Scientific paradigm. Evolutionary paradigm in natural sciences Paradigm of global evolutionism in modern science

1. Global evolutionism as the main paradigm of modern natural science

One of the most important ideas of European civilization is the idea of ​​world development. In its simplest and undeveloped forms (preformism, epigenesis, Kantian cosmogony) it began to penetrate natural science back in the 18th century. But already in the 19th century. can rightfully be called the century of evolution. First in geology, then in biology and sociology, more and more attention began to be paid to the theoretical modeling of developing objects.

In the sciences of the physical and chemical cycle, the idea of ​​development made its way very difficult. Until the second half of the 20th century. it was dominated by the original abstraction of a closed reversible system, in which the time factor does not play a role. Even the transition from classical Newtonian physics to non-classical (relativistic and quantum) did not change anything in this regard. True, some timid breakthrough was made in classical thermodynamics - the concept of entropy and the idea of ​​irreversible processes depending on time were introduced. Thus in physical sciences The "arrow of time" was introduced. But, ultimately, classical thermodynamics studied only closed equilibrium systems, and nonequilibrium processes were considered as disturbances, minor deviations that should be neglected in the final description of the cognizable object.

Penetration of the idea of ​​development into geology, biology, sociology, and humanities in the 19th - first half of the 20th centuries. occurred independently in each of these branches of knowledge. The philosophical principle of the development of the world (nature, society, man) did not have a common, core expression for all natural science (as well as for all science). In each branch of natural science, it had its own (independent of other branches) forms of theoretical and methodological specification.

Only towards the end of the 20th century. natural science has found theoretical and methodological means for creating a unified model of universal evolution, identifying general laws of nature that link into a single whole the origin of the Universe (cosmogenesis), the emergence solar system and our planet Earth (geogenesis), the emergence of life (biogenesis) and, finally, the emergence of man and society (anthroposociogenesis). Such a model is the concept of global evolutionism.

In this concept, the Universe appears as a natural whole developing in time, and the entire history of the Universe from the Big Bang to the emergence of humanity is considered as a single process in which cosmic, chemical, biological and social types evolutions are successively and genetically related to each other. Cosmochemistry, geochemistry, biochemistry here reflect fundamental transitions in the evolution of molecular systems and the inevitability of their transformation into organic matter.

The concept of global evolutionism emphasizes the most important pattern - the direction of the development of the world as a whole towards increasing its structural organization. The entire history of the Universe - from the moment of singularity to the emergence of man - appears as a single process of material evolution, self-organization, and self-development of matter.

An important role in the concept of universal evolutionism is played by the idea of ​​selection: new things arise as a result of the selection of the most effective formations, while ineffective innovations are rejected by the historical process; a qualitatively new level of organization of matter finally asserts itself when it turns out to be able to absorb previous experience historical development matter. This pattern is typical not only for biological form movement, but also for the entire evolution of matter. The principle of global evolutionism requires not just knowledge of the temporal order of formation of levels of matter, but a deep understanding of the internal logic of the development of the cosmic order of things, the logic of the development of the Universe as a whole.

On this path, the so-called anthropic principle plays a very important role. The content of this principle is that the emergence of humanity, a cognizing subject (and therefore preceding social form movement of matter organic world) was possible due to the fact that the large-scale properties of our Universe (its deep structure) are exactly what they are; if they were different, there would simply be no one to know the Universe. This principle points to the deep internal unity of the laws of the historical evolution of the Universe, the Universe and the prerequisites for the emergence and evolution of the organic world up to anthroposociogenesis. According to this principle, there is a certain type of universal system connections that determine the holistic nature of the existence and development of our Universe, our world as a certain systemically organized fragment of an infinitely diverse material nature. Understanding the content of such universal connections, the deep internal unity of the structure of our world (Universe) provides the key to the theoretical and ideological justification of programs and projects for the future space activities of human civilization.

Directly related to the theories of evolutionism are ideas about the origin and development of the Universe. Based on the theory of the expanding Universe (which appeared in the first half of the 20th century), it turned out to be possible to trace the development of the Universe in “ reverse side", i.e. try to go back as far as possible. Although it was far from easy to carry out such a reconstruction, it was still successful.

According to modern views, about 14 billion years ago the Universe was a material formation concentrated in some very small volume with a fantastically high density (many orders of magnitude greater than the density of matter inside the atomic nucleus). Suddenly, for reasons still unknown to science, the “Big Bang” occurred, which is usually called the “birth of the Universe” (for before this “explosion” matter had completely different, hard-to-imagine properties). Almost instantly (in 10 - 82 seconds) space inflated into a huge hot ball, significantly larger than the size of the part of the Universe visible to us. According to the latest calculations of American scientists, this happened 13 billion 700 million years ago.

Since the 20s of the 20th century, the model of the expansion of the Universe created by A.A. Friedman, was considered generally accepted. But the calculations he made spoke of a uniform expansion of the Universe, and new, more accurate calculations indicate a phase of almost instantaneous inflation. New theory, created in the 80s of the 20th century, mainly through the efforts of domestic scientists, was called the theory of an inflating Universe. According to this theory, in the process of inflation, the original Universe (Priverse) split into many separate Universes, differing in all the fundamental constants that determine physical properties peace. Our Universe is one of them. This kind of idea is currently advocated by some Russian scientists (A.D. Linde, S.S. Grigoryan, etc.).

