What role does intuition play in the process of cognition? What is the role of intuition in cognition? The roots of the philosophical understanding of intuition are seen in the views of the great philosophers of antiquity and the Middle Ages - Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, Augustine Aurelius, Thomas A
What is intuition? This mysterious inner voice constantly interferes with our actions. The voice prompts: do this, it will be the best option. A voice whispers: trust this person. Or vice versa, a voice warns: be careful!
Intuition and its role in cognition has nothing to do with the laws of logic. Logical thinking is based on collecting information, analyzing facts, establishing a cause-and-effect relationship between them and formulating conclusions. Intuition suggests a ready-made answer, appearing as if “from nowhere.”
“The first thought is the most correct.” This position has long been indisputable folk wisdom, included in sayings and proverbs. This “best first thought” is actually a glimmer of intuition pointing you in the right direction.
What the people have long ago learned empirically and adopted, as they say, into service, in Lately is beginning to be confirmed by scientific experiments.
It has been established that people with developed intuition are able to quickly navigate the most difficult situations and instantly make error-free decisions.
In some experiments, groups of subjects were asked to complete a variety of tasks - with numbers, words, pictures - each of which contained some kind of gap in information. The subjects had to “restore” this gap. The results showed that those who followed the “logical” path invariably failed. Some tried to solve the task “at random,” at random. And only a few came to the right result using intuition!
Scientists associate intuitive thinking with the functioning of the right hemisphere of the brain. This should indicate that left-handed people (the right hemisphere of the brain “controls” the left side of the body, and vice versa) should have better developed intuition. And indeed! In numerous intuition tests, left-handers always perform better than the “right-handed” majority.
Until recently, “left-handedness” was considered a defect that they tried to correct with the help of medicine, and children - young left-handers - were seriously “raised” in “right-handed” traditions: parents were worried that they were raising “defective” children.
Meanwhile, the great Leonardo da Vinci was left-handed, and this did not stop him from writing La Gioconda.
These fears are easily explainable: it is clear that one-sided, “right-sided” development is not harmonious and ultimately leads to imbalance in everything - in minds, in souls, in hearts, in mass behavior, in worldview.
The third millennium will obviously make the tasks facing humanity many times more complex and will require the involvement of new forces to solve them. It is clear that these problems cannot be solved with rationalism elevated to a cult. Fortunately, recently they have begun to recognize the fact that the further development of humanity is impossible without the harmonious development of all the creative capabilities inherent in man.
Judge for yourself: after all, man is an amazingly symmetrical creature. Is it normal when only the right half actually participates in active creation?
By the way, some cultures of the ancient and middle ages, in particular, the early Slavs, were “two-handed” - people could wield their right and left hands equally, and both hemispheres of the brain played an equally important role. Both intuition and reason - each in its own field, equally served people in knowledge endlessly complex world. God's things were given to God, and Caesar's things were given to Caesar.
Let us remember how many times we have heard calls to study, discover, and realize the hidden capabilities of man. Where are they hiding, these opportunities? Yes, in the right half of the brain, which is responsible for the left side of the body. Here is the source of intuition, as well as clairvoyance, clairvoyance and all those phenomena that in our “right-sided” civilization are usually called “paranormal”.
So, no matter how much they scare us about the end of the world, humanity still has huge reserves. And they lie in the area of intuition - the area that leads to spiritual knowledge. To know God...
A huge amount of information enters our brains every day. And the further humanity develops, the more knowledge it acquires in its practical activities, the more the flow of information increases. Most of the information received remains unused, but is imprinted in our brain for a long time in the form of associative connections. “Out of the total amount of available knowledge, at any given moment only a small fraction of it shines in the focus of consciousness. People are not even aware of some of the information stored in the brain.
The stock of acquired knowledge creates an unlimited reserve of human knowledge. As a result of this, the source of intuitive knowledge appears in the form of knowledge hidden from the subject himself, but already available to him. Let's call it cryptognosis (from the Greek kryptos - secret, hidden and gnosis - knowledge).
Cryptognosis refers to temporarily unconscious knowledge obtained from a person’s direct interaction with the objective world, which includes all the subject’s previous experience, but was not previously used by him.
A person receives not only the knowledge he needs at the moment about objective reality, but also a certain additional amount of information, which he turns to later and which makes it possible, in the process of scientific creativity, to successfully rely on predictions, foresights, forecasts, and to turn to such methods of modern physical research as analogy and hypothesis
Cryptognosis is a kind of encrypted knowledge. And the key to it is in intuition. The scope of cryptognosis is determined by two factors:
1. The total amount of knowledge acquired by humanity at a given stage of historical practice.
2. The amount of knowledge that a particular scientist has.
We can never know everything we know. A person is not able to determine the amount of knowledge imprinted in the recesses of his consciousness as a result of interaction with the objective world. Hence the unlimited, sometimes fantastic possibilities of our intuition.
Intuition as a form of cognitive process is expressed in two main points:
1. intuition is the ability of human consciousness for an accelerated, sudden transition from old forms of knowledge to new ones, which is based on previous historical practice and the individual experience of the researcher.
2. intuition is a specific way of interaction between the sensory and logical in cognition, based on the use of cryptognosis data, and the results of its action can act as a certain kind of knowledge, called “intuitive knowledge” and used in science, taking into account subsequent experimental verification.
So, intuition is a specific form of the cognitive process. Through its various forms, the interaction of sensory and logical knowledge is carried out. The action of intuition also extends to the level of scientific knowledge; more precisely, its result - intuitive knowledge is an important component of the process of obtaining new scientific knowledge.
Intuition appears in cognition as a process and as a result.
Epistemological analysis of intuition as a process comes down to an analysis of the action of its various forms in cognitive activity person. As a result, intuition appears in the form of “intuitive knowledge.”
The process of intuitive cognition, as noted above, is carried out on the basis of cryptognosis data, which can be expressed in the form of a concept-model (or image-model) and constitute a certain background of the cognitive process. This is a special, specific constructive expression of previously acquired knowledge, with which newly acquired information about objects is unconsciously correlated.
Intuitive cognition (unlike sensory and logical cognition) is not an independent, autonomous area of cognition. Forms of intuition always operate in cognition in a dialectical relationship with known forms of cognition, while carrying out the interaction of data from sensory and logical cognition.
