Rationality is a characteristic feature. Essence and types of knowledge

The development of science can be viewed through the prism of the question changing types of scientific rationality, where the type of rationality is understood “a system of closed and self-sufficient rules, norms and standards, accepted and generally valid within a given society to achieve socially meaningful goals”.

In relation to science, one of the most important socially significant goals is growth of knowledge. In the philosophy of science, there has been a tradition of identifying the following types of scientific rationality and corresponding scientific pictures of the world:

classical,
non-classical
and post-non-classical.

However, it is generally accepted that science arose in the era of Antiquity. Therefore, the period of development of science, from Antiquity to the Renaissance, is conventionally called preclassical rationality.

The change in types of rationality occurred in connection with global scientific revolutions. More precisely, each new type of rationality did not abolish the previous one, but limited scope of its action, allowing its use only for solving a limited range of problems.

Some researchers suggest that science arises within the history and culture of ancient civilizations. This idea is based on the immutable fact that the most ancient civilizations - Sumer, Egypt, Babylon, Mesopotamia, India - developed and accumulated a large amount of astronomical, mathematical, biological, and medical knowledge. At the same time, the original cultures of ancient civilizations were focused on the reproduction of established social structures and the stabilization of the historically established way of life that had prevailed for many centuries. The knowledge that was developed in these civilizations, as a rule, was prescription nature(schemes and rules of action).

Preclassical rationality

Most modern researchers of the history of science believe that The formation of pre-classical rationality took place in Ancient Greece in the 7th - 6th centuries. BC. The most important components of pre-classical rationality are

mathematics,
logics,
experimental science.

Pre-classical rationality passed through its development three sub-stages:

rationality of Antiquity,
Middle Ages,
Renaissance.

The first ancient thinkers who created teachings about nature - Thales, Pythagoras, Anaximander– learned a lot from the wisdom of Ancient Egypt and the East. However, the teachings that they developed, having assimilated and processed the elements of experimental knowledge that had accumulated in the Eastern countries surrounding Greece, were distinguished by their fundamental novelty.

Firstly, in contrast to scattered observations and recipes, they moved on to constructing logically connected, consistent and justified systems of knowledge – theories .
Secondly, these theories were not of a strictly practical nature. The main motive of the first scientists was a desire far from practical needs understand the original principles and principles of the universe. The ancient Greek word “theory” itself means “contemplation.”
Thirdly, theoretical knowledge in Ancient Greece was developed and preserved not by priests, but secular people, therefore, they did not give it a sacred character, but taught it to all people who were willing and capable of science. In antiquity, the foundations were laid for the formation three scientific programs:
1. mathematical program (Pythagoras and Plato);
2. atomistic program (Leucippus, Democritus, Epicurus);
3. continualist program (Aristotle - the first physical theory).

In the Middle Ages(V – XI centuries) scientific thinking in Western Europe develops in a new cultural and historical environment, different from the ancient one. Political and spiritual power belonged to religion, and this left its mark on the development of science. Science basically had to serve as an illustration and proof of theological truths. The basis of the medieval worldview is the dogma of creation and the thesis of the omnipotence of God.

In science Renaissance there is a return to many ideals of ancient science and philosophy. The Renaissance was an era of great changes: the discovery of new countries and civilizations, the emergence of cultural, scientific and technical innovations.

During the Renaissance they receive rapid development of astronomical knowledge. Nicolaus Copernicus develops a kinematic model of the Solar system, starting with Copernicus formed mechanistic worldview, he introduces for the first time a new method - building and testing hypotheses.

Giordano Bruno proclaims the philosophy of an infinite world, moreover, infinite worlds. Based on the heliocentric scheme of Copernicus, he goes further: since the Earth is not the center of the world, then the Sun cannot be such a center; the world cannot be enclosed in the sphere of fixed stars; it is infinite and limitless.

Johannes Kepler contributed to the final destruction of the Aristotelian picture of the world. He established an exact mathematical relationship between the time of revolution of the planets around the sun and the distance to it.

Galileo Galilei ideologically substantiated the basic principles of experimental and mathematical natural science. He combined physics as the science of the movement of real bodies with mathematics as the science of ideal objects.

The three subsequent types of scientific rationality are distinguished, first of all, by the depth of reflection of scientific activity, considered as the “subject-means-object” relationship.

Classical rationality

Classical rationality is characteristic of science in the 17th – 19th centuries, which sought to ensure the objectivity and subjectivity of scientific knowledge. For this purpose, everything that relates to the subject and the procedures of his cognitive activity was excluded from the description and theoretical explanation of any phenomenon. The objective style of thinking dominated, the desire to understand the subject in itself, regardless of the conditions of its study. It seemed that the researcher observes objects from the outside and at the same time does not attribute anything to them from himself.

Thus, during the period of dominance of classical rationality the subject of reflection was the object, whereas the subject and means were not subject to special reflection. Objects were considered as small systems (mechanical devices) having a relatively small number of elements with their force interactions and strictly determined connections. The properties of the whole were completely determined by the properties of its parts. The object was represented as a stable body. Causality was interpreted in the spirit of mechanistic determinism.

Mechanistic worldview, characteristic of classical rationality, develops primarily through the efforts Galileo, Descartes, Newton, Leibniz. Cartesian scientific program Rene Descartes is to from the obtained obvious principles, which can no longer be doubted, deduce an explanation of all natural phenomena.

Scientific program of experimental philosophy Newton explores natural phenomena based on experience, which he then generalizes using the method of induction.

IN Leibniz methodology analytical components predominate; he considered the ideal to be the creation of a universal language (calculus) that would allow formalize all thinking.

What the scientific programs of the New Age have in common is the understanding of science as a special rational way of understanding the world based on empirical testing or mathematical proof.

Nonclassical rationality

Non-classical rationality began to dominate science in the period from the late 19th to the mid-20th centuries. The transition to it was prepared by a crisis in the ideological foundations of classical rationalism.

During this era there were revolutionary changes in physics(discovery of the divisibility of the atom, development of relativistic and quantum theory), in cosmology (the concept of a non-stationary universe), in chemistry (quantum chemistry), in biology (the formation of genetics). Cybernetics and systems theory emerged, which played an important role in the development of the modern scientific picture of the world.

Nonclassical rationality moved away from the objectivism of classical science, began to take into account that ideas about reality depend from the means of its knowledge and from the subjective factors of research.

At the same time, the explication of the relationship between subject and object began to be considered as a condition for an objectively true description and explanation of reality. Thus, objects of special reflection for non-classical science became not only the object, but also the subject and means of research.

The classical position about the absoluteness and independence of time was violated by Doppler's experiments, which showed that the period of oscillation of light can change depending on whether the source is moving or at rest in relation to the observer.

The second law of thermodynamics could not be interpreted in the context of the laws of mechanics, since it asserted the irreversibility of heat transfer processes and, in general, of any physical phenomena, unknown to classical rationalism. A very noticeable “undermining” of classical natural science was carried out Albert Einstein who created theory of relativity. In general, his theory was based on the fact that, unlike Newtonian mechanics, space and time are not absolute. They are organically connected with matter, movement and each other.