Each of the Universes expanded according to Friedman’s scenario. In the beginning, when our Universe (like all others) was still very hot, heavy elementary particles were born in it, which consume a lot of mass and energy. They decayed and were immediately recreated, but the rate of restoration gradually decreased, and the Universe was enriched with generations of lighter and lighter particles. According to calculations, protons and neutrons - the “building blocks” of which atomic nuclei are composed - were formed approximately a thousandth of a second from the “beginning of the world” or a little earlier. After a few minutes they “stick together” into nuclei. The entire subsequent evolution of the Universe - the formation of chemical elements, nebulae, stars, galaxies, and so on - is nothing more than a slow decay, a long “tail” of primary processes.

The area of ​​the “beginning of the world” is the subject of the latest scientific direction, called quantum cosmology. Until now, verification of theoretical conclusions about processes near the threshold of the “birth of the Universe” can only be based on indirect data. For example, in studying the properties predicted by the theory elementary particles and reactions between them. The successes of particle physics today inspire confidence in the correctness of the cosmological constructions of scientists. It was significant that for the first time in the history of science, a bridge was “thrown” between two seemingly opposite poles of scientific knowledge - cosmology, which studies the Universe with its fantastic distances, and quantum physics, which studies phenomena in the ultrasmall. It turned out that, essentially, these are two aspects of the same thing. scientific knowledge. In nature, everything is interconnected: by studying the properties of microparticles, physicists clarify their understanding of the phases of the evolution of the Universe; cosmological data are used to choose between different versions of the theory of elementary particles.

An important event in cosmology in the last decades of the 20th century was the development of the relativistic theory of gravity (RTG), which is based on the works of a number of domestic scientists (A.A. Logunov, Yu.M. Loskutova, M.A. Mestvirishvili, etc.). This theory, which interprets physical reality in a new way, came by the end of the 20th century to replace the generally accepted one until recently. general theory A. Einstein's relativity, which revealed serious shortcomings. Analysis of the general theory of relativity (GR) shows that the acceptance of its concept leads, firstly, to the rejection of the laws of conservation of energy-momentum and angular momentum of matter and the gravitational field taken together, and secondly, to the rejection of the representation of the gravitational field as classical field of the Faraday - Maxwell type... However, neither in the macro- nor in the microworld there is not a single experimental indication that directly or indirectly questions the validity of the laws of conservation of matter, therefore there are no physical grounds for abandoning these laws.

Due to this, GTR as a theory devoid of these laws cannot be considered satisfactory from a physical point of view. The absence of any experimental indications of violation of conservation laws gives grounds to assert that only a theory that is consistent with conservation laws and explains the entire set of gravitational effects can be physically acceptable.

This is precisely the theory that RTG is, in which the gravitational field is considered “like any other physical field with all its inherent physical fields attributes."

Thus, at present, the idea of ​​global evolutionism is not only a stating position, but also a regulatory principle. On the one hand, it gives an idea of ​​the world as an integrity, allows one to think about the general laws of existence in their unity, and on the other hand, it orients modern natural science towards identifying specific patterns of the global evolution of matter at all its structural levels, at all stages of its self-organization.

Natural scientific picture of the world

The emergence of the principle of global evolutionism means that in modern natural science the conviction has been established that matter, the Universe as a whole and in all its elements cannot exist without development...

The Meaning of Evolution

In the modern understanding, evolution is a series of successive changes with a historically significant result. We are not obliged to stipulate what changes (genotype, trait, population, species), how (continuously, intermittently, spasmodically, directionally...

The Meaning of Evolution

The direction of the development of the world as a whole towards increasing structural organization is an essential feature of the idea of ​​global evolutionism. The entire history of the Universe from big bang before the emergence of humanity, from this point of view...

Concepts modern natural science

Today, global evolutionism is understood as a universal process of irreversible change from the simplest to the most complex forms, and is characterized by the genetic continuity of four types of evolution: cosmic, chemical...

Morphology and metabolism of yeast

Yeast as a source of protein The use of microbial biomass to enrich feed with protein and essential amino acids in intensive livestock farming is one of the important problems of the future, as humanity develops in this way...

Scientific picture of the world and synergetic paradigm

Synergetics (from the Greek uhn - “together” and the Greek esgpt - “acting”) is an interdisciplinary area of ​​scientific research...

The nature of biological cognition

Modern biology has new strategic directions for development research activities, namely design, construction of biological objects, control of living systems, forecasting...

Problems of self-organization are essential for understanding the evolution of matter, the development of living organisms and the transformation of social ones. Synergetics is a process of increasing complexity...

Self-organization in nature and society

Cosmology is an astrophysical theory of the structure and dynamics of change in the Metagalaxy, which includes a certain understanding of the properties of the entire Universe...

Modern biotechnology

Modern biotechnology includes a number of high technology, which are based on the latest achievements of ecology, genetics, microbiology, cytology, molecular biology...

One of the most important ideas of European civilization is the idea of ​​world development. In its simplest and undeveloped forms (preformationism, epigenesis, Kantian cosmology) it began to penetrate natural science back in the 18th century. but already in the 19th century...

Universal evolutionism

Ideas about the universality of evolutionary processes in the Universe are realized in modern science in the concept of universal evolutionism. Its principles make it possible to uniformly describe a huge variety of processes...

The scientific picture of the world (SPM) is the basis of a rationalistic worldview, based on the total potential of science of a particular era. The NCM systematizes scientific knowledge obtained in various disciplinary fields. NCM is a synthesis of knowledge corresponding to the specific historical period of human development.

Evolution of modern scientific picture the world involves movement from classical(the achievements of Galileo and Newton, an unambiguous cause-and-effect relationship, the objects of the world seemed to exist independently, in a strictly defined coordinate system) to non-classical ( the influence of the first theories of thermodynamics, where liquids and gases are not purely mechanical systems. The development of the system is thought to be directional, but its state at each moment in time is not determined. The lack of determinism at the level of individuals is combined with determinism at the level of the system as a whole: “statistical regularity”) and post-non-classical (PNC) its stages.