Sensory intuition, according to Bunge, has the following forms:
1. Intuition as perception.
A. Intuition as perception is expressed in the process of quickly identifying an object, phenomenon or sign.
B. A clear understanding of the meaning and relationship or sign.
C. Interpretive ability.
2. Intuition as imagination.
A. The faculty of representation or geometric intuition.
B. The ability to form metaphors: the ability to show partial identity of features or functions, or complete formal or structural identity of otherwise different objects.
C. Creative imagination.
Bunge classifies intellectual intuition (intuition as reason) as follows:
1. Intuition as reason.
A. Accelerated inference - a rapid transition from one statement to another, sometimes with rapid skipping of individual links.
B. The ability to synthesize or generalized perception.
C. Common sense- a judgment based on ordinary knowledge and not relying on special knowledge or methods, or limited to the past stages of scientific knowledge.
Introduction
Concept of intuition
Intuition in the history of philosophy
The role of intuition in cognition
Conclusion
Introduction
Play an important role in acquiring new knowledge logical thinking, ways and techniques of forming new concepts, laws of logic. But the experience of cognitive activity shows that ordinary logic in many cases turns out to be insufficient for solving scientific problems. An important place in this process is occupied by intuition, which gives knowledge a new impulse and direction of movement.
The problem of intuition has a rich philosophical heritage. Few philosophical problems in their development underwent such qualitative changes and were analyzed by representatives of the most diverse fields of knowledge. The question of intuition has often been the subject of a heated struggle between representatives of materialism and idealism. A whole cycle of often mutually exclusive concepts has formed around it.
Intuition, as a specific cognitive process that directly produces new knowledge, is as universal an ability, characteristic of all people (albeit to varying degrees), as feelings and abstract thinking. That is why the topic I have chosen seems relevant to me.
Intuition in the history of philosophy
Up until the 18th – 19th centuries, intuition, its nature and mechanisms were the subject of exclusively philosophical (discursive, reasoning) research. At the end of the 19th century, the phenomenon of intuition begins to penetrate into the area of interest of psychologists, and, in accordance with the general direction of development of psychology during this period, their approach to intuition reveals a desire to find ways of its experimental modeling and study. At the same time, specific psychological studies of intuition are very few in number; in the first half of the 20th century they were carried out sporadically, became more active after the 60s, and at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries they became noticeable against the background of general psychological problems. However, even today the number of psychological dissertations devoted to intuition is inferior to the number of philosophical dissertations on the same topic.
Two global periods can be distinguished in the development of ideas about intuition:
1. Philosophical, from the 6th century. BC. until the middle of the 19th century.
2. The period of specifically psychological analysis of intuition based on the objective experimental method.
At the same time, a spiritual and religious direction is developing in the understanding of intuition, considering it as a mechanism of faith.
Philosophical period. The long history of the development of philosophical ideas about intuition at the beginning of the 21st century does not allow us to state a unity of views on the problem. It is quite noteworthy that it was at the turn of the 20th – 21st centuries that the desire of philosophers to understand the phenomenon of intuition intensified, as evidenced by the “surge” of dissertation research devoted to its analysis.
The roots of the philosophical understanding of intuition are seen in the views of the great philosophers of antiquity and the Middle Ages - Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, Augustine Aurelius, Thomas Aquinas.
The close connection of medieval philosophy with religion leads to the fact that intuition begins to be considered as a way of divine contemplation and insight for the purpose of direct merging with God.
The phenomenon of intuition is discussed in detail by the representative of early Christian philosophy, Augustine the Blessed (350 – 430). In his epistemology (theory of knowledge), Augustine is an irrationalist: the human soul is a repository of reliable and true knowledge, for it is revealed to man through revelation. However, the Truth is revealed only under the condition of the activity of the soul. The main source of knowledge is Revelation, faith above reason: “Believe in order to know.”
To a certain extent, a new understanding of intuition in the idea of the existence of two knowledges is presented by the outstanding representative of the scholastics of the late Middle Ages, Thomas Aquinas (1225 - 1274). Thomas Aquinas tried to resist the emerging desire for experimental study and explanation of nature. According to Aquinas, the soul is not only rational, but also conscious. However, there is another type of knowledge - through grace, which reveals to man divine secrets that “cannot be proven by the power of the human mind.”
The development of ideas about intuition during the Middle Ages was formed in connection with theological issues - faith and Divine Revelation. Intuition is not a type of thinking, but a special experience, essentially ecstatic, a condition and way of communicating with God. The empirically revealed experience of intuition as direct knowledge becomes the basis for faith. At the same time, religious and philosophical teachings introduce new aspects and characteristics into the analysis of the phenomenon of intuition:
1. intuition as the soul’s ability to self-knowledge and, as a result, to self-revelation of the spirit
2. intuition as an intellectual ability of divine nature that creates general concepts
3. intuition as intentionality is a function of consciousness that gives the process of cognition a certain direction
4. intuition as a way of acquiring internal experience.
Note that the phenomenon of intuition itself is understood as a special experience in which something is directly and directly revealed to a person, insight comes.
In the 17th – 18th centuries, the phenomenon of intuition for the first time became the subject of special (still philosophical) analysis and was considered in connection with the knowledge not of God, but of the world, in an epistemological aspect.
Rene Descartes (1596 - 1650), in his desire to find new accurate and solid foundations of the sciences, continues in a certain sense the tradition of Aristotle, according to which intuition is understood as a type of thinking.
In accordance with the views of R. Descartes, consciousness is an inner world that opens up to the direct observation of the person himself. In this case, cognition and awareness act as attributes of the psyche.
Descartes believes that mathematical axioms and a number of the most general concepts have a direct, a priori, intuitive reality to the mind. Direct intuitive knowledge, according to Descartes, is the most reliable; guarantees of its accuracy and reliability are in the nature of human thinking, and the highest, most reliable intuition is a self-evident and indisputable principle of clear science.
The rationalistic understanding of Descartes' intuition is developed by Benedict Spinoza (163 - 1677) and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646 - 1716).
Thus, representatives of rationalism in philosophy, considering intuition as the most important component of the process of cognition and the highest rational ability, largely determined the further formation of views on the problem of intuition, both in philosophy and in psychology.