Another major scientific discovery was also made that a particle of matter has both the properties of a wave (continuity) and discreteness (quantum). Soon this hypothesis was confirmed experimentally.

All of the above scientific discoveries have radically changed the understanding of the world and its laws, they have shown limitations of classical mechanics. The latter, of course, did not disappear, but acquired a clear scope of application of its principles.

Post-nescassistic scientific rationality

Post-non-classical scientific rationality is currently developing, starting from the second half of the 20th century. It is characterized not only by its focus on the object, on objective knowledge, it not only takes into account the influence of the subject - its means and procedures - on the object, but also correlates the values of science (knowledge of truth) with humanistic ideals, with social values and goals.

In other words, scientific activity as a “subject-means-object” relationship is now subject to reflection not only from the point of view of objectivity or truth of knowledge, but also from the point of view of humanity, morality, social and environmental expediency (more precisely, this is declared, at a minimum).

Another important aspect of post-non-classical rationality is historical or evolutionary reflection in relation to the subject, means and objects of knowledge. That is, all these components of scientific activity are viewed as historically changing and relative.

A characteristic feature of post-non-classical rationality is also the complex nature of scientific activity, the involvement in solving scientific problems of knowledge and methods characteristic of different disciplines and branches of science (natural, humanitarian, technical) and its different levels (fundamental and applied).

The formation of post-non-classical rationality was influenced by such sciences as:

organization theory,
cybernetics,
general systems theory,
Informatics.

Ideas and methods have become widespread. Thus, ideas of integrity (irreducibility of the properties of the whole to the sum of the properties of individual elements), hierarchy, development and self-organization, the relationship of structural elements within the system and the relationship with the environment become the subject of special research within a variety of sciences.

The work consists of 1 file

It is important to emphasize that in a person the formation of the ability to sense is not limited to his biological nature, but takes place under the strong influence of social factors, among which, perhaps, the most important place is occupied by training and education. Sensations become the initial prerequisites for cognition only in the process of perception.

Perception– a process of receiving and transforming information based on sensations, creating a holistic reflection of images based on some directly perceived properties.

Perception is a reflection of objects by a person (and animals) during a direct impact on the senses, which leads to the creation of holistic sensory images. A person’s perception is formed in the process of practical activity based on sensations. As individual development and familiarization with culture occurs, a person identifies and understands objects by incorporating new impressions into the system of existing knowledge.

The biological nature of perception is studied by the physiology of higher nervous activity, the main task of which is to study the structure and function of the brain, as well as the entire human nervous system. It is the activity of the system of nervous structures that serves as the basis for the formation of reflex connections in the cerebral cortex, reflecting the relationship of objects. A person's previous experience in the process of perception allows one to recognize things and classify them according to appropriate criteria. In the course of perception, a person reflects not only objects of nature in their natural form, but also objects created by man himself. Perception is carried out both through human biological structures and with the help of artificial means, special devices and mechanisms. Today, the range of such tools has expanded incredibly: from a teaching microscope to a radio telescope with sophisticated computer support.

Performance– recreating the image of an object or phenomenon that is not currently perceived, but recorded by memory (the appearance of which is due to the development of the brain beyond the limits necessary for simple coordination of the functions of individual organs); as well as (at the last stage of development of cognition), an image created by productive imagination based on abstract thinking (for example, a visual image of a never-before-seen solar system from rational knowledge alone). (“Man and Society. Social Science.” edited by L.N. Bogolyubov, A.Yu. Lazebnikova, “Enlightenment”, Moscow 2006).

Forms of empiricism

This different understanding of experience creates two typical forms of empiricism: immanent and transcendental.

Immanent empiricism

Immanent empiricism refers to philosophical attempts to explain the composition and consistency of our knowledge from a combination of individual sensations and ideas. Such attempts in the history of philosophy led either to complete skepticism (Protagoras, Pyrrho, Montaigne) or to a silent assumption of the transcendental (the systems of Hume and Mill).

Hume questions the existence of reality outside consciousness. He contrasts relatively pale and weak mental experiences - Ideas - with brighter and stronger - Impressions, but recognizes this boundary as fluid, not unconditional, as is found in madness and in dreams. Hence, it would seem to be expected that Hume would consider the real identity of impressions unproven, but, proclaiming such a point of view, he does not maintain it, unnoticeably accepting impressions as objects that exist outside of consciousness and act on us as irritations.

In a similar way, Mill, limiting all the material of knowledge to single mental experiences (sensations, ideas and emotions) and explaining the entire cognitive mechanism as a product of association between individual mental elements, allows the existence of a certain existence outside consciousness in the form of permanent possibilities of sensation, which retain their real identity apart from our consciousness.

Transcendental empiricism

Its most typical form is materialism, which takes particles of matter moving in space and entering into various combinations as true reality, as the world of experience. The entire content of consciousness and all the laws of cognition seem, from this point of view, to be a product of the interaction of the organism with the surrounding material environment, which forms the world of external experience.

Representatives of empiricism

Representatives of empiricism include: Stoics, skeptics, Roger Bacon, Galilee, Campanella, Francis Bacon (the founder of new empiricism), Hobbes, Locke, Priestley, Berkeley, Hume, Condillian, Comte, James Mill, John Mill, Bahn, Herbert Spencer, Dühring, Iberweg, Goering and many others.

In many of the systems of these thinkers, others coexist alongside empiricist elements: in Hobbes, Locke and Comte, the influence of Descartes is noticeable, in Spencer - the influence of German idealism and criticism, in Dühring - the influence of Trendelenburg and others. Among the followers of critical philosophy, many are inclined towards empiricism, for example Friedrich Albert Lange, Alois Riehl and Ernst Laas. From the fusion of empiricism with criticism, a special direction of empirio-criticism was developed, the founder of which was Richard Avenarius, and the followers were Carstanien, Mach, Petzold, Willi, Klein, etc.

3.2. Rationalism.

Rationalism(from lat. ratio - reason) - a method according to which the basis of human knowledge and action is reason. Since the intellectual criterion of truth has been accepted by many thinkers, rationalism is not a characteristic feature of any particular philosophy; in addition, there are differences in views on the place of reason in knowledge from moderate, when the intellect is recognized as the main means of comprehending the truth along with others, to radical, if rationality is considered the only essential criterion. In modern philosophy, the ideas of rationalism are developed, for example, by Leo Strauss, who proposes to use the rational method of thinking not by itself, but through maieutics. Other representatives of philosophical rationalism include Benedict Spinoza, Gottfried Leibniz, Rene Descartes, Georg Hegel and others. Rationalism usually acts as the opposite of both irrationalism and sensationalism.

Rational cognition is a cognitive process that is carried out through forms of mental activity. Forms of rational knowledge have several common characteristics: firstly, the inherent focus of all of them on reflecting the general properties of cognizable objects (processes, phenomena); secondly, the associated abstraction from their individual properties; thirdly, an indirect relationship to knowable reality (through forms of sensory cognition and the cognitive means of observation, experimentation, and information processing used); fourthly, a direct connection with language (the material shell of thought).
The main forms of rational knowledge traditionally include three logical forms of thinking: concept, judgment and inference. The concept reflects the subject of thought in its general and essential features. Judgment is a form of thought in which, through the connection of concepts, something is affirmed or denied about the subject of thought. Through inference, a judgment is necessarily derived from one or more judgments, containing new knowledge.