Image PNK NCM: from the very beginning and to anyone at this moment time, the future remains uncertain. Development can go in one of several directions, which is most often determined by some minor factor. Only a small energy impact is enough for the system to be rebuilt and a new level of organization to arise. In modern NCM, the analysis of social structures involves the study of open nonlinear systems, in which the role of initial conditions, the individuals included in them, and random factors is great. The field of reflection on the activity is expanding, and its value-target structures are taken into account. The focus of post-nonclassical studies is the understanding of synergetic processes, which are very relevant for recent times. Nonlinear science has led to the emergence synergistic thinking.

In modern post-non-classical science, the entire potential of descriptive sciences, disciplinary knowledge and problem-oriented interdisciplinary research are focused on recreating the image of objective reality. The beginning of a new discipline called synergetics was laid by the speech of G. Haken in 1973. at the first conference dedicated to the problems of self-organization.

Synergetics, those. The theory of self-organization is characterized by spontaneous structurogenesis, nonlinearity, and open systems. In the synergetic picture of the world, formation reigns, burdened with diversity and irreversibility. Time has a constructive function. Nonlinear systems include those whose properties are determined by the processes occurring in them so that the result of each influence in the presence of another turns out to be different than in the absence of the latter.

The main distinctive properties of a world that obeys nonlinear patterns:

Irreversibility of evolutionary processes

Bifurcation nature of evolution: in a nonlinear system there is an alternation of periods of relatively monotonic self-motion and bifurcation zones, where the system loses stability with respect to small disturbances

Dynamism of the structure of self-developing systems

New understanding of the future

Nonlinear science leads to evolutionary synergetic paradigm. Paradigms, i.e. models (samples) of setting and solving scientific problems, according to T. Kuhn, control a group of research scientists and scientific community. The pre-paradigm period is characterized by a chaotic accumulation of facts. Coming out of this period means establishing standards for scientific practice, theoretical postulates, an accurate scientific picture of the world, and combining theory and method.

Adoption evolutionary synergetic paradigm means a rejection of the basic postulates of traditional science: * The principle of the existence of absolutely reliable truth and knowledge; * The principle of classical strength; * Reductionism; * The concept of linearity; * Hypotheses of a posterioriity, i.e. acquiring knowledge solely on the basis of past experience.

PNK The NCM stage posed new challenges. The development of the leading idea of ​​synergetics about spontaneous structurogenesis presupposes the presence of an adequate categorical apparatus. One of the important ideas of post-nonclassical science is the statement about loss of system memory. The system forgets its past states, acts spontaneously and unpredictably, the past has almost no influence on the present and the present does not have a decisive influence on the future.

Important feature PNK is the application post-analytical way of thinking, connecting 3 spheres of analysis at once - historical, critical-reflective and theoretical.

Question 41: Expanding the ethos of science. New ethical issues science of the late 20th - early 21st centuries. Environmental ethics.

Ethics is a philosophical discipline that studies the phenomena of morality and ethics. The question of the ethics of science is the question of whether science can be the object of moral evaluation. Heated debates on this issue have occurred throughout the history of the development of science and go back to the time of Socrates, who 2.5 thousand years ago taught that a person acts badly only out of ignorance and that having learned what goodness consists of, he will always strive for it. The peculiarity of our time is that, along with these disputes, the creation of special ones is proceeding at an accelerated pace. structures and mechanisms whose task is the ethical regulation of scientific activity.

Ethics of science studies the moral foundations of scientific activity, the set of value principles accepted in the scientific community, and concentrates the social and humanistic aspects of science. According to Merton, the ethos of science is an emotionally charged set of rules, regulations and customs, beliefs, values ​​and predispositions that are considered mandatory for a scientist. The modern world is a largely technologized space, man has surrounded himself with objects of technology, the essence of man is being transformed in the direction of gravitating not towards nature, harmony and love, but towards technicization. A contradiction arises between the primordial norms of ethics and the necessity of human technical existence, which entails a wide class of ethical problems of the artificial world. Diverse ethical issues in the most general view can be divided into ethical problems of physics, biology, genetics, technology; The problems of scientist ethics occupy a special place.

The most important problem is authorship of scientific discoveries, plagiarism, competence and falsification of scientific discoveries. For research that claims scientific status, the institution of references, the “academic component of science,” is strictly required, thanks to which the authorship of certain ideas is recorded and, in addition, the selection of new things is ensured, which indicates the growth of scientific knowledge. Otherwise, science will mark time and carry out endless repetitions.

The problem is of particular importance scientist's obsession when, while engaged in scientific activities, he breaks away from the real world and becomes like a robot.

Ethical issues arising from the field biology, indicate the danger of absolutizing biologizing tendencies, within the framework of which many negative human traits are recognized as innate - violence, aggression, hostility, war, as well as the desire for career growth, leadership, etc.

In area genetics Questions about the influence of gender differences on mental activity, genetic and intellectual differences between races and nationalities (manifestations of racism and genocide) turned out to be problematic.

Problems have arisen at the intersection of biology and medicine bioethicists(attitude to the patient only as an object of research or medical practice).

A special place is occupied by problems caused by increasing technologicalization of medicine and the emergence of new medical technologies and drugs that expand the possibilities of impact on humans. Bioethics researcher B. Yudin drew attention to the fact that modern biomedicine is expanding the technological capabilities of control and intervention in the natural problems of the origin, course and end of human life. Various methods of artificial human reproduction, replacement of affected organs and tissues, and active influence on the aging process lead to the fact that in all such cases borderline situations arise when the consequences of scientific and technical progress achievements are unpredictable. There is a danger of destruction of the original biological basis. Stress loads, exposure to carcinogens, and environmental pollution transform a person, destroy his health, and worsen the gene pool.