Representatives of German classical philosophy from Immanuel Kant to G. Fichte and F. Schelling also turn to the analysis of the phenomenon of intuition.
Kant argues that all general theoretical knowledge is a priori, cannot be the result of a simple empirical generalization, it is pre-experimental and extra-experimental. Intuition manifests itself as ideas that are directly contemplated by a person - what a person’s cognitive ability “adds” to what is perceived, “sets” the form. Only contemplation (intuition) has access to a holistic coverage of objects. Intuition also reveals the inner world, the soul’s contemplation of itself and its states.
In contrast to Kant and G. Fichte and F. Schelling, they emphasize the intellectual nature of intuition as direct unconscious contemplation.
In English empirical psychology, which continues the tradition of discursive analysis of mental phenomena, there is no place for intuition: intuition was understood as a metaphysical category not subject to psychological analysis.
Concept of intuition
Intuition at the everyday level is characterized as flair, insight, subtle understanding, penetration into the very essence of something. In psychology, intuition is considered as a special type of knowledge, as a specific ability, as a mechanism of creative activity.
When we do not know exactly which of the mechanisms played a role, when we do not remember the premises or are not clear about the sequence of processes of logical inference, or when we have not been sufficiently systematic and rigorous, we are inclined to say that it was all a matter of intuition .
Philosophers define intuition as direct, without justification by evidence, comprehension, insight (from the Latin Intueri - to look closely, carefully) of the truth.
Depending on the scope of application, intuition is distinguished in everyday life ("common sense"), in science, philosophy, art (artistic intuition), in inventive activity (technical intuition), professional intuition (doctors, investigators, teachers, etc.).
There are various explanations for the phenomenon of intuition. But despite all the differences, the connection between intuition and unconscious forms of mental activity is emphasized, although the specificity of intuition lies not in the very fact of unconsciousness, but in the cognitive, creative and evaluative functions of unconscious activity. At the intuitive level, all forms of sensuality are involved (sensations, perceptions, memory, imagination, emotions, will (“sensory intuition”)) and intelligence, logical thinking (“intellectual intuition”).
Let's consider the classification of forms of intuition proposed by Mario Bunge. Bunge distinguishes primarily between sensory and intellectual intuition.
Sensory intuition has the following forms:
1. Intuition as perception.
Intuition as perception is expressed in the process of quickly identifying an object, phenomenon or sign.
A clear understanding of the meaning and relationship or sign.
Ability to interpret.
2. Intuition as imagination.
The faculty of representation or geometric intuition.
The ability to form metaphors: the ability to show partial identity of features or functions, or complete formal or structural identity of otherwise different objects.
Creative imagination.
Bunge classifies intellectual intuition (intuition as reason) as follows:
1. Intuition as reason.
Accelerated inference is a rapid transition from one statement to another, sometimes with rapid skipping of individual links.
The ability to synthesize or generalize perception.
Common sense is a judgment based on ordinary knowledge and not relying on special knowledge or methods, or limited to the past stages of scientific knowledge.
2. Intuition as an assessment.
Sound judgment, phronesis (practical wisdom), insight or insight: the ability to quickly and correctly assess the importance and significance of an issue, the plausibility of a theory, the applicability and reliability of a method, and the usefulness of an action.
Intellectual intuition as a common way of thinking.
The classification carried out by Bunge, despite the value of the study as a whole, cannot claim to solve the problem.
A.S. Carmin and E.P. Khaikin in his book “Creative Intuition in Science” proposes a division of intuition into two forms: “eidetic” and “conceptual”. It differs from the division into sensory and intellectual in a narrower and more strict understanding of the epistemological content of different types of intuition.
Conceptual intuition is the process of forming new concepts based on previously existing visual images.
Eidetic intuition is the construction of new visual images based on previously existing concepts.
Both of these divisions are different forms of scientific intuition, i.e. various forms of interaction between sensory and logical cognition.
The division of intuition into eidetic and conceptual makes it possible to study its specificity in comparison with known forms of sensory and logical cognition.
The version of the classification proposed by Karminny and Khaikin is intended specifically for epistemological analysis and is not a conditional division, but a kind of working scheme for research, freed from the need for a phenomenological description of mysterious intuitive effects.
Based on this scheme, we can not only state the fact of the existence of intuition as a form of the cognitive process, but move on to the analysis of its actual manifestations in the sphere of scientific knowledge.
The role of intuition in cognition
Intuitive cognition refers to the sphere of cognition, where the process of accumulation and transformation of knowledge is carried out through various forms of intuition, operating at the level of unconscious interaction of sensory and logical cognition. It should be noted that intuition as a form of the cognitive process is expressed in two main points. Their separation is fundamental: it leads to inconsistency and ambiguity in interpretations of intuition.
Firstly, intuition is the ability of human consciousness to make an accelerated, sudden transition from old forms of knowledge to new ones, which is based on previous historical practice and the individual experience of the researcher.
Secondly, intuition is a specific way of interaction between the sensory and logical in knowledge, the results of which can act as a certain kind of knowledge, called “intuitive knowledge” and used in science, taking into account subsequent experimental verification.
The first definition refers to the analysis of intuition as a certain psychological phenomenon. Secondly, to epistemological analysis.
So, intuition is a specific form of the cognitive process. Through its various forms, the interaction of sensory and logical knowledge is carried out.
The epistemological functions of intuition lie in a kind of combinatorics of existing knowledge with data hidden from the subject himself, but knowledge already available to him and the subsequent transformation of the acquired new knowledge into scientific status. Thus, the effect of intuition extends to the level of scientific knowledge, or more precisely, its result - intuitive knowledge is an important component of the process of obtaining new scientific knowledge.
Epistemological analysis of the intuitive form of the cognitive process involves clarifying the relationship between the knowledge available at the beginning of the intuitive act and the knowledge obtained as a result of this act, as well as identifying the essence of the epistemological mechanism with the help of which the transformation of “old” (initial) knowledge into new is accomplished.
So, the place of intuition in scientific knowledge is determined by the sphere of interaction between sensory and logical knowledge. This is where the action of intuition as a process manifests itself. This interaction could otherwise be called intuitive cognition. The legitimacy of distinguishing this type of knowledge, as well as sensory and logical, is determined by the entire history of human knowledge.