The identified logical forms of thinking are basic, since they express the content of many other forms of rational knowledge. These include search forms of knowledge (question, problem, idea, hypothesis), forms of systemic expression of subject knowledge (scientific fact, law, principle, theory, scientific picture of the world), as well as forms of normative knowledge (method, method, technique, algorithm, program, ideals and norms of knowledge, style of scientific thinking, cognitive tradition).

The relationship between sensory and rational forms of cognition is not limited to the above-mentioned mediating function of the former in relation to perceived objects and forms of rational cognition. This relationship is more complex and dynamic: sensory data is constantly “processed” by the mental content of concepts, laws, principles, the general picture of the world, and rational knowledge is structured under the influence of information coming from the senses (the importance of creative imagination is especially great). The most striking manifestation of the dynamic unity of the sensual and rational in knowledge is intuition.

The process of rational cognition is regulated by the laws of logic (primarily the laws of identity, non-contradiction, excluded third and sufficient grounds), as well as the rules for deriving consequences from premises in inferences. It can be presented as a process of discursive (conceptual-logical) reasoning - the movement of thinking according to the laws and rules of logic from one concept to another in judgments, combining judgments into conclusions, comparing concepts, judgments and conclusions within the framework of the proof procedure, etc. The process rational cognition is accomplished consciously and controlled, that is, the knowing subject is aware and justifies every step on the path to the final result by the laws and rules of logic. Therefore, it is sometimes called the process of logical cognition, or cognition in logical form.

At the same time, rational knowledge is not limited to such processes. Along with them, it includes the phenomena of sudden, sufficiently complete and clear comprehension of the desired result (solution to the problem) while the paths leading to this result are unconscious and uncontrollable. Such phenomena are called intuition. It cannot be “turned on” or “turned off” by a conscious volitional effort. This is an unexpected “insight” (“insight” - an internal flash), a sudden comprehension of the truth.

Until a certain time, such phenomena were not subject to logical analysis and study by scientific means. However, subsequent studies made it possible, firstly, to identify the main types of intuition; secondly, to present it as a specific cognitive process and a special form of cognition. The main types of intuition include sensory (quick identification, the ability to form analogies, creative imagination, etc.) and intellectual (accelerated inference, the ability to synthesize and evaluate) intuition. As a specific cognitive process and a special form of cognition, intuition is characterized by identifying the main stages (periods) of this process and the mechanisms for finding a solution at each of them. The first stage (preparatory period) is predominantly conscious logical work associated with the formulation of a problem and attempts to solve it by rational (logical) means within the framework of discursive reasoning. The second stage (incubation period) - subconscious analysis and choice of solution - begins after the completion of the first and continues until the moment of intuitive “illumination” of consciousness with the finished result. The main means of finding a solution at this stage is subconscious analysis, the main tool of which is mental associations (by similarity, by contrast, by consistency), as well as imagination mechanisms that allow you to imagine the problem in a new system of measurements. The third stage is a sudden “insight” (insight), i.e. awareness of the result, a qualitative leap from ignorance to knowledge; what is called intuition in the narrow sense of the word. The fourth stage is the conscious ordering of intuitively obtained results, giving them a logically coherent form, establishing a logical chain of judgments and conclusions leading to a solution to the problem, determining the place and role of the results of intuition in the system of accumulated knowledge.

Formal and substantive rationality

Max Weber distinguishes between formal and substantive rationality. The first is the ability to carry out calculations and calculations within the framework of making an economic decision. Substantive rationality refers to a more generalized system of values and standards that are integrated into a worldview

History of philosophical rationalism

Socrates (c. 470-399 BC)

Many philosophical movements, including rationalism, originate from the philosophy of the ancient Greek thinker Socrates, who believed that before understanding the world, people must know themselves. He saw the only way to this in rational thinking. The Greeks believed that a person consists of body and soul, and the soul, in turn, was divided into an irrational part (emotions and desires) and a rational part, which alone constitutes the human personality. In everyday reality, the irrational soul enters the physical body, generating desires in it, and thus mixes with it, limiting the perception of the world through the senses. The rational soul remains outside of consciousness, but sometimes comes into contact with it through images, dreams and other means.

The task of the philosopher is to cleanse the irrational soul from the paths that bind it and unite it with the rational one in order to overcome spiritual discord and rise above the physical circumstances of existence. This is the need for moral development. Therefore, rationalism is not just an intellectual method, but also changes both the perception of the world and human nature. A rational person sees the world through the prism of spiritual development and sees not only the appearance, but also the essence of things. To know the world in this way, you must first know your own soul.

Methods of cognition

Rational knowledge is carried out in the form of concepts, judgments and inferences.

So, a concept is a generalization thought that allows one to explain the meaning of a given class of things.
The true nature of concepts is clarified in science, where concepts in their explanatory power are given in an extremely effective form. The essence of all phenomena is explained on the basis of concepts. Concepts are also idealizations.
Once it is determined what a concept is, judgment comes next. A judgment is a thought that affirms or denies something. Let's compare two expressions: “Electrical conductivity of all metals” and “All metals conduct electric current.” The first expression contains neither affirmation nor negation; it is not a judgment. The second expression states that metals conduct electricity. This is a judgment. Judgment is expressed in declarative sentences.
Inference is the conclusion of new knowledge. An inference would be, for example, the following reasoning:
All metals are conductors
Copper is a metal, Copper is a conductor
The conclusion must be carried out “cleanly”, without errors. In this regard, evidence is used, during which the legitimacy of the emergence of a new thought is justified with the help of other thoughts.
Three forms of rational knowledge - concept, judgment, inference - constitute the content of the mind, which guides a person when thinking. The philosophical tradition after Kant consists of the distinction between understanding and reason. Reason is the highest level of logical thinking. Reason is less flexible, less theoretical than reason.

Rationalism and empiricism

Since the Enlightenment, rationalism is usually associated with the introduction of mathematical methods into philosophy by Descartes, Leibniz and Spinoza. Contrasting this movement with British empiricism, it is also called continental rationalism.

In a broad sense, rationalism and empiricism cannot be opposed, since every thinker can be both a rationalist and an empiricist. In an extremely simplified understanding, the empiricist derives all ideas from experience, comprehensible either through the five senses or through internal sensations of pain or pleasure. Some rationalists oppose this understanding with the idea that in thinking there are certain basic principles similar to the axioms of geometry, and from them knowledge can be derived by a purely logical deductive method. These include, in particular, Leibniz and Spinoza. However, they recognized only the fundamental possibility of this method of cognition, considering its sole application practically impossible. As Leibniz himself admitted in his book Monadology, “in our actions we are all three-quarters empiricists” (§ 28).

Benedict (Baruch) Spinoza (1632-1677)

The philosophy of rationalism in its most logical and systematic presentation was developed in the 17th century. Spinoza. He tried to answer the main questions of our lives, while proclaiming that “God exists only in the philosophical sense.” His ideal philosophers were Descartes, Euclid and Thomas Hobbes, as well as the Jewish theologian Maimonides. Even eminent thinkers found Spinoza's "geometric method" difficult to understand. Goethe admitted that “for the most part he could not understand what Spinoza was even writing about.”

