Truth Criteria. Criteria of true knowledge. Practice as a criterion of truth

— achievement of scientific truth.

In relation to philosophy, truth is not only the goal of knowledge, but also the subject of research. It can be said that the concept of truth expresses the essence of science. Philosophers have long been trying to develop a theory of knowledge that would allow us to consider it as a process of obtaining scientific truths. The main contradictions along this path arose in the course of opposing the activity of the subject and the possibility of him developing knowledge corresponding to the objective real world. But truth has many aspects, it can be considered from a variety of points of view: logical, sociological, epistemological, and finally, theological.

What is truth? The origins of the so-called classical philosophical concept truths date back to antiquity. For example, he believed that "the one who speaks about things in accordance with what they are, speaks the truth, the same one who speaks about them differently, is lying." For a long time, the classical concept of truth dominated the theory of knowledge. In the main, she proceeded from the position: what is affirmed by thought really takes place. And in this sense, the concept of the correspondence of thoughts to reality coincides with the concept of “adequacy”. In other words, truth is a property of the subject, consisting in the agreement of thinking with itself, with its a priori (pre-experimental) forms. So, in particular, believed I. Kant. Subsequently, the truth began to mean the property of the ideal objects themselves, irrespective of human knowledge, and a special kind of spiritual values. Augustine developed the doctrine of the innateness of true ideas. Not only philosophers, but also representatives of private sciences are faced with the question of what is meant by reality, how to perceive reality or the real world? Materialists and idealists identify the concept of reality, reality with the concept of the objective world, i.e. with what exists outside and independently of man and humanity. However, man himself is part of the objective world. Therefore, without taking into account this circumstance, it is simply impossible to clarify the question of truth.

Taking into account the directions in philosophy, taking into account the originality of individual statements expressing the subjective opinion of a particular scientist, truth can be determined as an adequate reflection of objective reality by the cognizing subject, during which the cognized object is reproduced as it exists outside and independently of. Consequently, truth enters into the objective content of human knowledge. But as soon as we are convinced that the process of cognition is not interrupted, then the question arises about the nature of truth.

After all, if a person perceives the objective world in a sensual way and forms ideas about it in the process of individual cognition and his mental activity, then the question is natural - how can he make sure that his statements correspond to the objective world itself? Thus, we are talking about the criterion of truth, the identification of which is one of the main tasks of philosophy. There is no consensus among philosophers on this issue. The extreme point of view boils down to a complete denial of the criterion of truth, because, according to its supporters, truth either does not exist at all, or, in short, it is characteristic of everything and everything.

idealists- supporters of rationalism - thought itself as a criterion of truth, since it has the ability to clearly and distinctly present an object. Philosophers such as Descartes and Leibniz proceeded from the idea of ​​the self-evidence of the original truths comprehended with the help of intellectual intuition. Their arguments were based on the ability of mathematics to objectively and impartially reflect the diversity of the real world in its formulas. True, this raised another question: how, in turn, to be convinced of the reliability of their clarity and distinctness? Logic, with its rigor of proof and its irrefutability, should have come to the rescue here.

So, I. Kant allowed only a formal-logical criterion of truth, according to which knowledge must be consistent with the universal formal laws of reason and reason. But the reliance on logic did not eliminate the difficulties in the search for a criterion of truth. It turned out not so easy to overcome the internal consistency of thinking itself, it turned out that sometimes it is impossible to achieve formal-logical consistency of judgments developed by science with initial or newly introduced statements (conventionalism).

Even the rapid development of logic, its mathematization and division into many special areas, as well as attempts at a semantic (semantic) and semiotic (sign) explanation of the nature of truth, did not eliminate the contradictions in its criteria.

