognition of the rationality of the actions of people (ordinary people or those in power, military leaders, public figures, etc.). Rational actions are those that comply with the norms and rules adopted in a given community in a given period of its history. Rational explanation reveals not the necessity, but the possibility of acting according to given rules. In social and humanitarian knowledge, the model is also used intentional explanations. This model is based on motivation, orientation (intention) to some action. The logical form of intentional explanation is the "practical syllogism", often used in the investigation of crimes. It looks like this: “Nikolaev had a motive to kill Petrov. Petrov is killed. So, the killer is Nikolaev. The limitations of such an explanation are obvious, since there is no rigid unambiguous connection between a motive and an action. And yet, as the practice of investigations shows, the establishment of a motive, as a rule, contributes to the disclosure of a crime. In social and humanitarian cognition, such methods of explanation as typology, contextual explanation, causal, genetic, functional, structural-systemic, etc. are used. In social cognition, the explanation of human actions is synthesized with understanding.

As a result of studying this chapter, the undergraduate must:

know

• essence of scientific explanation, its types, methods and functions;
• features of the deductive-nomological model of scientific explanation;
• methods of explanation in social and humanitarian knowledge;
• the specifics of explanation in the theory of social work;

be able to

• reveal the unity and differences of the hypothetical-deductive method, abduction and deductive-nomological model of scientific explanation;
• identify the correspondence of specific methods of explanation to the scientific problems being solved;

own

• the categorical apparatus for studying the methods and functions of scientific explanation as a method of cognition;
• the skills of using the deductive-nomological model of scientific explanation in solving theoretical problems of social work.

Describing the differences between the natural sciences and scientific social and humanitarian knowledge, we pointed out the different role of the methods of explanation and understanding in the process of comprehending the truth in relation to these branches of scientific knowledge. With the help of methods of explanation and understanding, theoretical problems of scientific knowledge are solved.

Consider the specifics of scientific explanation.

The essence of scientific explanation, its types and methods

Explanation is considered in the philosophy of science both as the initial and most important function of scientific knowledge, and as the most important method of cognitive activity.

With regard to any previously unknown object or phenomenon, a person inevitably raises the question of its genesis and causes. So, ancient man, comprehending such natural phenomena as thunderstorms, hurricanes, floods, volcanic eruptions, tried to spiritualize them and explain natural phenomena by analogy with his own actions and behavior. If a storm rose on the sea, then the god of the seas, Neptune, became angry, if a strong thunderstorm rumbles, if lightning flashes, then the man annoyed Zeus.

This anthropologization of natural phenomena stems from an attempt to explain the unknown and unfamiliar through the known and familiar. In this case, the explanation appears in various varieties:

• - as deductive the derivation of statements about a fact from generalizations, laws and theories, as well as from those initial conditions that relate to the characterization of a given fact;
• - as summing up statements about an event or phenomenon under some general statement: hypothesis, law or theory;
• - as causal explanations, which are the simplest in their characteristics and therefore widely used in everyday thinking.

Structure of a causal explanation turns out to be simple: to explain the phenomenon under study, they refer to another phenomenon that precedes the first and generates this phenomenon. The preceding phenomenon is called the reason and this phenomenon consequence, although, as G. I. Ruzavin notes, "it would be more correct to call him action, not to be confused with logical relation grounds and consequences ".

At the same time, following in time (the cause precedes the effect, the effect comes after the cause) is a necessary but not sufficient characteristic of a causal explanation. In particular, phenomena that are not connected by "cause-effect" relationships can also follow each other in time.

So, for an observer of a camel caravan in the desert, one camel after another appears from behind the dune after a certain period of time, however, one camel is not the cause of the other (of course, if the caravan does not include parent camels and camels are their children). It is not without reason that the kind of logical errors "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" (after this, therefore - because of this) is specially distinguished, which are quite common in ordinary consciousness, but sometimes penetrate into science.

A causal explanation fulfills its methodological and epistemological role only when that general causal law, which establishes a regular, necessary connection between cause and effect.