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)

Kant also began as a traditional rationalist, studying the works of Leibniz and Wolff, but after becoming familiar with the works of Hume, he began to develop his own philosophy, in which he tried to combine rationalism and empiricism. It was called transcendental idealism. Arguing with the rationalists, Kant stated that pure reason receives a stimulus to action only when it reaches the limit of its understanding and tries to comprehend what is inaccessible to the senses, for example, God, free will or the immortality of the soul. He called such objects inaccessible to understanding through experience “things in themselves” and believed that they were by definition incomprehensible to the mind. Kant criticized the empiricists for neglecting the role of reason in understanding the experience gained. Therefore, Kant believed that both experience and reason are necessary for knowledge.

Description

In the system of diverse forms of a person’s relationship to the world, an important place is occupied by knowledge or acquisition of knowledge about the world around a person, its nature and structure, patterns of development, as well as about the person himself and human society.
Cognition is the process of a person acquiring new knowledge, the discovery of something previously unknown. The effectiveness of cognition is achieved primarily by the active role of man in this process, which necessitates its philosophical consideration. In other words, we are talking about clarifying the prerequisites and circumstances, the conditions for moving towards the truth, and mastering the necessary methods and concepts for this.

1. The essence of knowledge………………………………………………………………2
1.1. Types (methods) of cognition …………………………………………3
1.2. Plato………………………………………………………………………………3
1.3. Kant. Theory of knowledge…………………………………………………….4
1.4. Types of cognition………………………………………………………......4
2. The concept of the subject and object of cognition………………………………………….6
3. Dispute about the sources of knowledge: empiricism, sensationalism, rationalism
3.1 empiricism………………………………………………………………………………..8
3.2. rationalism………………………………………………………..12
3.3. Sensualism…………………………………………………………………………………..16
4. List of references………………………………………………………...19

Rationality is not thinking or consciousness. You can compare rationality with kindness. After all, it cannot be said that kindness is an emotion. They are different. Next, kindness is done. A person cultivates kindness in himself. Rationality is not something ready-made. This is why rationalism is now confused with logic, and many mathematicians are sure that they are rational, although they are just logical. Logic is not at all rational - madness can be logical. Nothing ready-made in the form of a “system” and “method” is rational, although these may be good attempts - not logic is rational, but one’s own effort to invent logic is a rational action. Rationality has little to do with efficiency - this is another horror, because people think that what is rational is what is justified in practice. This is a completely irrational reasoning - animals live very efficiently and practically, but they are not rational. Here again a comparison with good can help. If you just think about what good is, you inevitably have to think about values. They exist, these values - they exist somehow, and only in this case is good possible. In the same way, rationality presupposes the presence of reason as a model. Reason is not something ready-made that a person possesses, not a natural property that guarantees rationality - this is an ideal condition for rationality, it exists, it can be done - that means there is reason.

History of philosophical rationalism

Socrates (c. 470-399 BC)

The task of the philosopher is to cleanse the irrational soul from the shackles that bind it and unite it with the rational one in order to overcome spiritual discord and rise above the physical circumstances of existence. This is the need for moral development. Therefore, rationalism is not just an intellectual method, but also changes both the perception of the world and human nature. A rational person sees the world through the prism of spiritual development and sees not only the appearance, but also the essence of things. To know the world in this way, you must first know your own soul.

Rationalism and empiricism

Benedict (Baruch) Spinoza (1632-1677)

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)

Irrationalism- a direction in philosophy that insists on the limitations of the human mind in comprehending the world. Irrationalism presupposes the existence of areas of world understanding that are inaccessible to reason, and accessible only through such qualities as intuition, feeling, instinct, revelation, faith, etc. Thus, irrationalism affirms the irrational nature of reality.

Irrationalistic tendencies are, to one degree or another, inherent in such philosophers as Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Schelling, Kierkegaard, Jacobi, Dilthey, Spengler, Bergson.

Irrationalism (Latin irrationalis: unreasonable, illogical) is a characteristic of worldviews that in any way justify the failure of scientific thinking in understanding the fundamental relationships and patterns of reality. Supporters of irrationalism consider such cognitive functions as intuition, experience, contemplation, etc. to be the highest.

Characteristic

Irrationalism in its diverse forms is a philosophical worldview that postulates the impossibility of knowing reality using scientific methods. According to supporters of irrationalism, reality or its individual spheres (such as life, mental processes, history, etc.) are not deducible from objective causes, that is, they are not subject to laws and regularities. All ideas of this kind are oriented towards non-rational forms of human cognition, which are able to give a person subjective confidence in the essence and origin of being. But such experiences of confidence are often attributed only to a select few (for example, “geniuses of art,” “Superman,” etc.) and are considered inaccessible to the common man. Such “aristocratism of spirit” often has social consequences.

Irrationalism as an element of philosophical systems

Irrationalism is not a single and independent philosophical movement. It is rather a characteristic and element of various philosophical systems and schools. More or less obvious elements of irrationalism are characteristic of all those philosophies that declare certain spheres of reality (God, immortality, religious problems, the thing-in-itself, etc.) inaccessible to scientific knowledge (reason, logic, reason). On the one hand, reason recognizes and poses such questions, but, on the other hand, scientific criteria are not applicable to these areas. Sometimes (mostly unconsciously) rationalists postulate extremely irrational concepts in their philosophical reflections on history and society.

The influence of irrationalism on scientific research

Philosophical irrationalism is focused from an epistemological point of view on such areas as intuition, intellectual contemplation, experience, etc. But it was irrationalism that convinced researchers of the need to carefully analyze such types and forms of knowledge that were deprived of attention not only by rationalists, but also remained unexamined in many philosophical systems of empiricism. Researchers subsequently often rejected their irrationalistic formulations, but many serious theoretical problems moved into new forms of research: such as, for example, the study of creativity and the creative process.

Conditions for the emergence of ideas of irrationalism

Irrationalistic (in the narrow and proper sense of the word) are considered to be such worldview constructions that are largely characterized by the indicated features. Scientific thinking in such systems is replaced by certain higher cognitive functions, and intuition comes to replace thinking in general. Sometimes irrationalism opposes the dominant views on progress in science and society. Most often, irrationalistic moods arise during periods when society is experiencing a social, political or spiritual crisis. They are a kind of intellectual reaction to a social crisis, and, at the same time, an attempt to overcome it. In theoretical terms, irrationalism is characteristic of worldviews that challenge the dominance of logical and rational thinking. In a philosophical sense, irrationalism has existed as a reaction to situations of social crisis since the advent of rationalistic and enlightenment systems.

Types of philosophical irrationalism

The predecessors of irrationalism in philosophy were F. G. Jacobi, and, above all, G. W. J. Schelling. But, as Friedrich Engels argued, Schelling's Philosophy of Revelation (1843) represented "the first attempt to make a free science of thought out of authority-worship, Gnostic fantasies, and sensuous mysticism."