Subjective idealists- supporters of sensationalism - saw the criterion of truth in the direct evidence of the sensations themselves, in the consistency of scientific concepts with sensory data. Subsequently, the principle of verifiability was introduced, which got its name from the concept of verification of a statement (checking its truth). In accordance with this principle, any statement (scientific statement) is meaningful or meaningful only if it can be verified. The main emphasis is placed on the logical possibility of clarification, and not on the actual one. For example, due to the underdevelopment of science and technology, we cannot observe the physical processes taking place in the center of the Earth. But by means of assumptions based on the laws of logic, one can put forward a corresponding hypothesis. And if its provisions turn out to be logically consistent, then it should be recognized as true. It is impossible not to take into account other attempts to identify the criterion of truth with the help of logic, which are characteristic in particular for the philosophical trend called logical positivism.

Supporters of the leading role of human activity in cognition tried to overcome the limitations of logical methods in establishing the criterion of truth. The pragmatic concept of truth was substantiated, according to which the essence of truth should be seen not in accordance with reality, but in accordance with the so-called “final criterion”. Its purpose is to establish the usefulness of truth for practical actions and actions of a person. It is important to note that from the point of view of pragmatism, utility in itself is not a criterion of truth, understood as the correspondence of knowledge to reality. In other words, the reality of the external world is inaccessible to a person, since a person directly deals with the results of his activity. That is why the only thing that he is able to establish is not the correspondence of knowledge to reality, but the effectiveness and practical usefulness of knowledge. It is the latter, acting as the main value of human knowledge, that deserves to be called truth. And yet philosophy, overcoming extremes and avoiding absolutization, has approached a more or less correct understanding of the criterion of truth. It could not have been otherwise: if humanity faced the need to question not only the consequences of the momentary activity of this or that person (in some, and often, cases very far from the truth), but also to deny their own centuries-old history, life would be impossible to perceive differently, how absurd. Only the concept of objective truth, based on the concept of objective reality, allows us to successfully develop the philosophical concept of truth. We emphasize once again that the objective or real world exists not just by itself, but only when it comes to knowing it.

Relative and absolute truths

The limited practical capabilities of a person is one of the reasons for the limitedness of his knowledge, i.e. it is about the relative nature of truth. is knowledge that reproduces the objective world approximately, incompletely. Therefore, the signs or features of relative truth are proximity and incompleteness, which are interconnected. Indeed, the world is a system of interconnected elements, any incomplete knowledge about it as a whole will always be inaccurate, coarsened, fragmentary.

At the same time, the concept of absolute truth is also used in philosophy. With its help, an important aspect of the development of the process of cognition is characterized. Note that the concept of absolute truth in philosophy has not been sufficiently developed (with the exception of its metaphysical, idealistic branch, where absolute truth, as a rule, correlates with the idea of ​​God as the original creative and creative force). The concept of absolute truth is used to characterize one or another specific aspect of any true knowledge, and in this sense it is similar to the concepts “ objective truth" and " relative truth". The concept “ absolute truth”should be considered inextricably linked with the process of cognition itself. The same process is, as it were, a movement along the steps, which means the transition from less perfect scientific ideas to more perfect ones, however, the old knowledge is not discarded, but at least partially included in the system of new knowledge. It is this inclusion, reflecting the continuity (in the historical sense), the internal and external integrity of knowledge and representing truth as a process, that constitutes the content of the concept of absolute truth. Let us remind once again that, first of all, the material activity of man has an impact on the material world. But when it comes to scientific cognition, it means that out of the whole variety of properties inherent in the objective world, only those that constitute the historically conditioned object of cognition stand out. That is why practice, which has absorbed knowledge, is a form of their direct connection with objective objects and things. This is where the function of practice as a criterion of truth manifests itself.

Truth and its criteria

In order to prove the truth of a statement, it is necessary to somehow verify it. This verification tool is called criterion of truth(from the Greek. kriterion - a measure for evaluation).