Intuitive cognition is an important area of human cognition, belonging to the field of both scientific and non-scientific cognition.
According to V.R. Irina and A.A. Novikov, the most characteristic features of scientific intuition include:
The fundamental impossibility of obtaining the desired result through sensory knowledge of the surrounding world.
The fundamental impossibility of obtaining the desired result through direct logical inference.
Unaccountable confidence in the absolute truth of the result (this in no way eliminates the need for further logical processing and experimental verification).
The suddenness and unexpectedness of the result obtained.
Immediate evidence of the result.
Lack of awareness of the mechanisms of the creative act, the paths and methods that led the scientist from the initial formulation of the problem to the finished result.
Extraordinary lightness, incredible simplicity and speed of the path traveled from the initial premises to the discovery.
A pronounced feeling of self-satisfaction from the implementation of the intuition process and deep satisfaction from the result obtained.
So, everything that happens intuitively must be sudden, unexpected, immediately obvious, unconsciously fast, unconsciously easy, outside of logic and contemplation, and at the same time in itself strictly logical and based on previous sensory experience. The epistemological functions of these processes are to carry out the interaction of sensory and logical cognition.
The purpose of any kind of knowledge is to obtain and transform knowledge. As is known, there are four types of knowledge transformation.
From some sensory images to other sensory images (sensory cognition).
From some concepts to other concepts (logical cognition).
From visual images to a new concept (interaction of the sensory and logical).
From concepts to new sensory-visual images (interaction of the logical and sensory).
Types 3 and 4 of transformation, thus, belong to the selected sphere of intuitive knowledge.
The process of obtaining intuitive knowledge consists of complex combinations with sensory-visual images. The types of sensory images between which combinations are made include the following two groups of images: sensory-visual (direct perception, visual representation); conceptual (mental reproduction of previously acquired concepts, mental reproduction of the most general properties and essential aspects of connections and relationships of the objective world that are inaccessible directly to the senses).
Scientific knowledge of any kind always has as its ultimate goal the acquisition of a new concept, i.e. new knowledge. Every scientific concept is ultimately a synthesis of a set of sensory images.
So, the interaction of the sensory and logical, carried out thanks to intuition, consists in a peculiar combination of sensory images based on some initial concept. The result is a new concept about the object, new knowledge about its essence, and not just about the forms of manifestation.
The speed with which intuition acts is mysterious. A. A. Nalchadzhyan provides very convincing arguments in support of the position that after the cessation of conscious analysis of a scientific problem, the process of solving it continues in the subconscious sphere, that the corresponding electrophysiological processes also do not stop, but are transformed, continue to occur, but only with changed characteristics.
With this form of thinking, the thought process is significantly accelerated. An amazing phenomenon is observed: the ability to process 109 bits of information per second at the unconscious level, and only 102 at the conscious level. All this is an important prerequisite for the deployment of fast thought processes, for operating with a huge amount of “pure” information in the subconscious (unconscious) sphere. The subconscious mind is capable of carrying out enormous work in a short time that the conscious mind cannot do in the same short period of time.
The relationship between the whole and the part, the system and the element is also introduced into the consciousness and unconscious sphere of the human psyche in the form of a certain scheme or structure (in fact general view), clothed in a psychological attitude towards achieving harmony and perfection. The desire for harmony and beauty, carried out on a subconscious level, can serve as a factor that has a decisive influence on the choice from many options in favor of a more perfect one.
Individual cognition is unique, as is the specific and intuitive ability of each person, his uniqueness in life; but through all this specificity, the social nature of the human personality manifests its effect.
The general conditions for the formation and manifestation of intuition include the following:
thorough professional training of the subject, deep knowledge of the problem;
search situation, problem state;
the subject’s action of search dominant based on continuous attempts to solve a problem, intense efforts to solve a problem or task;
the presence of a “hint”.
The last point in some cases is not clearly detected. But a significant number of discoveries or inventions, as the history of science and technology shows, is associated with the action of a “hint”, which serves as a “trigger” for intuition.
The success of an intuitive solution depends on the extent to which the researcher managed to free himself from the template, become convinced of the unsuitability of previously known paths, and at the same time maintain passion for the problem and not recognize it as unsolvable. The hint turns out to be decisive in liberation from standard, template trains of thought. The specific form of the hint, those specific objects and phenomena that are used, are an unimportant circumstance. Its general meaning is important. The idea of the hint must be embodied in some specific phenomena, but which ones exactly will not be the decisive factor.
Conclusion
Intuition appears in cognition as a process and as a result. Epistemological analysis of intuition as a process comes down to an analysis of the action of its various forms in human cognitive activity. As a result, intuition appears in the form of “intuitive knowledge.”
Consideration of the question of the possible mechanism and components of intuition allows us to see that intuition is not reducible to either sensory or abstract knowledge; it contains both forms of knowledge, but there is also something that goes beyond these frameworks and does not allow it to be reduced to either one or the other form; it provides new knowledge that is not achievable by any other means.
It should, however, be remembered that, no matter how great the power of imagination and intuitive insight, they in no way oppose conscious and rational acts in cognition and creativity. All these essential spiritual forces of man act in unity, and only in each specific act of creativity can one or the other prevail.
Bibliography
Asmus V.F. The problem of intuition in philosophy and mathematics. M., 1964
Literally, “intuition” (from the Latin intuitio) means looking intently. Intuitive knowledge is often characterized as direct knowledge, instant insight. Philosophers have examined the phenomenon of intuition many times.
Plato, R. Descartes, A. Bergson, Z. Freud, N. Lossky, S. Frank and many others described intuitive knowledge. Some philosophers define intuition as a sensory ability, or intuitive feeling (A Bergson, L. Feuerbach). Others, such as R. Descartes, b. Spinoza, G. Leibniz are inclined to believe that intuition is a rational ability, and call it intellectual intuition. The ambiguity of the understanding of intuition, its similarity to both reason and feeling is determined by the fact that intuition is mainly associated with the work of the subconscious.
Intuitive cognition proceeds in such a way that a person is aware only of the beginning and end of this process: formulation of the problem and its ready-made solution. The stage of finding a solution is hidden in the subconscious, which is why knowledge achieved intuitively is perceived as an instant insight, as a finished result obtained without thinking. On this basis, intuition is often compared to discursive thinking.