Irrationalism becomes a key element in the philosophies of S. Kierkegaard, A. Schopenhauer and F. Nietzsche. The influence of these philosophers is found in the most diverse areas of philosophy (primarily German), starting with the philosophy of life, neo-Hegelianism, existentialism and rationalism, up to the ideology of German National Socialism. Even the critical rationalism of K. Popper, often called by the author the most rational philosophy, was characterized as irrationalism (in particular, by the Australian philosopher D. Stove). It is necessary to think dislogically, respectively, irrationally, in order to cognize the irrational. Logic is a rational way of knowing the categories of being and non-being; one can think (as far as possible) that the irrational way of knowing lies in dislogical methods.

Irrationalism in modern philosophical systems

Modern philosophy owes much to irrationalism. Modern irrationalism has clearly expressed outlines primarily in the philosophy of neo-Thomism, existentialism, pragmatism and personalism. Elements of irrationalism can be found in positivism and neopositivism. In positivism, irrationalistic premises arise due to the fact that the construction of theories is limited to analytical and empirical judgments, and philosophical justifications, assessments and generalizations are automatically shifted into the sphere of the irrational. Irrationalism is found wherever it is argued that there are areas that are fundamentally inaccessible to rational scientific thinking. Such spheres can be divided into subrational and transrational.

Subrational areas in irrationalism

By subrational spheres of irrational subjective-idealistic worldviews one can understand, for example, such concepts as:

Will (in Schopenhauer and Nietzsche)
soul (by L. Klages)
instinct (from Z. Freud)
life (in V. Dilthey and A. Bergson)

Transrational areas of objective-idealistic worldviews

Transrational areas in objective-idealistic worldviews may include the following classes of concepts:

The idea of deity (in all forms of religious philosophy such as neo-Thomism)
concepts of the unified, the root cause, which cannot be rationally comprehended, characteristic of a variety of philosophies from Plotinus to M. Heidegger.
existence (in S. Kierkegaard and K. Jaspers)

Rational views in irrationalism

Philosophical systems that oppose themselves to rationalism are not always anti-rationalist. They can be characterized as rationalistic if it is argued that the forms of knowledge are something other than reason and understanding (like the “enlightenment of existence” (“Existenzerhellung”) by K. Jaspers), do not correlate with the latter in any way and cannot be reduced to them.

Philosophical irrationalism declares areas inaccessible to objective rational analysis to be truly creative (for example, life, instinct, will, soul) and contrasts them with the mechanism of dead nature or abstract spirit (for example, élan vital (life impulse) in Bergson, Wille zur Macht (will to power) ) in Nietzsche, Erlebnis (experience) in Dilthey, etc.).

Irrationalism in modern theories and programs

In sociological and cultural terms, irrationalist views are often opposed to social and cultural innovations, which are perceived as the spreading power of science and technology and, thereby, the establishment of educational-rationalistic spiritual values in culture. Supporters of irrationalism consider this a sign of the decline of a truly creative cultural principle (as, for example, O. Spengler in his work “The Decline of Europe”). In Germany, for example, irrationalism in the field of political theories and programs found its most reactionary forms in the so-called young conservatism and national socialism. These theories deny the point of view that a social community is a self-regulating collective through social laws. It is declared that society is based on a mystical-chauvinistic or racial culture. Following this, a biological myth of blind worship of the “Fuhrer” arises, denying the “masses” the right to think and act creatively.

Proponents of irrationalism believe that rationalism and irrationalism are complementary aspects of reality in the spirit of Niels Bohr's complementarity principle. It is assumed that the relation of complementarity between rationalism and irrationalism extends to all phenomena of reality (for example: mind - feelings, logic - intuition, science - art, body - soul, etc.). However, supporters of irrationalism believe that the observable rational world is based on an irrational principle.

What is rationalism? This is the most important direction in philosophy, headed by reason as the only source of reliable knowledge about the world. Rationalists deny the priority of experience. In their opinion, only theoretically can one comprehend all the necessary truths. How did representatives of the rational philosophical school justify their statements? This will be discussed in our article.

The concept of rationalism

Rationalism in philosophy is, first of all, a set of methods. According to the positions of some thinkers, only a reasonable, Gnostic way can achieve an understanding of the existing world structure. Rationalism is not a feature of any particular philosophical movement. It is rather a unique way of understanding reality, which can penetrate many scientific fields.

The essence of rationalism is simple and uniform, but may vary depending on the interpretation of certain thinkers. For example, some philosophers hold moderate views on the role of reason in knowledge. Intellect, in their opinion, is the main, but the only means of comprehending the truth. However, there are also radical concepts. In this case, reason is recognized as the only possible source of knowledge.

Socratics

Before beginning to understand the world, a person must know himself. This statement is considered one of the main ones in the philosophy of Socrates, the famous ancient Greek thinker. What does Socrates have to do with rationalism? In fact, it is he who is the founder of the philosophical direction in question. Socrates saw the only way to understand man and the world in rational thinking.

The ancient Greeks believed that a person consists of a soul and a body. The soul, in turn, has two states: rational and irrational. The irrational part consists of desires and emotions - base human qualities. The rational part of the soul is responsible for perceiving the world.

Socrates considered it his task to purify the irrational part of the soul and unite it with the rational. The philosopher's idea was to overcome spiritual discord. First you should understand yourself, then the world. But how can this be done? Socrates had his own special method: leading questions. This method is most clearly depicted in Plato's Republic. Socrates, as the main character of the work, conducts conversations with the sophists, leading them to the necessary conclusions by identifying problems and using leading questions.

Philosophical rationalism of the Enlightenment

The Enlightenment is one of the most amazing and beautiful eras in human history. Faith in progress and knowledge was the main driving force of the ideological and worldview movement implemented by French enlighteners of the 17th-18th centuries.

A feature of rationalism during the presented era was the strengthening of criticism of religious ideologies. More and more thinkers began to elevate reason and recognize the insignificance of faith. At the same time, questions of science and philosophy were not the only ones in those days. Considerable attention was paid to sociocultural problems. This, in turn, prepared the way for socialist ideas.

Teaching people to use the capabilities of their minds was precisely this task that was considered a priority for the philosophers of the Enlightenment. The question of what rationalism is was answered by many minds of that time. These are Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, Montesquieu and many others.

Descartes' theory of rationalism

Starting from the foundations left by Socrates, thinkers of the 17th-18th centuries consolidated the initial attitude: “Have the courage to use your reason.” This attitude became the impetus for the formation of his ideas by Rene Descartes, a French mathematician and philosopher of the first half of the 17th century.

Descartes believed that all knowledge must be tested by the natural “light of reason.” Nothing can be taken for granted. Any hypothesis must be subjected to careful mental analysis. It is generally accepted that it was the French enlighteners who prepared the ground for the ideas of rationalism.

Cogito ergo sum

“I think, therefore I exist.” This famous judgment became Descartes' calling card. It most accurately reflects the basic principle of rationalism: the intelligible prevails over the sensible. At the center of Descartes' views is a person endowed with the ability to think. However, self-awareness does not yet have autonomy. A philosopher who lived in the 17th century simply cannot abandon the theological concept of the existence of the world. Simply put, Descartes does not deny God: in his opinion, God is a powerful mind that has put the light of reason into man. Self-consciousness is open to God, and it is also the source of truth. Here the philosopher forms a vicious circle - a kind of metaphysical infinity. Every existence, according to Descartes, is a source of self-consciousness. In turn, the ability to know oneself is provided by God.