Basic concepts of truth

The concept of truth	Definition of truth	Criterion of truth
classical	Truth is the correspondence of thoughts and statements to reality.	Sense experience and/or clarity and distinctness
coherent	Truth is the consistency of knowledge	Consistency with a common knowledge system
pragmatic	Truth is practically useful knowledge	Efficiency, practice
Conventional	Truth is agreement	universal consent

Scientists have proposed various criteria for how to distinguish true from false:

• Sensualists rely on the data of the senses and consider the criterion of truth sensory experience. In their opinion, the reality of the existence of something is verified only by feelings, and not by abstract theories.
• Rationalists believe that the senses are capable of misleading us, and see the basis for testing propositions in the mind. For them, the main criterion of truth is clarity and distinctness. Mathematics is considered an ideal model of true knowledge, where each conclusion requires clear evidence.
• Rationalism finds further development in the concept of coherence (from Latin cohaerentia - adhesion, connection), according to which the criterion of truth is consistency reasoning with a common system of knowledge. For example, "2x2 = 4" is true not because it coincides with a real fact, but because it is in agreement with the system of mathematical knowledge.
• Supporters of pragmatism (from the Greek pragma - business) consider the criterion of truth efficiency knowledge. True knowledge is proven knowledge that successfully "works" and allows you to achieve success and practical benefits in daily affairs.
• In Marxism, the criterion of truth is declared practice(from the Greek praktikos - active, active), taken in the broadest sense as any developing social activity of a person to transform himself and the world (from worldly experience to language, science, etc.). Only a statement verified by practice and experience of many generations is recognized as true.
• For supporters of conventionalism (from Latin convcntio - agreement), the criterion of truth is universal consent about the statements. For example, scientific truth is what the overwhelming majority of scientists agree with.

Some criteria (consistency, efficiency, agreement) go beyond the classical understanding of truth, therefore, they speak of a non-classical (respectively, coherent, pragmatic and conventional) interpretation of truth. The Marxist principle of practice attempts to combine pragmatism and the classical understanding of truth.

Since each criterion of truth has its drawbacks, all criteria can be considered as complementary. In this case, only that which satisfies all the criteria can be unequivocally called true.

There are also alternative interpretations of truth. Thus, religion speaks of a supramental truth, the basis of which is Holy Scripture. Many modern movements (for example, postmodernism) generally deny the existence of any objective truth.

Modern science adheres to the classical interpretation of truth and believes that truth is always objective(does not depend on the desires and moods of a person), specific(there is no truth "in general", without clear conditions), procedural(is in the process of constant development). The last property is revealed in terms of relative and absolute truth.

Choose the correct judgments about the truth and its criteria and write down the numbers under which they are indicated.

1) True knowledge adequately reflects the surrounding reality.

2) The criterion of true knowledge is the correspondence to the interests of the cognizing subject.

3) Relative truth is knowledge that can change as the possibilities of cognition develop.

4) Truth is connected with the conditions of place, time, etc., which must be taken into account in the process of cognition.

5) Absolute truth, unlike relative truth, is practice-oriented knowledge.

Explanation.

The main goal of knowledge is the achievement of scientific truth. In relation to philosophy, truth is not only the goal of knowledge, but also the subject of research. We can say that the concept of truth expresses the essence of science. Scientists have proposed various criteria for how to distinguish true from false.

1) Sensualists rely on the data of the senses and consider sensory experience as the criterion of truth. In their opinion, the reality of the existence of something is verified only by feelings, and not by abstract theories.

2) Rationalists believe that the senses are capable of misleading us, and see the basis for testing statements in the mind. For them, the main criterion of truth is clarity and distinctness. Mathematics is considered an ideal model of true knowledge, where each conclusion requires clear evidence.

3) Rationalism finds further development in the concept of coherence (from the Latin cohaerentia - coupling, connection), according to which the criterion of truth is the consistency of reasoning with the general system of knowledge. For example, "2x2 = 4" is true not because it coincides with a real fact, but because it is in agreement with the system of mathematical knowledge.

4) Supporters of pragmatism (from the Greek pragma - business) consider the effectiveness of knowledge to be the criterion of truth. True knowledge is proven knowledge that successfully "works" and allows you to achieve success and practical benefits in daily affairs.

