Natural science - philosophy and science

The connection between science and philosophy has long been the subject of discussion among philosophers and scientists. Some believe that philosophy is a pseudoscience, but most say with certainty that philosophy is the starting point of the emergence of all sciences.

In order to start developing thoughts, you need free time. Apparently, for this reason, philosophy was born long after the transition of man from life in the tribe to civilization. Only people who are free from problems related to the production of daily bread could seriously devote themselves to generalizing the experience gained in a particular area. If you look at it from the point of view of modern man, philosophy and science are inseparable in the sense that it is scientific inventions that make life easier for a person so that there is time for a free flight of thought. Thus, there is no philosophy without science.

It is quite legitimate and the opposite statement. Science is impossible without philosophy, because the latter is the key to the ability to analyze, highlight features and draw conclusions. After all, it is impossible to make great discoveries from purely mechanical work. It is for this reason that only scientists who are very erudite in their field and able to think widely can achieve success, comprehending all new unexplored areas.

Yet philosophy and science are different concepts, if only because the deeper mental work is needed for the first. Science is a process that begins with the collection of a certain amount of data, their processing and systematization. Without a thought process capable of combining all the facts together, the experimental and mechanical work of science would be empty and useless.

On the other hand, the scientific component in philosophy is also on a big question. Philosophy is the ability to think and define the essence of human existence, that is, this is a reasonable way of thinking. At the same time, there is a true statement that "science does not think". Thus, philosophy and science are connected only through the carrier of thought and scientific facts, that is, through a scientist engaged in the study of a specific issue. A scientist can make another discovery only with an unconventional, "unreasonable" approach to the topic. It is this irrationality of science that is the engine and the impetus for new discoveries.

Science does not think intelligently, reason is struggling for its foundations. In this regard, philosophy and science highlight their truths. Scientific truth is a reliable, confirmed by a concrete example knowledge, and philosophical truth is the result of the interaction of reason and morality. Its basis is an understanding of good and evil, which in no way agrees with the sober intellect of science.

Philosophy gave impetus to an understanding of the scientific validity of certain phenomena. As a result, mankind had to compare already such concepts as philosophy and private sciences. For some time science developed only in breadth, new areas of research appeared, each of which required its mental and financial investments. To date, European science is on the impasse. The appearance of numerous "podnauk" can lead to the fact that one day there will be nothing to expand and nowhere. Philosophy and private sciences will be forced to start a new relationship, since the former is already comprehending the same facts, and the second is striving to expand its borders immensely.

It is worth paying special attention to the fine connection between the surrounding nature and philosophy. Initially, they were united by mythology, deifying various natural phenomena that could not be explained. The philosophy of nature had firm foundations in natural philosophy, which already saw behind every natural phenomenon, not divine providence, but natural-science facts. However, natural philosophy was based on speculative conclusions, which resulted in a dead end in the relationship between society and natural knowledge. For each of these natural-philosophical currents, there was a primary principle-the progenitor of all living things.

Gradually, the philosophy of nature was confronted with Copernicus' proof that the Earth revolves around the Sun. The earth has already ceased to be the center of the universe. This was confirmed by subsequent scientific discoveries, clearly showing the unusually vast expanses of the Universe, in which our planet was only an uncountable grain of sand among a multitude of other cosmic objects.

To date, perhaps, nature as never needs a moral philosophical approach. After all, often reckless treatment of natural resources has a disastrous effect on the state of the whole planet.