Thinking substance

At the origins of Descartes' philosophy is man. According to the views of the thinker, a person is a “thinking thing.” It is one specific person who can come to the truth. The philosopher did not believe in the power of social knowledge, since the totality of different minds, in his opinion, cannot be the source of rational progress.

Descartes' man is a thing that doubts, denies, knows, loves, feels and hates. The abundance of all these qualities contributes to a smart start. Moreover, the thinker considers doubt to be the most important quality. It is precisely this that calls for a rational beginning, a search for truth.

The harmonious combination of the irrational and rational also plays a significant role in cognition. However, before you trust your senses, you need to explore the creative possibilities of your own intellect.

Descartes' dualism

It is impossible to exhaustively answer the question of what Descartes’ rationalism is without touching on the problem of dualism. According to the provisions of the famous thinker, two independent substances combine and interact in man: matter and spirit. Matter is a body consisting of many corpuscles - atomic particles. Descartes, unlike the atomists, considers particles to be infinitely divisible, completely filling space. The soul rests in matter, which is also spirit and mind. Descartes called the spirit a thinking substance - Cogito.

The world owes its origins precisely to corpuscles - particles in endless vortex motion. According to Descartes, emptiness does not exist, and therefore corpuscles completely fill space. The soul also consists of particles, but much smaller and more complex. From all this we can conclude about the prevailing materialism in the views of Descartes.

Thus, René Descartes greatly complicated the concept of rationalism in philosophy. This is not just a priority of knowledge, but a voluminous structure complicated by a theological element. In addition, the philosopher showed the possibilities of his methodology in practice - using the example of physics, mathematics, cosmogony and other exact sciences.

Spinoza's rationalism

Benedict Spinoza became a follower of Descartes' philosophy. His concepts are distinguished by a much more harmonious, logical and systematic presentation. Spinoza attempted to answer many of the questions raised by Descartes. For example, he classified the question about God as a philosophical one. “God exists, but only within the framework of philosophy” - it was this statement that caused an aggressive reaction from the church three centuries ago.

Spinoza's philosophy is presented logically, but this does not make it generally understandable. Many of Benedict's contemporaries recognized that his rationalism was difficult to analyze. Goethe even admitted that he could not understand what Spinoza wanted to convey. There is only one scientist who is truly interested in the concepts of the famous Enlightenment thinker. This man was Albert Einstein.

And yet, what is so mysterious and incomprehensible contained in Spinoza’s works? To answer this question, one should open the main work of the scientist - the treatise "Ethics". The core of the thinker's philosophical system is the concept of material substance. This category deserves some attention.

Spinoza's substance

What is rationalism as understood by Benedict Spinoza? The answer to this question lies in the doctrine of material substance. Unlike Descartes, Spinoza recognized only a single substance - incapable of creation, change or destruction. Substance is eternal and infinite. She is God. Spinoza's God is no different from nature: he is incapable of setting goals and does not have free will. At the same time, substance, which is also God, has a number of features - unchangeable attributes. Spinoza talks about two main ones: thinking and extension. These categories can be known. Moreover, thinking is nothing more than the main component of rationalism. Spinoza considers any manifestation of nature to be causally determined. Human behavior is also subject to certain reasons.

The philosopher distinguishes three types of knowledge: sensory, rational and intuitive. Feelings constitute the lowest category in the system of rationalism. This includes emotions and simple needs. Reason is the main category. With its help, one can cognize the endless modes of rest and movement, extension and thinking. Intuition is considered the highest type of knowledge. This is an almost religious category that is not accessible to all people.

Thus, the entire basis of Spinoza's rationalism is based on the concept of substance. This concept is dialectical and therefore difficult to understand.

Kant's rationalism

In German philosophy, the concept in question acquired a specific character. Immanuel Kant contributed greatly to this. Starting as a thinker adhering to traditional views, Kant was able to break out of the usual framework of thinking and give a completely different meaning to many philosophical categories, including rationalism.

The category under consideration acquired a new meaning from the moment it was connected with the concept of empiricism. As a result, transcendental idealism was formed - one of the most important and controversial concepts in world philosophy. Kant argued with the rationalists. He believed that pure reason must pass through itself. Only in this case will he receive an incentive to develop. According to the German philosopher, you need to know God, freedom, the immortality of the soul and other complex concepts. Of course, there will be no result here. However, the very fact of knowing such unusual categories indicates the development of the mind.

Kant criticized the rationalists for neglecting experiments, and the empiricists for their reluctance to use reason. The famous German philosopher made a significant contribution to the general development of philosophy: he was the first to try to “reconcile” two opposing schools, to find some kind of compromise.

Rationalism in the works of Leibniz

Empiricists argued that there is nothing in the mind that did not previously exist in the senses. The Saxon philosopher Gottfried Leibniz modifies this position: in his opinion, there is nothing in the mind that was not previously in the feeling, with the exception of the mind itself. According to Leibniz, the soul is generated by itself. Intelligence and cognitive activity are categories that precede experience.

There are only two types of truths: truth of fact and truth of reason. The fact is the opposite of logically meaningful, verified categories. The philosopher contrasts the truth of reason with logically unthinkable concepts. The body of truth is based on the principles of identity, exclusion of the third element and absence of contradiction.

Popper's rationalism

Karl Popper, an Austrian philosopher of the 20th century, became one of the last thinkers who tried to comprehend the problem of rationalism. His entire position can be characterized by his own quote: “I may be wrong, and you may be right; with an effort, perhaps we will get closer to the truth.”

Popper's critical rationalism is an attempt to separate scientific knowledge from non-scientific knowledge. To do this, the Austrian scientist introduced the principle of falsificationism, according to which a theory is considered valid only if it can be proven or disproved through experiment. Today, Popper's concept is applied in many fields.

5.2.1. Post-non-classical rationality as a factor in the knowledge of economic activity

The fundamental premise of economic theory is the rationality of behavior of economic entities and the entire economic system as a whole. Within a number of philosophical directions, concepts of the rationality of economic science have been developed, although in most cases in an implicit form. Post-non-classical theory uses the concept of classical rationality, but it is the application of the concept of post-non-classical rationality that helps resolve a number of theoretical problems that face modern economics. At the same time, in the economic literature one can find a wide variety of approaches to the concept of rationality. One can note, for example, the works of O. Williamson, R. Shveri, J. Konlisk, ,. Based on one or another definition of rationality, modern authors approach a fairly wide range of problems, within the framework of which rationality is the concept around which systematic theoretical research is subsequently carried out. However, the factor of rationality is interesting not only from the point of view of economic theory as such, but also from the point of view of the tasks of studying economic processes and economic activity in specific applied areas. Of course, we are talking about economic rationalism, about models of rational economic behavior, and more broadly about rationalism in the context of economic culture, as part of a new economic paradigm, which is organically connected with the modern interpretation of the phenomenon of rationality within the framework of the conceptual apparatus of modern theory of knowledge. It should be noted that the analysis of the nature of rationality and its significance in the system of human activity is a problem intensively discussed in modern philosophical literature.