5) In Marxism, the criterion of truth is practice (from the Greek praktikos - active, active), taken in the broadest sense as any developing social activity of a person to transform himself and the world (from worldly experience to language, science, etc.). Only a statement verified by practice and experience of many generations is recognized as true.

6) For supporters of conventionalism (from Latin convcntio - agreement), the criterion of truth is the general agreement on the statements. For example, scientific truth is what the overwhelming majority of scientists agree with.

1) True knowledge adequately reflects the surrounding reality - yes, that's right.

2) The criterion of true knowledge is the correspondence to the interests of the cognizing subject - no, it is not true.

3) Relative truth is knowledge that can change as the possibilities of cognition develop - yes, that's right.

4) Truth is connected with the conditions of place, time, etc., which must be taken into account in the process of cognition - yes, that's right.

5) Absolute truth, unlike relative truth, is practice-oriented knowledge - no, it's not true.

What gives people a guarantee of the truth of their knowledge, serves as the basis for distinguishing truth from error and error? R. Descartes, B. Spinoza, G. V. Leibniz proposed clarity and distinctness of the conceivable as a criterion of truth. What is clear is what is open to the observing mind and is clearly recognized as such without arousing doubt. An example of such a truth is "a square has four sides". This kind of truth is the result of the "natural light of reason." Just as light reveals both itself and the surrounding darkness, so truth is the measure of both itself and error. Socrates was the first to see in the abstractness and clarity of our judgments the main sign of their truth. Descartes argued that all things that we know clearly and distinctly are in fact the way we know them. The criterion of truth put forward by Descartes, which he believed in the clarity and evidence of knowledge, largely contributed to the distinctness of thinking, but this criterion does not guarantee reliability. Such an understanding of the criterion of truth is full of thoughtfulness. It is based on faith in the power of the logic of our thinking, the reliability of its perception of reality. This is largely based on our experience. This is a strong position in the fight against all kinds of wanderings of the mind in the darkness of the fictional. The evidence of what is felt and thought plays an important role in establishing the truth, but cannot, however, serve as its only criterion.

Time has “debunked” many truths that once seemed quite obvious and clear. It seems that what can be more clear and obvious than the immobility of the Earth, and for thousands of years mankind has not at all doubted this “immutable truth”. Clarity and evidence are subjective states of consciousness that deserve all respect for their enormous vital significance, but they clearly need to be supported by something more “solid”.

Undoubtedly, not only the clarity and evidence of what is conceivable is psychologically important, but also confidence in its authenticity. However, this certainty cannot serve as a criterion of truth. Confidence in the truth of a thought can be fatally misleading. In particular, W. James described how, as a result of the influence of laughing gas, a certain person was convinced that he knew "the secret of the Universe." When the action of the gas ceased, he, remembering that he "knew" this secret, could not say what exactly it consisted of. And finally, he managed to fix this important information on paper before the end of the gas. Waking up from the dope, he read with surprise: "There is a smell of oil everywhere."

A criterion of truth has also been put forward, such as validity: true is what corresponds to the opinion of the majority. Of course, there is a reason for this: if many people are convinced of the validity of certain principles, then this in itself can serve as an important guarantee against error. However, even R. Descartes noted that the question of truth is not decided by a majority of votes. From the history of science, we know that the discoverers, defending the truth, as a rule, found themselves alone. Let us recall at least Copernicus: he alone was right, since the rest were in error regarding the rotation of the Earth around the Sun. It would be ridiculous to put to a vote in the scientific community the question of the truth or falsity of this or that statement.