The Newtonian picture of the world, with its dominant principle of Laplacian (mechanistic) determinism, is characterized by the desire to explain all natural phenomena using the simplest causal (from lat. causalis - causal) laws. In the history of science, this approach to explanation is usually characterized as Galilean tradition in explanation.

Indeed, one of the founders of modern natural science, G. Galileo, opposed scientific natural science to scholastic natural philosophy and sought to refute its attempts to explain natural phenomena with the help of various kinds of "hidden qualities" and mysterious forces. In particular, heat was associated with the action of a special liquid - caloric, electrical phenomena - with the action of "electric fluid", etc.

So, when explaining the free fall of bodies, G. Galileo considered as causes not mythical entities, but a real external force - the force of gravity. Consequence This reason is a change in the state of the body: the body accelerates under the influence of gravity. I. Newton and his followers further developed the scientific approach implemented by G. Galileo.

Comprehension of the complex nature of cause-and-effect relationships led in the middle of the 19th century. J. St. Mill to an attempt to establish links between causal explanations and inductive methods research. J. St. Mill developed varieties of the so-called eliminative induction by the method of similarity, induction by the method of difference, induction by the method of concomitant changes, etc. The algorithm of such induction set certain rules according to which, from the totality of possible causes of a given phenomenon, those events that did not meet the signs were eliminated (eliminated) causal relationship.

Thus, J. St. Mill set a model for an explanation that boiled down to the deduction of statements about facts from empirical causal laws: "the explanation of a single fact is the indication of its cause, i.e. the establishment of that law or those laws of causal connection, of which or of which this fact is a special case."

Causal relationships, according to J. St. Mill, were established using inductive methods, which, however, make it possible, as a rule, to obtain probabilistic knowledge, the truth of which needs additional verification. Such explanations are appropriate only at the preliminary stage of the study. The need to identify theoretical laws (reflecting varying degrees of penetration into essence studied objects) leads to the need to expand and generalize the causal (causal) model of scientific explanation.

The structure of any scientific explanation consists of a) initial knowledge about the object as an explicandum, b) knowledge used as a means of explanation (the basis of the explanation) - the explicat, and c) cognitive actions associated with the application of the basis of the explanation, i.e. with the establishment of its functions in relation to the explicandum.

Depending on the chosen explicant and cognitive actions with it, several types of scientific explanation are distinguished.

4.1. CAUSAL EXPLANATIONS pointing to the cause and its effect as successive phenomena, states of affairs in some specific conditions. There is a different understanding of the cause, but it is usually determined from the following characteristics:

a) a cause is a factual action that causes an unambiguous factual effect and exists independently of the effect, b) cause and effect are often combined by a law that defines indispensable, necessary connections, c) the effect cannot exist without a cause and in one way or another reflects the cause, but does not is identified with the cause, d) each cause has only its own consequences (responsible for the effect, “takes the blame for the effect”), e) the cause is directed to explain the past or present. Causal explanations are widely used in the study of natural and biological facts, and there was a tendency to transfer causal explanations to phenomena of a behavioral nature, but it did not take into account the specifics of these phenomena, which led to the search for other types of explanations.

4.2. RATIONAL EXPLANATIONS pointing to a human motive, his rational considerations that determine his actions. Rationality under the given conditions does not make the fact necessary, but only possible.

4.3. INTENTIAL EXPLANATIONS (teleological, purposeful, usually associated with rational explanations). They consist of the desired, anticipated result, the goal (goal setting) and the means that they consider necessary to apply to achieve it (“the end justifies the means”). The goal differs from the cause in the following characteristics: a) the goal is always intentional, the reason is always factual, b) the goal is directed to the future, the reason is to the past or present, c) to achieve the goal, causes are implemented, i.e. the goal is based on causal determination, d) the goal and the means do not have the necessary internal connection.

