Общество и неестественные науки
Научная статья
Для цитирования
Тамбовцев В. Л. Общество и неестественные науки // Управление наукой: теория и практика. 2025. Том 7. № 2. С. 210-219. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2025.7.2.13 EDN: WORNDV
Аннотация
Взаимодействие общества с общественными науками отличается от его отношений с естественными науками. Ведь развитие последних может производить информацию, на основе которой создаются различные технологии, улучшающие условия и качество жизни больших масс или отдельных групп населения, в то время как многие из результатов занятия современными социальными науками приносят пользу преимущественно тем, кто этим занимается. Конечно, исключения бывают, но не всегда. В статье обсуждаются две основные причины этого: во-первых, широкое распространение среди всех граждан народных (наивных, интуитивных) социальных теорий, зачастую заменяющих лицам, принимающим решения, опору на научные результаты, и во-вторых, проводимое рядом методологов социальных наук противопоставление объектов, изучаемых естественными и социальными науками, с упором на то, что в последних имеет смысл проводить в основном качественные исследования, сводящиеся к выявлению субъективного понимания причин или смыслов того, почему люди ведут себя так, а не иначе, в то время как выявление регулярностей слишком сложно, чтобы этим заниматься. В завершение обсуждается, можно ли преодолеть эти причины.
Ключевые слова:
социальные науки, народные теории, качественные исследования, общество, естественные науки, неестественные науки
Литература
1. Wallerstein I. World-systems analysis. In: Giddens A., Turner J. H., eds. Social theory today. Stanford, CA : Stanford University Press; 1987. P. 309–324.
2. MacIver R. M., Page C. H. Society: An introductory analysis. London ; Basingstoke : The Macmillan Press LTD; 1950. xviii, 491 p.
3. Osipov G. V., Naletova A. D. Society [Obshchestvo]. In: Russian sociological encyclopedia [Rossiiskaya sotsiologicheskaya entsiklopediya]. Moscow : Norma ; Infra-M; 1998. P. 330–331. (In Russ.).
4. Osipova N. G. Conceptualization of the society category in the history of sociology: Key discussions. Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 18. Sociology and Political Science. 2020;26(2):7–34. (In Russ.). DOI 10.24290/1029-3736-2020-26-2-7-34.
5. Sorokin P. A. The system of sociology [Sistema sotsiologii]. Moscow : Astrel; 2008. 1003 p. (In Russ.). ISBN 978-5-271-14765-4.
6. Gerstenberg T., Tenenbaum J. B. Intuitive theories. In: Waldmann M. R., ed. The Oxford handbook of causal reasoning. New York : Oxford University Press; 2017. Р. 515–548. DOI 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199399550.013.28.
7. Mahr J. B., Csibra G. A short history of theories of intuitive theories. In: Gervain J., Csibra G., Kovács K., eds. A life in cognition: Studies in cognitive science in honor of Csaba Pléh. Cham : Springer; 2022. P. 219–232. DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-66175-5_16.
8. Malle B. F. People’s folk theory of behavior. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. 1997;19:478–483.
9. Rubin P. H. Folk Economics. Southern Economic Journal. 2003;70(1):157–171. DOI 10.2307/1061637.
10. Boyer P., Petersen M. B. Folk-economic beliefs: An evolutionary cognitive model. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2017;41:e158. DOI 10.1017/S0140525X17001960.
11. Leiser D., Shemesh Y. Introduction: Folk-economic beliefs. In: Leiser D., Shemesh Y. How we misunderstand economics and why it matters: The psychology of bias, distortion and conspiracy. London : Routledge; 2018. P. 1–9.
12. Odum H. W. Folk sociology as a subject field for the historical study of total human society and the empirical study of group behavior. Social Forces. 1953;31(3):193–223. DOI 10.2307/2574217.
13. Churchland P. M. Folk psychology and the explanation of human behavior. Philosophical Perspectives. 1989;3:225–241. DOI 10.2307/2214269.
14. Stich S., Nichols S. Folk psychology: Simulation or tacit theory? Mind & Language. 1992;7(1–2):35–71. DOI 10.1111/j.1468-0017.1992.tb00196.x.
15. Srnicek N., Williams A. Inventing the future: Postcapitalism and a world without work. Revised and updated ed. London ; New York : Verso; 2016. vii, 263 p. ISBN 978-1-784-78-622-9.
16. Drumm L. Folk pedagogies and pseudo-theories: How lecturers rationalise their digital teaching. Research in Learning Technology. 2019;27:1–17. DOI 10.25304/rlt.v27.2094.