In some philosophical systems there is such a criterion of truth as principle of pragmatism, i.e. the theory of a narrow-utilitarian understanding of truth, ignoring its substantive foundations and its objective significance. “Pragmatism recognizes as true that - and this is its only criterion of truth - that which “works” best for us, guides us, which best suits every part of life and is connected with the totality of our experience, and nothing should be missed. If religious ideas fulfill these conditions, if, in particular, it turns out that the concept of God satisfies them, then on what basis will pragmatism deny the existence of God ... "

Some scientists believe that the choice of this or that concept is dictated not by the fact that the results obtained with its help are confirmed by practice, experiment, but by its "elegance", "beauty", mathematical "gracefulness". These aesthetic "criteria" - Phenomena, of course, are a pleasant thing and, perhaps, somehow and in some cases testify to the truth. But these phenomena are unreliable. Ernst Mach (1838-1916) and Richard Avenarius (1843-1896) believed that it is true that thought sparingly, and the German physicist and philosopher Wilhelm Ostwald (1853-1932) put forward an intellectual energy imperative."Don't waste your energy."

One of the fundamental principles of scientific thinking is that a proposition is true if it can be shown whether it is applicable in a particular situation. This principle is expressed by the term "feasibility". After all, there is a saying: "Maybe this is true in theory, but it is not suitable for practice." Through the realization of the idea in practical action, knowledge is measured, compared with its object, thereby revealing the real measure of objectivity, the truth of its content. In knowledge, that which is directly or indirectly confirmed in practice is true, i.e. successfully implemented in practice.

As a criterion of truth practice"works" not only in its sensual "nudity" - as an objective physical activity, in particular in the experiment. It also appears in an indirect form - as logic, hardened in the crucible of practice. We can say that logic is a mediated practice. “He who makes it a rule to check the matter with thought, and the thought with deed ... he cannot be mistaken, and if he makes a mistake, he will soon again attack the right path.” The degree of perfection of human thinking is determined by the extent to which its content corresponds to the content of objective reality. Our mind is disciplined by the logic of things, reproduced in the logic of practical actions and the entire system of spiritual culture. The real process of human thinking unfolds not only in the thinking of an individual, but also in the bosom of the entire history of culture. The logicality of thought with the reliability of the initial provisions is, to a certain extent, a guarantee not only of its correctness, but also of its truth. This is the great cognitive power of logical thinking. The last basis for the reliability of our knowledge is the possibility of practical creation on its basis.

Of course, we must not forget that practice cannot fully confirm or refute any idea, knowledge. "The atom is indivisible" - is it true or a delusion? For many centuries this was considered true, and practice confirmed this. From the point of view, for example, of ancient practice (and even up to the end of the 19th century), the atom was indeed indivisible, just as it is divisible at present, but elementary particles still remain indivisible - this is the level of modern practice. Practice is a "cunning person": it not only confirms the truth and exposes error, but also remains silent about what is beyond its historically limited capabilities. However, the practice itself is constantly being improved, developed and deepened, moreover, on the basis of the development of scientific knowledge. The practice is multifaceted - from empirical life experience to the strictest scientific experiment. It is one thing for the practice of primitive man, who produced fire by friction, and another for medieval alchemists who were looking for a way to turn various metals into gold. Modern physical experiments with the help of instruments of enormous resolution, calculations on a computer - this is a good practice. In the process of development of true knowledge, increase in its scope, science and practice increasingly act as an inseparable unity. This provision is becoming a pattern not only in the field of natural science, but also social, especially at the present stage of development of society, when in the socio-historical practice of people an increasing share belongs to the subjective, human factor. The development of the socio-historical process, the organization of social practice, is more and more carried out on the basis of scientific knowledge of social laws.

Scientific knowledge differs from other types of knowledge by the desire to obtain objective truth, independent of the personality of the researcher. The result obtained should not depend on predilections, private opinions, authorities. To avoid wishful thinking.

Scientific knowledge is aimed at obtaining such knowledge that is not only related to today, but can also be used in the future, using methods and forms of knowledge.

All human cognitive activity can be divided into two types:

• · Ordinary - carried out by all people throughout life. Such knowledge is aimed at acquiring the skills that a person needs to adapt to the conditions of real life. Folk wisdom and common sense, knowledge through art, experience of everyday life.
• Scientific - involves the study of phenomena, the mechanism of action of which has not yet been fully disclosed. The information obtained is fundamentally new.