Often the problem of rationality is identified with the problem of determining the exact criteria of scientific irrationality, and in a number of works the problem of rationality itself is identified with the problem of post-non-classical rationality. This is discussed in great detail in the works of V.S. Stepina, V.S. Shvyreva, A.L. Nikiforova, , . Let us only note that these problems are not actually identified. Indeed, in modern literature there is a certain blurring of clear criteria of scientific rationality. However, this problem to some extent can be removed in the sense that the problem of rationality itself is broader than it is represented in science and in theoretical knowledge in general, for in fact rationality will cover not only rational forms of cognition and consciousness, but also methods of human action and behavior.

The modern crisis of the very idea of classical rationality is precisely the crisis of classical ideas about it. It acts as a symptom of the general crisis in the methodological foundations of classical European science and is associated with the loss of clear guidelines that were characteristic of the classical interpretation of rationality. A characteristic feature of understanding the problems of rationality in both foreign and domestic literature is the idea of the monologic nature of classical reason, which could not but lead to the emergence of a number of types of rationality. As a result, a certain relativization of the interpretation of scientific knowledge occurred. In the philosophy of science, the idea of pluralism of types of rationality in the form in which it exists in modern consciousness practically deprives the very idea of rationality of its initial principle associated with the conscious search for the deep foundations of adequate human existence in the universe surrounding him, for rationality seems to dissolve in the technologies of private paradigms of human activity. However, in this case, the grounds for highlighting rationality as some local principle of culture and a person’s way of relating to the world are lost. It is obvious that at present it is necessary to strictly demarcate ourselves from the straightforwardness of the classical rationalist concept. And in this sense, criticism of its monopoly is quite fair. Let us note that rationalistic monopolism is the subject of philosophical thinking only. It is very actively manifested in a number of specific sciences that are trying to develop certain rationalistic criteria for constructing certain models.

Such characteristics as proportionality, correspondence, and adequacy of the subject’s position in reality in a broad sense are intended to ensure the effectiveness of both the rationality of cognition and the rationality of action. A rational attitude towards the world necessarily presupposes a focus on efficiency, on the success of action, so a prerequisite for rational activity and a rational attitude towards the world is a special effort of consciousness to analyze the positions of the subject himself in relation to the real situation in which he, strictly speaking, finds himself . At the same time, post-non-classical rationality is associated with an adequate understanding of the problem situation in which the subject of action finds himself as a result of conscious control of his own behavior. Such rationality presupposes two mandatory conditions: reflexive self-control and taking into account the requirements of reality. Own responsibility and reflexive self-control will determine the freedom of the subject of action, which opposes subjective dependence on external forces.

Rationality presupposes alternative behavior, the possibility of choosing variable methods of action. Depending on which layers of mental prerequisites of activity and to what extent become the subject of reflexive control in the process of their objectifying modeling, different levels and degrees of rationalization of activity are established.

The obvious limitation of classical rationalism was precisely the lack of understanding of the complexity of the rationalization process, a simplified idea of the transparency of one’s own mentality for the reflective consciousness. Post-non-classical rationalism must proceed from the relativity of self-control in real life. Rationality in the sense of a conscious search for a position adequate to reality is not carried out in its pure form; it covers any aspect of the human worldview, intertwining, of course, with its irrational forms.

The freedom of choice inherent in rationality is realized in search of the optimal way to achieve certain goals, and the degree of rationality depends on the nature and scale of the goals, types of activities, guidelines, behavior patterns, etc. chosen in a given paradigm. In modern literature, the idea of open rationality comes to the fore, the basis of which is a conscious readiness to constantly improve the basis of a person’s world orientation as a free subject who controls his positions in relation to the world around him. In this case, the problem of the so-called formal orientation in the sense of R. Schweri or in the Weberian sense fades into the background. The idea of open rationality as a principle of rationality at the height of its capabilities turns out to be connected with other concepts that characterize the specifics of human existence and the reality surrounding it.

In post-nonclassical theory, the basic model of human behavior, for example in the market for goods and services, is in principle no different from human behavior in the labor and capital markets. However, this happens when the subject of the theory itself includes all possible areas of human behavior. In this case, the definition of the subject of the theory will already be analytical, and not just classificational. On the other hand, the analytical definition of the subject of a theory refers to its own approach to research, which makes it unnecessary to single out any special area.

It should be noted that many scientists, especially in the field of economics, do not adhere to the post-non-classical tradition, but widely use the classification of working models to indicate the specific characteristics of the proposed approaches. Moreover, in a number of cases, such approaches mean the classification of all behavioral models according to two main criteria: information availability and orientation towards self-interest.

When determining the conditions for interpreting human behavior as rational behavior, a number of structural elements of his behavior should be taken into account:

2) means of achieving it;

3) information used.

But one cannot ignore the fact that human behavior itself represents a certain range of choices. Behavior aimed at realizing a goal set by a person, as well as behavior aimed at realizing a goal attributed to a person, can be considered rational, so the question is transferred to the sphere of the relationship between the conscious and unconscious goals of behavior.

Currently, the authors of some theories, including sociological and economic ones, generally adhere to the principle of methodological individualism, when only individuals make decisions, and society itself can be considered as the result of interaction between decision-making individuals. At the same time, apparently, it is necessary to make a reservation that the principle of methodological individualism serves not so much to explain the behavior of an individual person, but rather to explain the organization of society as a whole. The use of methodological individualism allows us to eliminate social goals from analytical activity, which will be considered as independent phenomena that have their own analytical tools, and, accordingly, their own goals.

From the point of view of determining the type of goals, as is customary in modern post-non-classical rationality - the goals of rationality, in the model of economic behavior one can distinguish instrumental and value rationality; instrumental rationality is characteristic of the post-non-classical version (for example, in economic theory); As for value rationality, it is closer to other social and humanitarian theories.

Post-non-classical rationality acts as instrumental if human activity is associated with the choice of means that are most suitable for realizing the chosen goal. It follows from this that instrumental rationality will correspond to the concept of post-non-classical rationality, which is used, for example, in post-non-classical economic theory. Such conditionality is determined by the very property of instrumental rationality, which is associated with a previously chosen goal. As for the question of the formation of the goals themselves, this concept does not provide an answer; This property of rationality follows from the principle of methodological individualism. In the end, it turns out that, for example, an agent of economic activity will be rational only in a situation where he effectively concentrates some fairly expressed goal within the framework of extremely clearly defined possibilities. Moreover, it is natural that rationality can be understood as both an objective and a subjective point of view; it depends on whether a person forms an adequate picture of economic activity, or whether we are talking only about a subjectively determined goal against the background of identified alternatives within the same economic environment. The goal acts as a criterion for choosing among the available alternatives, the question of their necessary correlation is resolved quite simply if the goal itself remains unchanged, in the opposite case, which involves a change in goals as a result of changes in the system of preferences, an uncompared situation of choice appears, since there is no working theory, capable of explaining such a change. One possible direction in solving such problems is to search for higher-ranking targets. The instrumentality of rationality and the associated premise of certainty of preferences are usually due to the possibility of mathematizing decision-making models and their verification, , .