If discursive thinking proceeds as a process of gradual, rational progress from the formulation of a problem to its solution, then intuition represents a leap from the initial to the final point of the cognitive process. Intuition is often perceived as sacred knowledge, but the history of science shows that many scientists have experienced moments of intuitive insight. In this regard, the question arose about the role of intuition in scientific knowledge., about the study of the mechanisms of its action. Despite the subconscious nature of intuition, it can be described based on the testimony of scientists and data from the history of science.
Following A. Poincaré, who conducted a study of intuition, in the intuitive process, as a rule, several stages are distinguished: preparatory, subconscious, stages of obtaining a result and checking it.
At the preparatory stage, the problem is formulated and its detailed logical analysis is given. All major scientists agree that the moment of intuitive insight is necessarily preceded by painstaking work, numerous attempts to solve the problem by logical, rational means. In cases where a solution has not been found and a fundamentally new approach is needed, a non-standard turn of thought, intuition can come to the rescue; the search for a solution moves into the realm of pop consciousness.
Since the subconscious is not controlled by consciousness, standards and prohibitions do not apply at this level regulating our conscious activity. In the subconscious, incompatible things can come together. ultimately provides unexpected, new solutions. The stage of the selected solution entering the realm of consciousness is experienced as intuitive insight. It seems that the solution comes immediately ready-made. Although a solution found intuitively is subjectively perceived as true, it is not necessarily true. The intuitive solution requires verification. It needs to be included in logical norms, at least so that it is accepted by the scientific community
Many great scientists have experienced a moment of intuitive insight. Among them are A. Poincaré, N. Tesla, F. Kekule, A. Einstein, G. Helmholtz, D. Mendeleev, L. de Broglie. Analysis of data from the history of science allows us to assert that the role of intuition in scientific knowledge is quite large and necessary. It often accompanies the emergence of new scientific discoveries and thereby ensures a qualitative increase in scientific knowledge. Many scientists pay attention to the fact that logic is a means of persuasion, a way of developing an idea within the framework of accepted ideas, while the transition to new knowledge requires, in addition to logic, the involvement of such a person’s cognitive ability as intuition. Thus, philosophers of science consider intuition as a creative ability that ensures the emergence of new knowledge.
Introduction……………………………………………………….……. 2
1. Methods of scientific knowledge …………………………. 2
1.1. Scientific knowledge as a creative process…….… 2
1.2. Psychology of scientific knowledge………………... 5
2. Intuition and the process of cognition …………………………………. 7
2.1. Intuition as part of the thinking mechanism…….. 7
2.2. Development of intuitive abilities……………………….. 13
Conclusion……………………………………………………… 15
References………………………………………………………...… 17
Introduction
Almost all scientists, when working on a given task, primarily rely on the knowledge and experience acquired during previous activities. However, a very significant role in the creative work of the researcher is played by his personal qualities, among which intuition occupies an important place.
It should be noted that at present, not only do assessments of the degree of participation of intuition in the process of scientific knowledge vary quite widely, but there is also debate about what, in fact, intuition itself is and what meaning should be put into this concept.
The purpose of this work is an attempt, based on a review of some studies on the problem of intuition, to show the place of intuition in the process of cognition, and to consider possible mechanisms of its action.
1. Methods of scientific knowledge
1.1. Scientific knowledge as a creative process
By nature, almost every person is characterized by curiosity and a desire to acquire new knowledge. Over the millennia of its development, humanity has recorded many facts and discovered a huge number of properties and laws of nature. The theory of knowledge, or epistemology, was formed in the course of the development of philosophy as one of its fundamental sections. In fact, in epistemology, knowledge is understood as a kind of connecting thread between nature, the human spirit and the practical activities of man.
Knowledge is impossible without a creative approach to solving almost any problem. When a researcher tries to learn and understand something new for him, he is faced with a number of problems, determined primarily by the characteristics of his personality, as well as the nature of his understanding of the task and the goals of the research being conducted.
All scientific disciplines have developed many specific methods, following which is a necessary precondition for making discoveries within this particular discipline; in addition to this, there is also a number of principles (prescriptions, prohibitions, restrictions, rules, etc.) common to all disciplines of the same focus (natural, humanitarian, etc.). But at the same time, it is necessary to realize that recognition of the creative nature of scientific research is today the general thesis of the methodology of science. The creative activity of a scientist occurs within the framework general principles scientific research methods, among which the so-called “methodological regulative” theories occupy a prominent place. These usually include the principle of verifiability (or falsifiability), the principle of simplicity, the principle of invariance, the principle of correspondence, and some others.
In general, speaking about the methodology of scientific knowledge, one cannot fail to mention that in the theory of knowledge the question of the knowability of the world has long remained unanswerable. Here is what the English philosopher, founder of the theory of critical rationalism, Karl Popper, writes about this: “The dispute being analyzed is between critical and bold rationalism - the soul of discovery - and a narrow, defensive doctrine, according to which we do not need, and we cannot, know or understand about our world is more than what we already know. This teaching is, moreover, incompatible with the appreciation of science as one of the greatest achievements of the human spirit.”
A research scientist in his work “seeks to find a true theory, that is, a description of the world (in particular, its regularities, or laws), which would also be an explanation of the observed facts. (This means that the description of the facts must be deducible from a theory coupled with certain statements - the so-called “initial conditions.” Popper defends this thesis, and he further believes that “the reason for the possible unreliability of any theory is simply that our tests can never be exhaustive.”
Here one may not agree with Popper, but bold theories always did not find proper assessment at first, if only because it is difficult for people to change their established ideas. “If you like, the main paradox of cognition can be formulated as follows: the object of cognition can be something that is somehow given to thinking and characterized by it; but what is already given, what is known to thought, makes knowledge unnecessary, for knowledge, in order to be such, must deal with the unknown. Or in other words: knowledge, in order to be knowledge, must deal with the unknown; but in order to deal with “something”, this “something” must be known.” This “paradox of knowledge” is resolved by philosophical categories, giving a preliminary (and in the very essence of the matter uncertain) characteristic of “being”, giving knowledge its object. Thus, one of the philosophical categories in the methodology of scientific knowledge is intuition.