Scientific knowledge is a system of knowledge about the surrounding world (the laws of nature, man, society, etc.), obtained and fixed using specific means and methods (observation, analysis, experiment, generalization, analysis, synthesis, modeling).

Features of scientific knowledge:

• · Universality. Science studies the general laws and properties of an object, reveals the patterns of development and functioning of an object in a system. Knowledge does not focus on the unique features and properties of the subject.
• · Need. The main, system-forming aspects of the phenomenon are fixed, and not random aspects.
• · Consistency. Scientific knowledge is an organized structure, the elements of which are closely interconnected. Outside a particular system, knowledge cannot exist.

How to understand what knowledge is true? And what characteristics must knowledge have in order to be true?

The question of how to distinguish truth from falsehood is very difficult. For this there are criteria of truth. And chief among them is practice.

In practice, we can test the truth that black clothes heat up faster than white clothes. But, we will not be able to verify the truth that the baptism of Russia was in 988. There are other criteria for this. Logic, or logical non-contradiction. If the information is logical, consistent, then it is most likely true.

In scientific cognition, this may be the correspondence to basic scientific laws, previously discovered laws. To determine the truth of knowledge as much as possible, it is necessary to use a set of criteria.

The main criteria for the truth of scientific knowledge:

• · Objectivity: scientific knowledge should be independent of the subject who knows it, its interests, thoughts and feelings.
• · Validity: knowledge must be supported by facts and logical conclusions. Statements without evidence are not considered scientific.
• Rationality: scientific knowledge cannot be based only on people's faith and emotions. It always gives the necessary grounds to prove the truth of a statement. The idea of ​​a scientific theory should be quite simple.

Use of special terms: scientific knowledge is expressed in concepts formed by science. Clear definitions also help to better describe and classify observed phenomena.

Consistency. This criterion helps to exclude the use of mutually exclusive statements within the same concept.

Verifiability: The facts of scientific knowledge must be based on controlled experiments that can be repeated in the future. This criterion also helps to limit the use of any theory, showing in which cases it is confirmed, and in which cases its use would be inappropriate.

Mobility: Science is constantly evolving, so it's important to recognize that some statements may be wrong or inaccurate. It should be recognized that the conclusions obtained by scientists are not final and can be further supplemented or completely refuted.

True- this is knowledge corresponding to its subject, coinciding with it. Truth is one, but it has objective, absolute and relative aspects.
objective truth- this is the content of knowledge that exists in itself and does not depend on a person.
absolute truth- this is exhaustive reliable knowledge about nature, man and society; knowledge that cannot be refuted in the process of further knowledge. (For example, the Earth revolves around the Sun).
Relative truth- this is incomplete, inaccurate knowledge, corresponding to a certain level of development of society, depending on certain conditions, place, time and means of obtaining knowledge. It can change, become obsolete, be replaced by a new one in the process of further knowledge. (For example, changes in people's ideas about the shape of the Earth: flat, spherical, elongated or flattened).

Truth Criteria- that which characterizes truth and distinguishes it from error.
1. Universality and necessity (I. Kant);
2. Simplicity and clarity (R. Descartes);
3. Logical consistency, general validity (A. A. Bogdanov);
4. Usefulness and economy;
5. Truth is "truth", what really is (P. A. Florensky);
6. Aesthetic criterion (the inner perfection of the theory, the beauty of the formula, the elegance of the evidence).
But all these criteria are insufficient, the universal criterion of truth is socio-historical practice: material production (labor, transformation of nature); social action (revolutions, reforms, wars, etc.); scientific experiment.
Practice value:
1. Source of knowledge (practice poses vital problems for science);
2. The purpose of cognition (a person cognizes the world around him, reveals the laws of its development in order to use the results of cognition in his practical activities);
3. The criterion of truth (until the hypothesis is tested by experience, it will remain just an assumption).