Genetic Engineering turned out to be the vanguard of scientific and experimental research into the living world. It makes it possible to interfere with a person’s genetic code and change it, which is considered positive in the treatment of a number of hereditary diseases. However, there is a temptation to systematically improve human nature in order to increasingly adapt it to the stresses of the modern artificially created technosphere.

Problems manipulation of the human psyche, effects on the human brain constitute a special group of problems. There are experiments involving the implantation of electrodes into the brain, which, by providing weak electrical effects, prevent drowsiness and help relieve stress. Such manipulations are compared to tranquilizers and drugs.

An acute problem of our time is cloning technology. The term “cloning” has always been related to the processes of vegetative propagation (cloning of plants by cuttings, buds, tubers in agriculture). Living organisms, such as amoebas, also reproduce by producing genetically identical cells called clones. In a general sense, cloning can be called a process that involves the creation of a creature that is genetically identical to its parents. As long as we were talking about cloning to ensure efficiency in agriculture and crop production, the problem did not become so acute, but when it came to cells. man, it took the efforts of many theorists to understand the consequences of such a step. The solution to this problem is associated with the need for a clear understanding of the multidimensionality of the phenomenon of class. There are medical, economic, ethical, philosophical, religious aspects of this problem. Kl-e as a complex experimental technology can lead to the reproduction of not only standards, but also freaks. From a methodological point of view, we are talking about a mismatch between the goals set and the results obtained, which in the conditions of class. on a person is immoral and criminal.

Global ecological problems concentrated in the system of relations “man-society-biosphere”. They require scientists to increase their responsibility for the consequences and results of their activities, as well as strengthen government control over the implementation of projects and developments. An analysis of environmental disasters in recent decades shows that in most cases they are caused by ill-conceived man-made impacts that have a catastrophic effect on nature. Science responded by creating a new industry - social ecology. Its tasks are to study extreme situations, clarify anthropogenic, technological, social factors causing the environmental crisis and find optimal ways to overcome it.

The concept of “evolution” entered intellectual discourse in the 17th century; the first evolutionary concepts of human development, society, and culture were created by the enlighteners: Voltaire, Condorcet, Saint-Simon. Since the time of Aristotle, philosophy has had the idea of ​​development as self-development, i.e. change in accordance with the inner principle of development, which was considered to be embodied in the “seed” or “herm” of all things. This idea is extended by the founders of classical evolutionism G. Spencer, E.B. Tylor, L.G. Morgan, who, rejecting the idea of ​​providentialism, put forward the idea internal sources development of culture and society. As a scientific paradigm, evolutionism arises in late XIX century, it represents an international scientific tradition: in England its representatives are G. Spencer, J. Lebok, E. Tylor, J. Fraser, in Germany - A. Bastian, T. Weitz, J. Lippert, in France - Sh. Letourneau, in the USA - L.G. Morgan, in Russia such a variety of evolutionism is developing as a formational approach. The latter is part of the Marxist-Leninist scientific paradigm cultivated in Soviet Russia. In the 50s of the 20th century, neo-evolutionism was formed, whose representatives L. White and T. Parsons directed efforts to identify patterns of general and specific, micro- and macroevolution.

The founder of evolutionism as a scientific tradition is Herbert Spencer(1820 - 1903) - English philosopher, sociologist, methodologist, author of the works “Fundamentals”, “Foundations of Biology”, “Foundations of Psychology”, “Foundations of Sociology”, “Foundations of Ethics”. He viewed evolution as the integration (bringing to an articulate unity) of matter, accompanied by the dispersion of motion, during which unconsumed motion undergoes a similar transformation. Spencer was not a supporter of uniform linear progress; on the contrary, he believed that social types, like the types of individual organisms, do not form a known series, but are distributed only into diverging and branching groups. Spencer believed that the development of society is determined by both external (natural and cultural environment) and internal (racial, mental characteristics) factors. In his vision, a developed society has three organ systems: a support system that ensures the production of necessary products; a distribution system that regulates the distribution of manufactured products; and a regulatory system that subordinates parts and elements of culture to the whole. Evolution, according to Spencer, is subject to a universal law: any natural or social phenomenon goes from an initial undivided syncretic integrity to the differentiation of parts within the whole with their subsequent integration into a new integrity, representing the unity of diversity. Development is thus a three-stage process: it begins with the quantitative growth of the elements of the system; quantitative growth leads to the functional and structural differentiation of the whole, which creates the need for coherence or integration. Spencer tested his scheme on extensive ethnographic material; he studied the evolution of various social institutions (industrial, distribution, political, domestic, ritual, church), calling them organs of a self-regulating social system.