“Intuitionism” is the name of a philosophical school, which is based on the position that a person has some special ability or gift of intellectual intuition that allows him to “see the truth.” Although intellectual intuition “is in some sense our inevitable companion, it often leads us astray and these wanderings pose a serious danger. In general, we do not see the truth when we most clearly think we see it. And only mistakes can teach us not to trust our intuition.”
The following statements by Popper fairly objectively reflect the position of intuition in the cognitive process:
1. “Whatever we accept should be believed only tentatively, always remembering that at best we possess only part of the truth (or justice) and by our very nature we are forced to make at least some mistakes and make incorrect judgments. This applies not only to the facts, but also to the norms we accept.”
2. “We can believe in intuition (even tentatively) only if we have come to it as a result of many tests of our imagination, many errors, many checks, many doubts and a long search for possible ways of criticism.”
3. “The process of learning, the growth of subjective knowledge is always
basically the same. It consists of criticism with creative imagination.”
1.2. Psychology of scientific knowledge
Speaking about the methodology of scientific knowledge, one cannot fail to mention the psychological side of the process of knowledge, and here it is interesting to turn to what scientists themselves think about their scientific achievements. Famous French mathematician Henri Poincaré believed that “it is important to look at what is happening in the very soul of a mathematician,” and believed that “the best thing that can be done for this is to conduct one’s own memories.” These memoirs contain a description of the following episode: “We boarded an omnibus for some kind of walk: the moment I stood on the step, an idea occurred to me without any seemingly previous thought on my part.” A. Poincaré's analysis contains not only descriptions, but also interpretation, for example the statement that unconscious work “is possible, or at least fruitful, only when it is preceded and followed by conscious work. A. Poincaré spoke about the feeling of absolute confidence that accompanies insight, but emphasized that it can deceive us. At the same time, A. Poincaré emphasized that his views on the nature of creativity “undoubtedly need verification, since in spite of everything they remain hypothetical.”
This provision clearly establishes the heuristic value and limitations of introspection: its results are the source of the formation of hypotheses, but are not proof of the correctness of these hypotheses; only the results of an objective study of the psyche are proof.
G. Helmholtz also resorts to the image when characterizing creativity: “I can compare myself with a traveler who attempted to climb a mountain without knowing the road; He climbs for a long time and with difficulty, and is often forced to turn back, because there is no further passage. Either reflection or chance opens up new paths for him, they lead him a little further, and finally, when the goal is achieved, he, to his shame, finds a wide road along which he could climb if he knew how to correctly find the beginning.” G. Helmholtz analyzed the dependence of the appearance of new thoughts on external conditions: a thought “is never born in a tired brain and never at a desk...”. Conditions conducive to the emergence of new thoughts include: “a feeling of calm well-being,” “waking up, leisurely climbing through wooded mountains, on a sunny day. The slightest amount of alcohol seemed to scare them away.”
A. Einstein believed that “words, written or spoken, apparently do not play the slightest role in the mechanism of my thinking,” but creativity cannot be reduced to the functioning of imaginative thinking.”
Thus, in the psychological literature, based on a generalization of the stories of scientists and inventors, their interviews and biographical data, a well-known idea has developed about the main stages of the thought process. And this idea is essentially an answer to the question: what is thinking “composed of”, what happens between the moment of accepting the problem to be solved and the moment of issuing the name of its solution?
Let us present one of the most general schemes for organizing the stages of solving a problem, which involves distinguishing four stages:
1) preparation (problem formulation);
2) maturation of the decision (gestation);
3) inspiration (birth of a solution, intuitive
insight);
4) checking the solution found.
This idea of four stages of any complex mental activity shows how the process of thinking unfolds. Let us note, however, that this scheme was born on the basis of self-descriptions and introspection of the mental activity of scientists and inventors. The second source of obtaining knowledge about mental activity, which is considered in conjunction with the first source and is based on the above diagram of the thinking process, is experimental psychological research. The most general conclusions about the activity of thinking obtained as a result of these studies and of interest for this work are the following:
1) the activity of thinking consists not only of processes subordinated to a conscious goal, but also of processes subordinated to the unconscious anticipation of future results, and the processes of forming these ideas, which cannot, naturally, be reduced to operations;
2) in the composition of activity (i.e., in what it consists of), processes of this second type can occupy more space than goal-directed actions themselves.”
Thus, the science of psychology of scientific knowledge claims that in mental activity there are some unconscious processes associated with inspiration.
2. Intuition and the process of cognition
2.1. Intuition as part of the thinking mechanism
The end product of all scientific research is scientific discovery. Scientific discoveries are diverse in their content and nature; In the broadest sense of the word, a discovery is any new scientific result.
A scientific achievement is usually associated with the formation of fundamentally new concepts and ideas that are not a simple logical consequence of well-known scientific principles. How does a scientist come to fundamentally new concepts and ideas if they are not derived from the existing scientific knowledge, and sometimes even do not fit into it so much that they must seem, in the words of N. Bohr, crazy?
As mentioned in the first part of this work, when scientists try to describe and analyze the process of their creativity, they rarely do without references to “hunch”, “insight”, “insight”, “experience”. Intuition is what, in all likelihood, plays the most significant, decisive role in creating new scientific concepts and putting forward new ideas.
Here is what A. Einstein writes about this: “In essence, only intuition is of true value. What is not called intuition! This is the highest, even supernatural gift, the only one capable of shedding the light of truth on the innermost secrets of existence, inaccessible to the feelings wandering on the surface things, nor the mind, fettered by the disciplinary rules of logic. This is an amazing force that easily and simply carries us across the abyss that unfolds between the condition of the problem and its solution. This is the happy ability to instantly find an idea that will only be in retrospect, in sweat and agony justified by reasoning and experience. But at the same time, it is also an unreliable, unsystematized path that can lead to a dead end, the fruitless hope of lazy people who do not want to exhaust their brains with strained mental efforts; a naive child of knowledge, whose incoherent babble is devoid of clear meaning and only after countless corrections may be considered as an informational message."