4.4. FUNCTIONAL EXPLANATIONS. The term "function" (lat. functio - performance, correspondence, display) is widely used in modern sciences, but is interpreted in them in different ways. In mathematics, a function is a dependent variable, in physiology it is a manifestation of the vital activity of organs, tissues, cells, etc., in sociology it is the responsibility of social institutions, positions, etc. Usually, a mathematical understanding of a function is distinguished from an objective function. If we generalize the use of the term "function" in non-mathematical sciences, we can distinguish the following conceptual features:

1) a function is a special property of an integral object as a system or its subsystem and element (carriers of the function); the concepts of a system, its subsystem and element are interconnected: there is no system, subsystem, element of the system without a function, just as there is no function without a system, subsystem or element of the system (cf. a spring in a clockwork and a spring lying on the floor);

2) a function is a derived property of the entire system, subsystem or element of the system;

3) a function always provides something necessary, intended, serves for something, i.e. has a way out of the system, subsystem or element of the system (cf. the function of the aircraft - movement in the air, the function of a glass for drinking, the functions of large and small hands in a watch);

4) the function has its own implementation environment and is adaptive to the environment (for example, the environment for the glass function is the process of drinking liquids, the environment for the watch is the passage of time);

5) the function connects the system, subsystem or element of the system with its environment and is in relation to the relationship with the latter;

6) each function manifests itself in systemic (interdependent) relationships with other functions, and the functional system as a whole is a system of elements, subsystems with their interrelated functions subordinate to the function of the whole system.

7) a function as the purpose of a system object or its element manifests itself in the very real or potential process of their adaptation to the environment according to the feedback principle.

8) the function and the system are in mutually determined relations, and the function can act as a leading system-forming factor. A system function must be distinguished from a replaced function.

function allowed by the system function. For example, the system function of a glass is its use for drinking, which corresponds to its structure adapted to the peculiarities of the process of drinking liquids, but the use of a glass for holding a butterfly is its use in a substitute function allowed by the system function. The function can be primary and secondary (derived from the primary): such is, for example, the secondary function of buttons sewn only to add beauty to the dress.

The concept of function is correlated with the concept of "functioning". Functioning is the realized manifestation of a function in the environment. According to the functioning of the object as directly given for observation, its function is determined.

In linguistics, the concept of a function, as a rule, is used in accordance with its characteristics, namely, in a generalized form, as the ability of a language system, its subsystems and elements to fulfill one or another purpose in transmitting and receiving information.

All the above features of a function distinguish it from a cause and a goal: a function is not, like a cause, an action that causes consequences, and is not a “required future”, like a goal, being always given or potential.

The essence of functional explanations lies in the fact that an object as a system or an element in a system is explained by its function or, on the contrary, the function of an object and its element are explained by its systemic nature or systemic connections (cf., for example, such objects as a clock, an airplane, a chair and all other artifacts or their individual elements).

4.5. SYSTEMIC-STRUCTURAL EXPLANATIONS related to the concept of a system as a single organized and ordered integrity, consisting of interdependent elements and certain relationships between them, called the structure of the system. The simplest and most universal type of structural relations are binary relations (dyads), which are one of the types of symmetry of nature and organisms (cf. the left and right hemispheres of the human brain with their functional difference, day and night, life and death, inhalation and exhalation, and etc.). As is known, Hegel generalized and considered in terms of development binary relations as opposites, which are inherent in any certainty. Man's awareness of the binarity of everything that exists was already reflected in the creation of binary symbolism in the culture of many peoples. However, with the further development of human thinking, other types of structural relations were also realized, reflecting the dialectic of being - binary relations with intermediate links and P-member relations with a binary structure.

The essence of system-structural explanations is that this or that phenomenon and development is explained from the point of view of the laws of the system, its intra-structural features and intra-system relations. For example, in psychology and linguistics, many phenomena are explained by associative connections, when one phenomenon causes another by contiguity, similarity, contrast (associations are based on the mechanisms of neural connections in the brain).

4.6. GENETIC EXPLANATIONS. They suggest explaining the given state of the object by establishing its initial conditions for development in time through the derivation of phased relationships and the definition of the main lines of development. Genetic explanations are historical explanations, but somewhat specialized in that they explain an object from its original foundation. Genetic explanations are widely used in all sciences and are often combined with system-structural and other types of explanation.

It should be noted that the mentioned types of scientific explanation are not always used in the sciences in isolation from each other, which is determined by its different tasks and aspects.

Explanation is one of the functions of theory and science in general. An explanation is a mental operation of expressing the essence of one object through another, through what is known, understandable, obvious, clear. Explanation is a necessary component of understanding any kind of activity.