17. McCloskey M. Intuitive physics. Scientific American. 1983;248(4):122–131. DOI 10.1038/scientificamerican0483-122.
18. Fragaszy D. M., Mangalam M. Folk physics in the twenty-first century: Understanding tooling as embodied. Animal Behavior and Cognition. 2020;7(3):457–473. DOI 10.26451/abc.07.03.12.2020.
19. Au T. K. Developing an intuitive understanding of substance kinds. Cognitive Psychology. 1994;27(1):71–111. DOI 10.1006/cogp.1994.1012.
20. Hunn E. Folk biology: A frontier of cognitive anthropology. Reviews in Anthropology. 1975;2(2):266–274. DOI 10.1080/00988157.1975.9977170.
21. Waxman S., Medin D., Ross N. Folkbiological reasoning from a cross-cultural developmental perspective: Early essentialist notions are shaped by cultural beliefs. Developmental Psychology. 2007;43(2):294–308. DOI 10.1037/0012-1649.43.2.294.
22. Kitchener R. F. Folk epistemology: An introduction. New Ideas in Psychology. 2002;20(2–3):89–105. DOI 10.1016/S0732-118X(02)00003-X.
23. Mercier H. The social origins of folk epistemology. Review of Philosophy and Psychology. 2010;1(4):499–514. DOI 10.1007/s13164-010-0021-4.
24. Gerken M. On folk epistemology: How we think and talk about knowledge. Oxford : Oxford University Press; 2017. xv, 332 p. DOI 10.1093/oso/9780198803454.001.0001.
25. Haas P. When does power listen to truth? A constructivist approach to the policy process. Journal of European Public Policy. 2004;11(4):569–592. DOI 10.1080/1350176042000248034.
26. Newman J., Cherney A., Head B. W. Do policy makers use academic research? Reexamining the “two communities” theory of research utilization. Public Administration Review. 2015;76(1):24–32. DOI 10.1111/puar.12464.
27. Nelson J. P., Lindsay S., Bozeman B. The last 20 years of empirical research on government utilization of academic social science research: A state-of-the-art literature review. Administration & Society. 2023;55(8):1479–1528. DOI 10.1177/00953997231172923.
28. Kaplan A. The conduct of inquiry: Methodology for behavioral science. San Francisco, CA : Chandler Publishing; 1964. xix, 428 p. ISBN 9780810201446.
29. Diesing P. Patterns of discovery in the social sciences. Chicago, IL : Aldine ; New York : Atherton; 1971. x, 350 p. ISBN 0-202-30101-X.
30. Yilmaz K. Comparison of quantitative and qualitative research traditions: Epistemological, theoretical, and methodological differences. European Journal of Education. 2013;48(2):311–325. DOI 10.1111/ejed.12014.
31. Newman I., Ridenour C. Qualitative-quantitative research: A false dichotomy. In: Newman I., Ridenour C. Qualitative-quantitative research methodology: Exploring the interactive continuum. Carbondale, IL ; Edwardsville, IL : Southern Illinois University Press; 1998. P. 1–12.
32. Bryman A. The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: A question of method or epistemology? The British Journal of Sociology. 1984;35(1):75–92. DOI 10.2307/590553.
33. Tobin G. A., Begley C. M. Methodological rigour within a qualitative framework. The Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2004;48(4):388–396. DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03207.x.
34. Lanka E., Lanka S., Rostron A., Singh P. Why we need qualitative research in management studies. Revista de Administração Contemporânea. 2021;25(2):e200297. DOI 10.1590/1982-7849rac2021200297.en.
35. Turk-Browne N. B., Jungé J. A., Scholl B. J. The automaticity of visual statistical learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2005;134(4):552–564. DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.134.4.552.
36. Zhao J., Al-Aidroos N., Turk-Browne N. B. Attention is spontaneously biased toward regularities. Psychological Science. 2013;24(5):667–677. DOI 10.1177/0956797612460407.
37. Summerfield C., de Lange F. P. Expectation in perceptual decision making: Neural and computational mechanisms. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2014;15(11):745–756. DOI 10.1038/nrn3838.
38. Stevens S. S. On the theory of scales of measurement. Science. 1946;103(2684):677–680. DOI 10.1126/science.103.2684.677.
39. Suppes P., Zinnes J. Basic measurement theory. In: Luce R. D., Bush R. R., Galanter E., еds. Handbook of mathematical psychology. Chichester : John Wiley & Sons; 1963. Vol. 1. P. 1–76.
40. Shiller R. J. Narratives about technology-induced job degradation then and now. Journal of Policy Modeling. 2019;41(3):477–488. DOI 10.1016/j.jpolmod.2019.03.015.