One of the founders of evolutionism is an English ethnographer, methodologist, author of works: “Primitive culture”, “Anthropology”, “On the method of studying the development of institutions”, “Research in the field ancient history humanity" Edward Barnett Tylor(1832 - 1917). Like Spencer, Tylor tried to apply Darwin's theory of evolution to social phenomena. The scientist viewed human history as a continuation of the history of nature; accordingly, he qualified historiography as a continuation of natural science. Tylor believed that the historical process is subject to strict cause-and-effect relationships and the task of the scientist is to identify these connections. He was a consistent supporter of the theory of progressive development of culture and society. The scientist criticized the theory of “degradationism” of Comte de Maistre, according to which, starting with the appearance of a semi-civilized race of people on earth, history moved in two ways: back to the society of savages, and forward to the society of civilized people. Taylor explained cultural differences by the asynchronous evolution of different peoples, their location at different stages of sociocultural development. It should be noted that Tylor did not deny the possibility of regressive movements in culture, however, he believed that progress was the main direction. The scientist was convinced that all cultures should go through approximately the same stages in general cultural development as civilized ones. European countries– from an ignorant state to an enlightened one. Thus, all peoples and all cultures were united in Taylor’s teachings into a common, progressively developing evolutionary series. He writes: “The origin of the newest civilization from the medieval one, the development of this latter in turn from the civilization of Greece, Assyria or Egypt - all this is the generally accepted property of historiography. Thus, if the highest culture can be traced back to a state that can be called middle culture, then the only question that remains is whether this secondary culture trace in the same way back to the lower culture, i.e. to a wild state"(1).

Starting from the idea of ​​the development of culture as the evolution of species, Tylor forms a methodological apparatus, the basis of which is natural science taxonomy. The key principle of Tylor's methodology is the principle of classifying cultural phenomena by type and their arrangement in evolutionary series - from simpler to more complex. complex types. Tylor's initial research procedure is the procedure for identifying species and varieties of cultural phenomena, their systematization and classification according to general characteristics, just as biology identifies, systematizes and classifies species of plants and animals. As types and varieties of cultural phenomena, he considers such elements of material and spiritual culture as: myths, rituals, tools, weapons, etc. After identifying cultural species, the next research procedure involves tracing the evolution of each of the identified species. The task of the researcher, in Tylor's vision, is to trace the improvement of a particular tool, ritual, or myth. Tylor writes: “The making of fire, the art of cooking, the art of pottery, the art of weaving, can be traced along the lines of their gradual improvement. Music begins with the rattle and drum, which in one form or another have retained their place throughout the history of civilization, while the pipe and stringed instruments represent a later achievement of musical art” (2). This approach was based on the belief that each element or type of culture develops independently, and the progress of culture is the gradual displacement of less perfect types by more perfect ones. Moreover, the evolution of each species or element of culture was studied in isolation, without connection with the evolution of other species. Culture in this context was presented as a collection of species, losing its integrity and internal unity.

The most important element of Tylor's methodology was the theory of "survivals". By relic, he understood rituals, customs, etc., which, being, by force of habit, transferred from one stage of culture characteristic of it to another, later one, remain a living testimony or monument of the past. The scientist believed that at first they have a mythological content, and then acquire a metaphorical character. Tylor believed that from this living evidence of an older culture it was possible to reconstruct the historical past. At the same time, the scientist believed that mystical and ecstatic practices are harmful relics that do not fit into the educational-rationalistic way of life of a civilized society.

The methods used by Tylor for the natural scientific study of cultural phenomena were subsequently called typological comparison and became an integral part of the comparative historical method.

As for Tylor's research topics, his favorite topic was religious culture. The scientist studied the development of religious ideas among various peoples of the world from isolated animistic beliefs, fetishism, totemism to established polytheistic systems and modern world religions. He created an animistic concept of religion. In Tylor's interpretation, animism is the “minimum of religion,” the first religion that appeared along with the separation of man from the animal kingdom and the emergence of culture. It represents the basis of the primary source of archaic and modern religions.

A prominent representative of evolutionism is James George Fraser(1854 - 1941) - English (Scottish) anthropologist, folklorist, historian of religion. Fraser's main works: “The Golden Bough”, “Folklore in the Old Testament”. “Totemism and exogamy” “Reverence for nature.”

Fraser is an armchair scientist; he received research materials from missionaries who lived in the colonies, as well as from special questionnaires sent to them. Fraser's main study is “The Golden Bough,” which presents extensive material on primitive magic, totemism, animism, taboos, folklore, and customs. A distinctive feature of Fraser's research is the desire to understand, explain, and build a hierarchy of such cultural phenomena as myths, customs, and rituals. He is considered the creator historical approach to the Holy Scriptures, within which Holy Bible is considered as a source of information about real events in the life of mankind. Fraser undertook a comparative study Old Testament and mythologies of other peoples. He put forward the idea of ​​the origin of myth from ritual, the connection of Christianity with the ancient cult of dying and resurrecting gods, etc.

Scientist formulates theory of evolution human thinking. Starting from the idea of ​​unity mental nature man, Fraser identifies three stages in the evolution of human thinking: magical, religious and scientific, corresponding to three ways of relating to nature.

Magical thinking is based on the idea that the natural world is governed by impersonal and unchanging laws and that there are causal connections between ritual practices and natural events. Magic in general relies on superficial associations and analogical thinking. At the stage of magical thinking, a person believed in his witchcraft abilities, in his magical power.

Religious thinking personifies natural forces; it is based on belief in supernatural beings that control the world. Accordingly, religious thinking sees causal connections between religious practices and natural phenomena. At the stage of religious thinking, a person is inclined to attribute supernatural abilities to the gods, the spirits to whom he turns with requests.

Scientific thinking is aimed at identifying the real causal relationships of natural phenomena; to achieve this goal, it uses logical-experimental methods. Knowledge of real causality helps a person to control natural phenomena. On the stage scientific thinking the conviction is born that it is possible to influence the natural world only if one knows its laws.

Fraser's merit is the introduction of the comparative method into anthropology.

A prominent representative of evolutionism is also an American anthropologist, author of the works: “Systems of kinship and properties in the human family”, “Ancient society” Lewis Henry Morgan(1818 - 1881). Morgan was a supporter of the evolutionist idea of ​​uniform development of all peoples. Morgan's most important achievement was the substantiation of evolutionary series by the facts of field research. The scientist carried out comparative studies of kinship facts based on the culture of North American Indian tribes, as a result of which he showed that it was the genus that was the “primary cell” of primitive society. Fraser divided the history of mankind into two periods: the early, characterized by the tribal organization of the social system, and the later, determined by other territorial, political and economic methods of social organization.