In a situation where the concept of instrumental rationality is used, the person himself is considered as some kind of “uncertainty”. When entering it there is a set of data, and at the output there is an already made decision. Actually, what processes occur within the framework of this uncertainty does not matter much from the point of view of instrumental rationality, because the postulate is the internal consistency of preferences. Thus, existential problems are removed, the inner essence of a person is not subject to consideration, and therefore the difficulties associated with mathematization of the decision-making process are removed, and it is always possible to use the premises of the stability of preferences. And as follows from post-non-classical theory, this means that a person must choose not between different types of goods, but between different types of his own preferences. In this case, the question of value arises and, as a consequence, the problem of determining value rationality. Rationality will be value-based if the object of choice in it is the goal itself. In other words, a person looks for a goal to realize it, and then looks for the means to realize it. Therefore, the process of goal setting becomes one of the most important elements of a person’s behavioral model. It would be fair to note that value rationality is directly related to a person’s need for self-expression. If we draw a parallel with instrumental rationality, then such situations will mean nothing more than a transfer of priority from the goal to the means.

Value rationality usually raises questions related to epistemological contradictions, and as a result, difficulties usually arise in the very process of making correct and consistent decisions. The most optimal way out of such a situation is to search and eliminate those data that create cognitive dissonance. At the next step, adequate individual solutions are developed, which, even when working with models, are presented as value-rational. Post-non-classical theory directly takes the principle of rationality as its starting point. However, alternative concepts are mainly built on the basis of uncertainty, which naturally reinterprets the concept of rationality. In this regard, we can highlight the model of bounded rationality, which is common in neo-institutional economic theory. D. Conlisk identifies four main factors that allow us to pay serious attention to the concept of bounded rationality. The first factor is related to the large amount of empirical evidence in favor of the bounded rationality of decision makers. The second factor is related to the predictive capabilities of bounded rationality models. The third factor relates to the unconvincing justification for the use of unbounded rationality. The fourth factor notes the need to achieve compliance with human behavior and make decisions that are adequate within the framework of post-non-classical theory. The identification of complete and unlimited rationality is based on how fully the available alternatives to using limited means of achieving the goals are taken into account in the model. The concept of complete rationality presupposes the existence of a researcher who takes into account all possible alternatives at the decision-making stage. Full rationality presupposes the fulfillment of two basic conditions: a person’s attention and intelligence are unlimited, which will allow a person who is able to implement the best alternative to be considered as rational; but such a situation is clearly not realistic, and, in addition, within the framework of the concept of complete rationality, it is impossible to discover the possibility of discovering new resources. The postulate regarding the limitations of intelligence requires a different look at the patterns of the same economic information that is extremely necessary for economic activity itself. Thus, there is a need to make decisions that involve avoiding a large amount of information based on the use of multi-level search; limited intelligence determines the transition from full to limited rationality, which shifts priority from the result to the process; in this regard, traditional behavior can be designated as procedural-rational, since in this case the time for making decisions changes. However, on the other hand, the choice itself in the decision-making process can be designated through the conceptual apparatus of procedural rationality, that is, at the level of a specific situation, bounded rationality must be supplemented by procedural rationality.

If the post-non-classical theory uses the thesis about the constant level of rationality of an individual’s behavior in the economic sphere of activity, which, in general, is a necessary consequence of the completeness of rationality itself, then a number of related concepts consider cases in which the individual himself will take into account, select and compare available alternatives. This is precisely what is meant when defining behavior as rational.

Post-non-classical rationality, which involves a change in its level, will be called selective; Taking into account this definition, it is necessary to keep in mind that rationality can be understood both as the content of performing some specific actions and as their result. But selective rationality does not imply, for example, the construction of an optimization model of behavior, when only the result of an action matters, and not the strategy itself.

As for the complexity of the choice task, it directly depends on the frequency of quantitative indicators and the degree of their supposed separate study. Of no small importance is also the degree of similarity of the model of a given situation to those models with which the individual has already dealt. Having complete rationality, we can assume that the individual has complete information about the positive aspects of the achieved result.

When considering adequate motivation, two main aspects must be constantly correlated. On the one hand, the more important the choice is, the more time it takes to analyze the problem itself, but the faster a person will master it. On the other hand, it should be borne in mind that the more a person is confident that his choice has an impact on the outcome itself, the stronger the motivation for rational behavior in terms of the choice strategy itself.

When selective rationality concerns the frequency and quality of adequate information, then in these cases the priority will be the correspondence of the information received to the content of the choice, since the principle will operate that links the adequacy of information with the independence of rationality. In other words, the more adequate the information, the more adequate the decision-making model of the corresponding independent rationality. Typically, in such situations, a model with a minimum level of complexity is used, since, for example, economic institutions contribute to the maximum simplification of mental operations that arise during decision-making. When it comes to adequate information, then, naturally, awareness is a necessary factor for a change in the goals with which decisions will be made. The desire to increase the frequency of choice usually not only makes it possible to reduce the probability of departure from the marginal decision, but also increases the usefulness of the information received for the subject.

Note that we are talking only about different types of individual rationality, since problem solving is actually transferred to the sphere of making individual decisions necessary to address the subject of economic decision, activity and behavior. Consideration of models of interactive rationality was not part of the objectives of this study, just as it was not, for example, consideration of the relationship between rational and non-rational at the individual and interactive levels.

Control questions

1. How do the concepts of classical and post-non-classical rationalism relate?

2. How do you understand the rational behavior of an economic entity?

3. What is the relationship between the concepts of instrumental and post-non-classical rationality?

4. How do you understand methodological individualism?

5. What should be understood by value rationality?

6. What is the essence of the concept of bounded rationality?

7. Expand the content of the concept of selective rationality.

References

1. Williamson O. Behavioral prerequisites for modern economic analysis // Thesis. 1993. issue. 3. pp. 52-64.

2. Shveri R. Theory of rational choice // Questions of Economics. 1997. No. 3. P. 25-34.

3. Conlisk J. Whu Bounded Rationality // Journal of Economic Literature, 1996. vol XXXIV.

4. Stepin V.S. Theoretical knowledge. M., 2000. 744 p.

5. Shvyrev V.S. Rationality as a cultural value. M., 2003. 160 p.

6. Nikiforov A.L. The relationship between rationality and freedom in human activity // Rationality at the Crossroads. M., 1999. pp. 295-313.

7. Aristotle. Policy. Essay: in 4 volumes M., 1978-1983.

8. Bakirov V. Social cognition on the threshold of the post-industrial world // Social sciences and modernity. 1993. No. 1.

9. Hintikka J. The problem of truth in modern philosophy // Questions of philosophy. 1996. No. 11. P. 92-101.

10. von Wright G.H. Logical-philosophical studies. M., 1986.

11. Popov V.V., Shcheglov B.S. The logic of “future change” by A. Prior // Smirnov Readings. 2001. pp. 157-159.

12. Rescher N. The border of cognitive relativism // Questions of Philosophy. 1995. No. 4. P. 35-58.

13. Shvyrev V.S. On the activity approach to the interpretation of the “human phenomenon” // Questions of Philosophy. 2000. No. 3. P. 107-114.

14. Popov V. V. The problem of intersybjectivity // Analecta Husserliana - Hague. 1997. P. 133-141.

15. Moiseev N.N. Parting with simplicity. M., 1998. 480 p.

16. Moiseev N.N. Modern rationalism. M., 1995. 80 p.