41. Tambovtsev V. L., Valitova L. A. Subjective well-being as a unit for narrative analysis. Moscow University Economics Bulletin. 2025;60(1):60–81. (In Russ.). DOI 10.55959/MSU0130-0105-6-60-1-4.
42. Stevens S. S. The operational definition of psychological concepts. Psychological Review. 1935;42(6):517–527. DOI 10.1037/h0056973.
43. Lundberg G. A. Operational definitions in the social sciences. The American Journal of Sociology. 1942;47(5):727–743. DOI 10.1086/219004.
44. Adler F. Operational definitions in sociology. The American Journal of Sociology. 1947;52(5):438–444. DOI 10.1086/220037.
2. MacIver R. M., Page C. H. Society: An introductory analysis. London ; Basingstoke : The Macmillan Press LTD; 1950. xviii, 491 p.
3. Osipov G. V., Naletova A. D. Society [Obshchestvo]. In: Russian sociological encyclopedia [Rossiiskaya sotsiologicheskaya entsiklopediya]. Moscow : Norma ; Infra-M; 1998. P. 330–331. (In Russ.).
4. Osipova N. G. Conceptualization of the society category in the history of sociology: Key discussions. Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 18. Sociology and Political Science. 2020;26(2):7–34. (In Russ.). DOI 10.24290/1029-3736-2020-26-2-7-34.
5. Sorokin P. A. The system of sociology [Sistema sotsiologii]. Moscow : Astrel; 2008. 1003 p. (In Russ.). ISBN 978-5-271-14765-4.
6. Gerstenberg T., Tenenbaum J. B. Intuitive theories. In: Waldmann M. R., ed. The Oxford handbook of causal reasoning. New York : Oxford University Press; 2017. Р. 515–548. DOI 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199399550.013.28.
7. Mahr J. B., Csibra G. A short history of theories of intuitive theories. In: Gervain J., Csibra G., Kovács K., eds. A life in cognition: Studies in cognitive science in honor of Csaba Pléh. Cham : Springer; 2022. P. 219–232. DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-66175-5_16.
8. Malle B. F. People’s folk theory of behavior. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. 1997;19:478–483.
9. Rubin P. H. Folk Economics. Southern Economic Journal. 2003;70(1):157–171. DOI 10.2307/1061637.
10. Boyer P., Petersen M. B. Folk-economic beliefs: An evolutionary cognitive model. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2017;41:e158. DOI 10.1017/S0140525X17001960.
11. Leiser D., Shemesh Y. Introduction: Folk-economic beliefs. In: Leiser D., Shemesh Y. How we misunderstand economics and why it matters: The psychology of bias, distortion and conspiracy. London : Routledge; 2018. P. 1–9.
12. Odum H. W. Folk sociology as a subject field for the historical study of total human society and the empirical study of group behavior. Social Forces. 1953;31(3):193–223. DOI 10.2307/2574217.
13. Churchland P. M. Folk psychology and the explanation of human behavior. Philosophical Perspectives. 1989;3:225–241. DOI 10.2307/2214269.
14. Stich S., Nichols S. Folk psychology: Simulation or tacit theory? Mind & Language. 1992;7(1–2):35–71. DOI 10.1111/j.1468-0017.1992.tb00196.x.
15. Srnicek N., Williams A. Inventing the future: Postcapitalism and a world without work. Revised and updated ed. London ; New York : Verso; 2016. vii, 263 p. ISBN 978-1-784-78-622-9.
16. Drumm L. Folk pedagogies and pseudo-theories: How lecturers rationalise their digital teaching. Research in Learning Technology. 2019;27:1–17. DOI 10.25304/rlt.v27.2094.
17. McCloskey M. Intuitive physics. Scientific American. 1983;248(4):122–131. DOI 10.1038/scientificamerican0483-122.
18. Fragaszy D. M., Mangalam M. Folk physics in the twenty-first century: Understanding tooling as embodied. Animal Behavior and Cognition. 2020;7(3):457–473. DOI 10.26451/abc.07.03.12.2020.
19. Au T. K. Developing an intuitive understanding of substance kinds. Cognitive Psychology. 1994;27(1):71–111. DOI 10.1006/cogp.1994.1012.
20. Hunn E. Folk biology: A frontier of cognitive anthropology. Reviews in Anthropology. 1975;2(2):266–274. DOI 10.1080/00988157.1975.9977170.
21. Waxman S., Medin D., Ross N. Folkbiological reasoning from a cross-cultural developmental perspective: Early essentialist notions are shaped by cultural beliefs. Developmental Psychology. 2007;43(2):294–308. DOI 10.1037/0012-1649.43.2.294.