To better understand what intuition is and what its place is in scientific knowledge, it is necessary to say a little about the background of this concept. Intensive development of natural science and mathematics in the 17th century. put forward a whole series of epistemological problems for science: about the transition from individual factors to general and necessary provisions of science, about the reliability of data from the natural sciences and mathematics, about the nature of mathematical concepts and axioms, about an attempt to create a logical and epistemological explanation of mathematical knowledge, etc. The rapid development of mathematics and natural science required new methods in the theory of knowledge that would make it possible to determine the source of the necessity and universality of the laws derived by science. Interest in methods of scientific research increased not only in natural science but also in philosophical science, in which rationalistic theories of intellectual intuition appeared.
The main point of the rationalistic concept was the differentiation of knowledge into mediated and direct, that is, intuitive, which is a necessary moment in the process of scientific research. The founder of rationalism, Descartes, spoke of the existence of a special kind of truths, cognizable by “direct intellectual discretion” without the help of proof.
For Kant, intuition is the source of knowledge. And “pure” intuition (“pure intuition of space and time”) is an inexhaustible source of knowledge: absolute certainty originates from it. This concept has its own history: Kant borrowed it to a large extent from Plato, Thomas Aquinas and Descartes.
M.V. Lomonosov was an opponent of rationalism. Knowledge, from Lomonosov’s point of view, is carried out as follows: “From observations, establish a theory,
through theory to correct observations there is The best way to finding the truth." Lomonosov came close to the problem of the relationship between direct and mediated knowledge as the results of sensory and theoretical knowledge and had a huge influence on the development of the problem of intuition in Russian philosophy.
Initially, intuition means, of course, perception: it is what we see or perceive if we look at some object or examine it closely. However, starting at least from Plato, an opposition has been developed between intuition, on the one hand, and discursive thinking on the other. In accordance with this, intuition is a divine way of knowing something with just one glance, in one moment, outside of time, and discursive thinking is a human way of knowing, consisting in the fact that in the course of some reasoning, which takes time, we unfold step by step our argument.
As follows from the above, throughout the entire history of the development of ideas about intuition, there has been a contrast between perceptions, i.e., sensory images, and concepts, i.e., logically substantiated statements. Perhaps the place should be sought in the area of two cognitive processes: during the transition from sensory images to concepts and during the transition from concepts to sensory images. These two processes are qualitatively special ways of forming sensory images and concepts. Their difference from all others lies in the fact that they are associated with the transition from the sphere of the sensory-visual to the sphere of the abstract-conceptual and vice versa. In the course of their development, concepts can be found that are not logically deducible from other concepts, and images that are not generated by other images according to the laws of sensory association.
The processes of transition from sensory images to concepts and, conversely, are indeed characterized by those qualities
which are most often considered mandatory signs of intuition: the immediacy of the knowledge received and the not fully conscious nature of the mechanism of its occurrence.
One might think that human mental activity has a “two-dimensional character”, due to the presence of two languages in which the information circulating in thinking is encoded (the language of “objective gestalts” and the “symbolic-operator” language). If in the processes of sensory-associative, figurative thinking the movement of thought occurs in the plane of visual images, and in the course of discursive, logical reasoning in the plane of abstract concepts, then intuition is a “jump” from one of these planes to another. Transitions from sensory images to concepts (conceptual intuition) and from concepts to sensory images (eidetic intuition) differ in the direction of this “leap”. Jumping from the plane of the sensory-visual to the plane of the abstract-conceptual, thought makes a kind of “detour maneuver” in order to overcome the barriers that block its path to new knowledge when moving in the same plane. This “maneuver” allows you to obtain results that cannot be achieved by other means (while remaining in the same plane all the time).
Based on the elementary forms of conceptual and eidetic intuition, specific mechanisms of intuitive thinking are deployed, which involve images and concepts from seemingly completely distant subject areas into interaction with each other. When these images and concepts interact, they are modified and rearranged, which leads to the emergence of fundamentally new concepts and ideas.
Of course, reconstructing the mental processes that lead a scientist to a discovery encounters great difficulties. However, based on an epistemological analysis of historical and scientific material, taking into account the data accumulated in psychological research, it is possible to indicate some mechanisms of intuitive thinking, with the help of which new ideas and ideas are formed in the minds of scientists (unfortunately, the estimated scope of this work does not allow us to give them in detail analysis).
Here is one example, taken from the book “From Dream to Discovery,” authored by Hans Selye: “Logic is the basis of experimental research, just as grammar is the basis of language. However, we must learn to use mathematics and statistics intuitively, i.e. .unconsciously, since we do not have time to consciously apply the laws of logic at every step.
Logic and mathematics can even block the free flow of that semi-intuitive thinking that is the basis of scientific research
in medecine.
That semi-intuitive logic that every experimental scientist uses in his daily work is a specific mixture of rigid formal logic and psychology. It is formal in the sense that it abstracts forms of thought from their content in order to establish abstract criteria of consistency. And since these abstractions can be represented by symbols, logic can also be called symbolic (mathematics). But, at the same time, this logic honestly and frankly admits that its conceptual elements, its abstractions, unlike mathematics or theoretical physics, are necessarily variable and relative. Consequently, strict laws of thinking cannot be applied to it. Thus, in thinking about the nature of thinking, we should also give an essential role to intuition. This is why psychology must be integrated with logic in our system of thinking.
The following are the most important problems that this semi-formal logic has to deal with.
1. Formulation of conceptual elements.
a) characteristics (signs);
b) the reason.
3. Formation of new questions regarding:
a) evolution of characteristics over time (those types
conceptual elements that precede them
and the types into which they are likely to be
will move) ;
b) mediation of cause and effect relationships
(incidents that immediately precede
for a reason, and the conventions, which, throughout the whole century,
probability are the result of its action).
4. A flash of intuition, “insight”. Although she is under
prepared by previous operations, but not
less can be deduced from them by applying
knowledge of formal logic.
Possessing deep knowledge, hard work and armed with logic, you can more or less consciously pave the way from 1. to 3.a) or 3.b), i.e. Precisely that part of the path that represents the development of a previously formulated concept. However, only a flash of intuition, creative imagination, occurring in the subconscious, can bridge the gap between the whole range of problems and a genuine discovery."
Intuition here plays a closing, connecting role, and the revelation from the subconscious of such a flash in the form of a conscious missing, connecting link is the most fruitful scientific achievement, which forms the basis of fundamental research.