A scientific explanation must meet the requirements of adequacy (correctness) and fundamental verifiability. From a logical point of view, explanation is the derivation of consequences from the premise. The explanation is carried out both at the theoretical and empirical levels of the organization of scientific knowledge.

There are several models of scientific explanation:

1. Deductive-nomological explanation

A clear formulation of this model was carried out by K. Popper and K. Gempel. In the deductive-nomological explanation, we indicate the cause or conditions for the existence of some event. The set of initial conditions and general laws or hypotheses (major and minor premise) constitutes the explanance of the explanation. The big premise is universal or general laws or stochastic laws of a particular nature. Small premise - initial or boundary conditions related to specific events or phenomena. The statement to be explained - explanandum - the conclusion of a deductive conclusion from the premises, i.e. from the explanance.

If a cause or condition exists, then a certain event occurs with necessity.

K. Hempel developed a model of inductive-probabilistic explanation, when instead of the law of science there is a proposition that has a probabilistic-statistical nature and the conclusion establishes only the probability of an event occurring. In any case, an explanation based on the deductive-nomological model gives the event being explained the necessary character.

(Example with Faraday's explanation of Arago's experiment on the rotation of a copper disk over a rotating magnetic needle).

The deductive-nomological model of explanation is most characteristic of mathematics and natural science.

2. "Rational" explanation (teleological)

The Canadian historian W. Dray showed that other models of explanation are used in historical science. An explanation that points to the connection of a person's actions with his motives and beliefs, Dray called rational. The task of such an explanation is to show that some act is "reasonable" from the point of view of the person performing it. Basically, historians, when explaining human actions, see not causal relationships, but norms or rules of rational action.

In general terms, the explanation within the framework of this model is as follows: to show that "in the given circumstances, the people of the period under study acted in such and such a way," and then consider a specific case. Thus, a rational explanation justifies only the possibility of the event being explained, and not its necessity.

The main attention is drawn to the goals, meaning and intentions of people's activities. The big premise is the sum of goals, motives, aspirations. Small package - the amount of funds. Explanandum - act, action. Practical syllogism is a form of teleological explanation. The big premise is the purpose of the action. In the small - the means to achieve it. Explanandum - the statement that only when acting in accordance with the premises, i.e. with proper consideration of the goals and means of achieving it, one can hope for the success of the action.

3. Functional explanation

The functional explanation is close to the teleological ones, because answers the question why? It is used when it is necessary to find out the role and function of any element or subsystem of elements in an integral system. (an organ in a living organism). Widespread use in biology, after the creation of evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin.

4. Normative explanations

Normative explanations - attempt to identify the meaning and role of norms in explaining the behavior of people in society. They take into account not only the conscious activity of a person, but also moral. It relies on the rules and norms established in society, which are fundamentally different from laws that have a regular and stable character.

5. Causal explanation

Causal explanations: during the period of classical science, mechanical movements and processes, natural phenomena were tried to be explained using the simplest causal or causal laws. It was used by Galileo when explaining the motion of free falling bodies.

The preceding phenomenon is called the cause, and the given phenomenon (which is explained) is called the effect. But the causal explanation is not limited to indicating the preceding and subsequent phenomena (P: night replaces the day, but the night is not the cause of the day). For a causal explanation, it is imperative to define a general causal law, which establishes a regular, necessary connection between m / y causal and effect.

6. Intentional explanation

Intention means intention, goal, orientation of consciousness to a certain object. (From the Latin word intentio - desire). Intentional explanation is sometimes called teleological, motivational. The intentional explanation of human behavior consists in pointing out the goal pursued by the individual, establishing the aspirations, intentions or motivations of current events. Such explanations are focused on revealing the aspirations of people, they can be used to explain the behavior of historical figures, explain the actions, actions of ordinary people. G. von Wright emphasized the importance of the so-called "practical syllogism" for the humanities and for history.

In all alternative models of explanation (normative, functional, teleological, intentional) the main attention is drawn to the specific features of a person's conscious and purposeful activity, which is expressed in setting goals, clarifying his functions and role in society, analyzing the norms and rules of behavior.