22. Kitchener R. F. Folk epistemology: An introduction. New Ideas in Psychology. 2002;20(2–3):89–105. DOI 10.1016/S0732-118X(02)00003-X.
23. Mercier H. The social origins of folk epistemology. Review of Philosophy and Psychology. 2010;1(4):499–514. DOI 10.1007/s13164-010-0021-4.
24. Gerken M. On folk epistemology: How we think and talk about knowledge. Oxford : Oxford University Press; 2017. xv, 332 p. DOI 10.1093/oso/9780198803454.001.0001.
25. Haas P. When does power listen to truth? A constructivist approach to the policy process. Journal of European Public Policy. 2004;11(4):569–592. DOI 10.1080/1350176042000248034.
26. Newman J., Cherney A., Head B. W. Do policy makers use academic research? Reexamining the “two communities” theory of research utilization. Public Administration Review. 2015;76(1):24–32. DOI 10.1111/puar.12464.
27. Nelson J. P., Lindsay S., Bozeman B. The last 20 years of empirical research on government utilization of academic social science research: A state-of-the-art literature review. Administration & Society. 2023;55(8):1479–1528. DOI 10.1177/00953997231172923.
28. Kaplan A. The conduct of inquiry: Methodology for behavioral science. San Francisco, CA : Chandler Publishing; 1964. xix, 428 p. ISBN 9780810201446.
29. Diesing P. Patterns of discovery in the social sciences. Chicago, IL : Aldine ; New York : Atherton; 1971. x, 350 p. ISBN 0-202-30101-X.
30. Yilmaz K. Comparison of quantitative and qualitative research traditions: Epistemological, theoretical, and methodological differences. European Journal of Education. 2013;48(2):311–325. DOI 10.1111/ejed.12014.
31. Newman I., Ridenour C. Qualitative-quantitative research: A false dichotomy. In: Newman I., Ridenour C. Qualitative-quantitative research methodology: Exploring the interactive continuum. Carbondale, IL ; Edwardsville, IL : Southern Illinois University Press; 1998. P. 1–12.
32. Bryman A. The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: A question of method or epistemology? The British Journal of Sociology. 1984;35(1):75–92. DOI 10.2307/590553.
33. Tobin G. A., Begley C. M. Methodological rigour within a qualitative framework. The Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2004;48(4):388–396. DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03207.x.
34. Lanka E., Lanka S., Rostron A., Singh P. Why we need qualitative research in management studies. Revista de Administração Contemporânea. 2021;25(2):e200297. DOI 10.1590/1982-7849rac2021200297.en.
35. Turk-Browne N. B., Jungé J. A., Scholl B. J. The automaticity of visual statistical learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2005;134(4):552–564. DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.134.4.552.
36. Zhao J., Al-Aidroos N., Turk-Browne N. B. Attention is spontaneously biased toward regularities. Psychological Science. 2013;24(5):667–677. DOI 10.1177/0956797612460407.
37. Summerfield C., de Lange F. P. Expectation in perceptual decision making: Neural and computational mechanisms. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2014;15(11):745–756. DOI 10.1038/nrn3838.
38. Stevens S. S. On the theory of scales of measurement. Science. 1946;103(2684):677–680. DOI 10.1126/science.103.2684.677.
39. Suppes P., Zinnes J. Basic measurement theory. In: Luce R. D., Bush R. R., Galanter E., еds. Handbook of mathematical psychology. Chichester : John Wiley & Sons; 1963. Vol. 1. P. 1–76.
40. Shiller R. J. Narratives about technology-induced job degradation then and now. Journal of Policy Modeling. 2019;41(3):477–488. DOI 10.1016/j.jpolmod.2019.03.015.
41. Tambovtsev V. L., Valitova L. A. Subjective well-being as a unit for narrative analysis. Moscow University Economics Bulletin. 2025;60(1):60–81. (In Russ.). DOI 10.55959/MSU0130-0105-6-60-1-4.
42. Stevens S. S. The operational definition of psychological concepts. Psychological Review. 1935;42(6):517–527. DOI 10.1037/h0056973.
43. Lundberg G. A. Operational definitions in the social sciences. The American Journal of Sociology. 1942;47(5):727–743. DOI 10.1086/219004.
44. Adler F. Operational definitions in sociology. The American Journal of Sociology. 1947;52(5):438–444. DOI 10.1086/220037.
Статья
Поступила: 06.05.2025
Опубликована: 25.06.2025
Форматы цитирования
Другие форматы цитирования:
APA
Тамбовцев, В. Л. (2025). Общество и неестественные науки. Управление наукой: теория и практика, 7(2), 210-219. https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2025.7.2.13
Раздел
Дискуссия