Morgan can be considered the forerunner of the “materialist understanding of history,” since he believed that the development of productive forces and technology lies at the basis of cultural progress. Morgan considered collective ownership of land to be the original form of property. Private property became dominant, in his vision, in connection with the general growth of productive forces. Morgan periodizes the history of ancient culture on the basis of “inventions and discoveries.” The most important historical milestones that marked the transition from one type of culture to another, in his vision, were: the making of fire, the invention of the bow, pottery, agriculture, cattle breeding, and iron processing. He combined the idea of ​​natural evolution with the idea of ​​progress of the human mind. Morgan believed that the main objective progress - the common good of humanity, which will be achieved as a result of the establishment of social harmony and the dominance of reason over private arbitrariness

One of the main theorists of neo-evolutionism is an American anthropologist, cultural scientist, methodologist, author of the works: “The Science of Culture”, “The Evolution of Culture”, “The Concept of Cultural Systems: The Key to Understanding Tribes and Nations” Leslie Alvin White(1900 - 1975). White introduced the term “cultural studies” into science. He proposed to distinguish between three types of processes in culture and the same number of methods for interpreting it. Firstly, these are time processes that represent a chronological sequence unique events, their study, in White's definition, is history. Secondly, these are formal processes - timeless, structural and functional aspects of phenomena, studied within the framework of structural and functional analysis. Thirdly, these are formal-temporal processes in which phenomena appear as a temporal sequence of forms and which are considered by the evolutionary method.

The starting point of White's evolutionary theory is the idea that cultural elements cannot exist independently of each other; they are combined into forms of culture. These forms undergo changes over time. According to White, evolution is a process in which, in chronological sequence, one form grows out of another and turns into a third. The scientist claims that if we trace the development of axes, looms, writing, legislation, public organizations, mathematics, philosophy, then one can see a consistent change in the forms of their existence. The scientist actively uses the concepts of stages of evolution, progress and proves that different states of culture can and should be assessed and compared using the words “higher”, “more developed”. White believes that the evolution of cultural forms can be viewed both from a unilinear and multilinear perspective.

White presents culture as a system consisting of three horizontal layers: technological at the base, philosophical at the top, and social in between. This picture, in White's vision, corresponds to their relative roles in the cultural process. The technological system is primary, it lies at the foundation. The social system is a technological function. A philosophical system reflects social relations. “The technological factor is thus a determinant of the cultural system as a whole. It determines the form of social systems, and technology and society together determine the content and direction of philosophy. Of course, it cannot be said that social systems do not in any way influence technological processes or that philosophy does not have any influence on the social and technological systems. Both are certainly happening. But influencing is one thing; defining is another,” writes White(3). The main source of cultural development, according to White, is the development of technology. The core of White's concept of universal cultural evolutionism is the law according to which cultural evolution is a function of energy per inhabitant per year. Evolution is thus understood by White as an increase in the amount of energy used. For him, the energy supply of a society acts as a criterion for the development of cultures. The history of culture, as represented by the anthropologist, appears as a battle between people and nature for an ever-increasing level of control over energy. The first level and source of energy was human body- human muscular strength. The era of human energy is being replaced by the era of conquering solar energy in the form of cultivation of cultivated plants and the use of domestic animals. Then come the eras of wind, water, fossil fuels and nuclear energy.

The level of cultural development is determined, according to White, by three indicators:

1. The amount of energy used per capita;

2. The efficiency of technological means by which energy is extracted and put to the service of man;

3. The number of items and services produced to satisfy human needs (2).

The scientist proposes to determine the level of cultural development using the formula: E T = C, in which C denotes the level of cultural development, E is the amount of energy consumed per year per capita, T is the degree of efficiency of the tools used to extract and use energy (5) .

White believes that each method of harnessing energy corresponds to certain cultural values, a certain ideology and a certain social structure.

Related information.

July 21, 2016

Global evolutionism and the modern scientific picture of the world is a topic to which many researchers have devoted their works. Currently, it is becoming increasingly popular because it addresses the most important scientific issues.

The concept of global (universal) evolutionism assumes that the structure of the world is consistently improving. The world in it is considered as an integrity, which allows us to talk about the unity of the general laws of existence and makes it possible to make the universe “commensurate” with man, to correlate it with him. The concept of global evolutionism, its history, basic principles and concepts are discussed in this article.

Background

The idea of ​​world development is one of the most important in European civilization. In its simplest forms (Kantian cosmogony, epigenesis, preformationism) it penetrated into natural science back in the 18th century. Already the 19th century can rightfully be called the century of evolution. Theoretical modeling of objects characterized by development began to be given great attention, first in geology, and then in biology and sociology.

The teachings of Charles Darwin, the research of G. Spencer

Charles Darwin was the first to apply the principle of evolutionism to the realm of reality, thus laying the foundations of modern theoretical biology. Herbert Spencer made an attempt to project his ideas into sociology. This scientist proved that the concept of evolution can be applied to various areas of the world that do not belong to the subject of biology. However, classical natural science as a whole did not accept this idea. Evolving systems for a long time were considered by scientists as a random deviation resulting from local disturbances. Physicists made the first attempt to extend this concept beyond the social and biological sciences by hypothesizing that the universe is expanding.