Based on the mechanisms of thinking discussed above, we can say that intuition is a qualitative leap that occurs as a result of the fact that a certain quantitative volume of logical thinking preceding it moves to a qualitatively new level of intuitive insight. It’s just that new ideas don’t come out of nowhere; the birth of a new idea is preceded by a long period of mental work. Here it is also necessary to say that “a fundamental discovery cannot be made without the process of interaction of sensory and logical knowledge, carried out by the action of intuition. But this does not give any reason to consider it the main and, especially, the only way to obtain new scientific knowledge. Intuition is a specific form "cognition, which in a certain way influences the use of specific scientific research methods by a scientist. Fundamental theoretical discoveries are the result of the interaction of intuition with the methods and principles of a specific science (in physics, for example, with analogy and hypothesis) and experimental verification of the data obtained."
Discovering the patterns that define intuition is a very labor-intensive task, requiring the concentrated efforts of specialists in various fields. There is an urgent need for this, since the real acceleration of scientific and technological progress is associated with a qualitative increase in primarily fundamental, i.e., fundamentally new (and therefore not pre-programmed and not deducible only in a formal way), results. Here the question inevitably arises about the role of intuition in scientific knowledge. “If there is intuition, then there are patterns on which it is based.”
2.2. Development of intuitive abilities
In connection with the question of the development of intuitive abilities, Edward de Bono’s work “The Birth of a New Idea: On Unconventional Thinking” seems interesting. In this work, the author analyzes the relationship between “conventional and “unconventional” thinking, i.e., he tries to solve the classic problem of the relationship between logic and intuition in cognition.
Also in his monograph, Edward de Bono gives the following basic principles of unconventional thinking, which “can be summarized under 4 very general, but far from the only possible headings:
1) awareness of the dominant, or polarizing,
2) searches for different approaches to phenomena;
3) release from strict control of the template -
thinking;
4) use of chance.”
To reveal the second principle, you can resort to the words of the author himself: “The transition from an obvious way of approaching phenomena to a less obvious one requires a simple shift in the emphasis of attention.”
Considering the third principle of unconventional thinking, Edward de Bono writes: “One way to avoid the rigidity of words is to think on the basis of visual images, without using words at all. Based on these images, a person is quite capable of thinking consistently. Difficulties arise only when when a thought needs to be expressed in words. Unfortunately, few people are able to think, so to speak, visually, and not all situations can be analyzed through visual images. Nevertheless, it would be worth acquiring the habit of visualizing thinking, because visual images have such mobility and plasticity, which words do not possess.
Visual thinking does not simply mean using primary visual images as material for thinking. It would be too primitive. Visual thinking language uses lines, diagrams, colors, graphs and a host of other means to illustrate relationships that would be very difficult to describe in ordinary language. Such visual images easily change under the influence of dynamic processes and, in addition, make it possible to simultaneously show the past, present and future results of the influence of any process.
A very useful way to avoid being influenced by the fixed parts of a problem is to divide those parts
into even smaller parts, and then putting them together into larger new compounds. It is much easier to assemble small parts of a situation into various kinds of connections than to break an already fragmented situation into new component parts."
In general, it should be noted that the issue of developing intuitive abilities (as well as the problem of intuition itself) has not yet been sufficiently studied; solving this issue seems to be a very important matter, since it can open the way to new effective methods for conducting scientific research.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it must be said that it is very important not to overestimate or underestimate the role of intuition in the process of scientific knowledge.
Intuitive components are present to a greater or lesser extent in almost all types of scientific creativity. Therefore, it is quite obvious that if intuition helps us in obtaining new knowledge, then no matter how mysterious and incomprehensible this mechanism may seem, we must try to control it. For this purpose, for example, the achievements of modern psychology are applicable - work on overcoming subconscious barriers and stereotypes. Moreover, it is better not to “remake” a person, but to pay attention to these issues at the earliest stages of raising a creative personality. Also interesting are the methods of managing the cognitive process cultivated in the East (meditation, yoga, etc.). However, it seems somewhat questionable to use these methods specifically in scientific knowledge.
It is also necessary to note the dangers that are fraught with excessive enthusiasm for attempts to artificially initiate intuition. It is necessary to clearly understand that only indirect and weak methods of influencing the psyche and brain are effective and safe.
In this sense, scientists are in a more advantageous position than people of other creative professions. Scientists, no matter how new knowledge is obtained in the most inexplicable way, are looking, firstly, for logical evidence of what they have received, and, secondly, for confirmation of it in real life. objective world. A person who, for example, is engaged in artistic creativity and relies too much on various kinds of intuitive ways of obtaining new things, risks losing touch with reality and even going crazy.
However, intuition in scientific knowledge occupies a less important place than, for example, in artistic creativity. The main reason is that science is the property of all humanity, while a poet or artist can create in his own closed world. Any scientist at the initial stage of his scientific development uses the works of other scientists, expressed in logically constructed theories and making up science.” today" It is for scientific creativity that one should once again emphasize the importance of preliminary accumulation of experience and knowledge before intuitive insight and the need for logical presentation of the results after it.
Bibliography
1. Irina V.R., Novikov A.A. In the world scientific intuition: intuition and reason. 1978.
2. Nalgadzhyan A.A. Some psychological and philosophical problems of intuitive knowledge (intuition in the process of scientific creativity). 1972.
3. Asmus V.F. The problem of intuition in philosophy and mathematics. M., 1964.
4. Bunge M. Intuition and science. M., 1967.
5. Granovskaya R.M., Bereznaya I.Ya. Intuition and artificial intelligence. L., 1991.
6. Karmin A.S., Khaikin E.P. Creative intuition in science. M, 1971.
7. Bono de E. “The Birth of a New Idea” - M., 1976.
8. Knyazeva E.N., Kurdyumov S.P. Intuition as self-completion // Questions of Philosophy. - 1994. - No. 2. - From 110.
9. Simonov P.V. Brain and creativity // Questions of philosophy. - 1992. – No. 11. - P. 3.
10. Feinberg E.A. Intuitive judgment and faith // Questions of philosophy. - 1991. - No. 8. - With. 13
- Houses in astrology Which planet rules which house
- Prayers to the guardian angel for every day and all occasions Morning prayer to the guardian angel for every day
- Why do moths dream according to the dream book?
- Folk signs: what does meeting a double mean and is it possible to avoid the consequences?