Big Bang concept

The data obtained by astronomers confirmed the untenability of the opinion that the Universe is stationary. Scientists have found that it has been developing since the Big Bang, which, according to the assumption, provided the energy for its development. This concept appeared in the 40s of the last century, and in the 1970s it was finally established. Thus, evolutionary ideas penetrated into cosmology. The concept of the Big Bang significantly changed the understanding of how matter came into being in the Universe.

Only by the end of the 20th century did natural science receive methodological and theoretical means for the formation of a unified model of evolution, the discovery of general laws of nature that link into one whole the emergence of the Universe, the Solar system, planet Earth, life and, finally, man and society. Universal (global) evolutionism is such a model.

The emergence of global evolutionism

In the early 80s of the last century, the concept that interests us entered modern philosophy. Global evolutionism began to be considered for the first time in the study of integrative phenomena in science, which are associated with the generalization of evolutionary knowledge accumulated in various branches of natural science. For the first time, this term began to define the desire of such disciplines as geology, biology, physics and astronomy to generalize the mechanisms of evolution, to extrapolate. At least, this is the meaning that was put into the concept that interests us at first.

Academician N. N. Moiseev pointed out that global evolutionism can bring scientists closer to resolving the issue of meeting the interests of the biosphere and humanity in order to prevent a global environmental catastrophe. The discussion was conducted not only within the framework of methodological science. It is not surprising, because the idea of ​​global evolutionism has a special ideological load, in contrast to traditional evolutionism. The latter, as you remember, was laid down in the works of Charles Darwin.

Global evolutionism and the modern scientific picture of the world

Currently, many assessments of the idea that interests us in the development of a scientific worldview are alternative. In particular, the opinion was expressed that global evolutionism should form the basis of the scientific picture of the world, since it integrates the sciences of man and nature. In other words, it was emphasized that this concept is of fundamental importance in the development of modern natural science. Global evolutionism today is a systemic education. As V.S. Stepin notes, in modern science its provisions are gradually becoming the dominant feature of the synthesis of knowledge. This is the core idea that permeates special pictures of the world. Global evolutionism, according to V.S. Stepin, is global research program, which sets the research strategy. Currently, it exists in many versions and variants, characterized by different levels of conceptual elaboration: from filling ordinary consciousness unsubstantiated statements to detailed concepts that consider in detail the entire course of the evolution of the world.

The essence of global evolutionism

The emergence of this concept is associated with the expansion of the boundaries of the evolutionary approach accepted in the social and biological sciences. The fact of the existence of qualitative leaps to the biological, and from it to the social world, is in many ways a mystery. It can be comprehended only by assuming the necessity of such transitions between other types of movement. In other words, based on the fact of the existence of the evolution of the world in the later stages of history, we can assume that it as a whole is an evolutionary system. This means that as a result of consistent change, all other types of movement were formed, in addition to social and biological.

This statement can be considered as the most general formulation of what global evolutionism is. Let us briefly outline its main principles. This will help you better understand what is being said.

Basic principles

The paradigm that interests us made itself felt as a mature concept and an important component of the modern picture of the world in the last third of the last century in the works of cosmology specialists (A. D. Ursula, N. N. Moiseeva).

According to N. N. Moiseev, the following basic principles underlie global evolutionism:

• The Universe is a single self-developing system.
• The development of systems, their evolution, is directional: it follows the path of increasing their diversity, increasing the complexity of these systems, and also reducing their stability.
• Random factors that influence development are inevitably present in all evolutionary processes.
• Heredity dominates the Universe: the present and future depend on the past, but they are not uniquely determined by it.
• Consideration of the dynamics of the world as a constant selection, in which the system selects the most real ones from many different virtual states.
• The presence of bifurcation states is not denied; as a result, further evolution becomes fundamentally unpredictable, since random factors act during the transition period.

The Universe in the concept of global evolutionism

The Universe appears in it as a natural whole, developing in time. Global evolutionism is the idea that the entire history of the Universe is considered as a single process. The cosmic, biological, chemical and social types of evolution in it are interconnected successively and genetically.

Interaction with various fields of knowledge

Evolutionism is the most important component of the evolutionary-synergetic paradigm in modern science. It is understood not in the traditional sense (Darwinian), but through the idea of ​​universal (global) evolutionism.

The primary task of developing the concept that interests us is to bridge the gaps between various areas of existence. Its supporters concentrate on those areas of knowledge that can be extrapolated to the entire universe and that could connect different fragments of existence into some kind of unity. Such disciplines are evolutionary biology, thermodynamics, and Lately makes a great contribution to global evolutionism and synergetics.

However, the concept that interests us at the same time reveals contradictions between the second law of thermodynamics and the evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin. The latter proclaims the selection of states and forms of living things, the strengthening of order, and the first - an increase in the measure of chaos (entropy).

The problem of the anthropic principle

Global evolutionism emphasizes that the development of the world as a whole is aimed at increasing structural organization. According to this concept, the entire history of the Universe is a single process of self-organization, evolution, and self-development of matter. Global evolutionism is a principle that requires a deep understanding of the logic of the development of the Universe, the cosmic order of things. This concept currently has multi-faceted coverage. Scientists consider its axiological, logical-methodological and ideological aspects. The problem of the anthropic principle is of particular interest. Discussions on this issue are still ongoing. This principle has close connection with the idea of ​​global evolutionism. It is often seen as the most modern version of it.

The anthropic principle is that the emergence of humanity was possible due to certain large-scale properties of the Universe. If they were different, then there would be no one to understand the world. This principle was put forward by B. Carter several decades ago. According to him, there is a relationship between the existence of intelligence in the Universe and its parameters. This led to the question of how random the parameters of our world are, and how connected they are to each other. What happens if there is a slight change in them? As the analysis showed, even a small change in the basic physical parameters will lead to the fact that life, and therefore intelligence, simply cannot exist in the Universe.

Carter expressed the relationship between the emergence of intelligence in the Universe and its parameters in strong and weak formulations. The weak anthropic principle only states the fact that the conditions existing in it do not contradict the existence of man. The strong anthropic principle implies a more rigid relationship. The Universe, according to him, must be such that at a certain stage of development the existence of observers is allowed in it.

Coevolution

In the theory of global evolutionism, such a concept as “coevolution” is also very important. This term is used to designate a new stage in which the existence of man and nature is consistent. The concept of coevolution is based on the fact that people, changing the biosphere in order to adapt it to their needs, must change themselves in order to meet the objective requirements of nature. This concept in a concentrated form expresses the experience of humanity in the course of history, which contains certain imperatives and regulations of socio-natural interaction.

Finally

Global evolutionism and the modern picture of the world are very actual topic in natural science. This article discussed only basic issues and concepts. The problems of global evolutionism can be studied for a very long time if desired.

Global evolutionism is an integrative research direction that takes into account the dynamics of the development of the inorganic, organic and social worlds. It is based on the idea of ​​the unity of the universe and the idea that the whole world is a huge evolving system. In modern philosophy of science, global evolutionism is given one of the central places. The concept of global evolutionism took shape in the 80s. XX century Coming out of the depths natural sciences, based on the laws of the Universe, it is distinguished by its universality and enormous integrative potential.

Global evolutionism includes four types of evolution: cosmic, chemical, biological and social evolution - uniting them by genetic and structural continuity.

Along with the desire to unite ideas about living and inanimate nature, social life and technology, one of the goals of global evolutionism is the need to integrate natural science, social science, humanitarian and technical knowledge, i.e. global evolutionism claims to create a new type of holistic knowledge that combines scientific, methodological and philosophical foundations. The emergence of synergetics also indicates the search for global and general evolutionary patterns that universally unite the development of systems of various natures.

According to V.S. Stepin, the substantiation of global evolutionism was facilitated by three most important modern scientific approaches: the theory of a non-stationary Universe, the concept of the biosphere and noosphere, as well as the ideas of synergetics.

Evolutionary processes of space, star groups, clusters and galaxies, which are studied by astronomy are probabilistic in nature. They are described in the language of statistical laws. Dynamic laws apply to the evolution of stars and planets. In the evolution of living things, one of the important postulates is the statement about the random nature of mutations. The anthropic principle fixes the connection between the properties of the expanding Universe and the possibility of the emergence of life in it. The properties of our Universe are determined by the presence of fundamental physical constants, with a slight change in which the structure of the Universe would be different from the existing one. The hypothetical nature of the idea of ​​the anthropic principle does not reduce the significance of the problem of cosmic evolutionism. Global evolutionism also reveals contradictions between the provisions of Darwin's evolutionary theory, which proclaims the selection and strengthening of the orderliness of the forms and states of living things, and the second law of thermodynamics, which proclaims the growth of entropy - a measure of chaos. The chemical form of global evolutionism traces the totality of interatomic compounds and their transformations that occur with the rupture of some atomic bonds and education of others. Within its framework, various classes of compounds and types of chemical reactions are studied.

In understanding global evolutionism, the anthropic principle is important, which fixes the connection between the properties of the expanding Universe and the possibility of the emergence of life in it.

The properties of our Universe are determined by the presence of fundamental physical constants, with a slight change in which the structure of our Universe would be different, different from the existing one.

The hypothetical nature of the anthropic principle does not reduce the significance of cosmic evolution. Global evolutionism reveals contradictions between the provisions of Darwin's evolutionary theory and the second

the beginning of thermodynamics. The first proclaims the selection and strengthening of the orderliness of the forms and states of living things, the second - the growth of entropy - a measure of chaos.

Within the framework of global evolutionism, much attention is paid to biological evolution. Evolutionary teachings (Lamarck, Darwin, etc.) recreated the picture of the natural historical change forms of life, the emergence and transformation of species, the transformation of biogeocenoses and the biosphere. In the 20th century a synthetic theory of evolution arose, in which a synthesis of the main provisions of Darwin's evolutionary theory, modern genetics and a number of the latest biological generalizations was proposed.

Humanity, as a product of natural evolution, is subject to its basic laws. The stage of slow, gradual change in society is called social evolution. Moreover, the changes taking place in society do not occur simultaneously and are multidirectional.

The evolution of human society occurs while maintaining the genetic constants of the species Homo sapiens and is realized through interconnected development processes social structures, social consciousness, production systems, science, technology, material and spiritual culture. The qualitative nature of these interactions is changing due to scientific and technological progress, technoevolution, the speed of which, unlike bioevolution, is constantly increasing. Given the large difference in the rates of bioevolution and technoevolution (three tenths of an order of magnitude), it is impossible to talk about the coevolution of nature and society. Focal and local consequences of degradation environment lead to diseases, mortality, genetic deformity, they are fraught with regional and global consequences.

Therefore, the problem of “coevolution”, which denotes the coordinated existence of nature and humanity, becomes important in the theory of global evolutionism. The mechanisms of humanity’s “growing into nature” include biological, technical and social aspects. This is a complex integrative quality of interactions between micro-, macro-reality and the reality of a global cosmic scale, where one level is superimposed on another, modifies the third under its pressure, etc. Man is inseparable from the biosphere, he lives in it and at the same time he himself forms a part of it. Implementation of the principle of coevolution - necessary condition to secure his future. The collective mind and collective will of humanity must be capable of ensuring the joint development (coevolution) of nature and society.