CC BY
6ПЕДАГОГИЧЕСКИЕ НАУКИ
CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES AIMED AT MASTERING SCIENTIFIC COGNITIVE METHODS IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS
FIRADUN NADIR IBRAHIMOV,
doctor of pedagogical sciences, professor Shaki Branch of Azerbaijan State Pedagogical University Shaki, Azerbaijan
GULARA ABDURAHMAN ABDULLAYEVA,
doctor of Philosophy in Philology, associate professor Shaki Branch of Azerbaijan State Pedagogical University, Shaki, Azerbaijan
Abstract. In the article, the relevance of the students' assimilation of the characteristic features of scientific cognitive methods in the process of teaching subjects is justified and methods of scientific cognition a) empirical research (observation, comparison, analogy, measurement, experiment); b) empirical-theoretical methods of scientific research: c) methods of theoretical research (abstract and concrete, idealization, formalization, axiomatic method) are given scientific comments on the characteristic features of a number of components contained in selected groups (enough to generalize). These, that is, information about the specific features of scientific cognitive methods aimed at mastering in the process of teaching subjects, act as an "enabling component" in the preparation of students for both professional and scientific activities, as well as in their intellectual skills. The content of the article also includes an interpretation of metatheoretical and metacognitive methods that have a significant impact on the effectiveness of the educational process.
Key words. Scientific cognition, empirical and theoretical knowledge, metacognition, forms of scientific cognition.
Relevance of the research topic. It is known that the students have the opportunity to master the necessary part of the human experience that has been reworked and turned into a system for a defined purpose, in accordance with the nature (philosophy) of the educational space they are surrounded by. They acquire the elements (values) contained in human culture over a period of time either ready-made or through independent creativity. The establishment of the desired second state takes place when the student is able to assert himself at the level of the subject of the relevant intellectual skills.
According to our opinion, one of the important components of intellectual skills is the information about the characteristic features of the forms of action (in other words, methods) of real spiritual development. In the educational process, identifying the characteristic features aimed at mastering scientific cognitive methods consists in turning them into an "enabling component" in the student's intellectual abilities. This is a complex problem related to the development of a system of tasks to be applied in the process of teaching subjects at different levels of education and the development of their application technology on a scientific-pedagogical basis. There is no doubt that the mentioned problem involves the solution of many issues. One of the important issues to solve this problem is "Distinguishing the characteristic features aimed at mastering scientific cognitive methods in the teaching process". Therefore, despite what has been said, we claim the relevance of the topic of the research work.
Interpretation of the characteristic features aimed at mastering scientific cognitive methods in the teaching process. Our long-term pedagogical and scientific-research experience gives rise to reasonable doubts that a person who is not deeply familiar with the specific features of the forms and methods of scientific cognition can stand at the level of the subject of creative spiritual exploration of truth. Manifestations that are the opposite of what we have said are rarely encountered
in the example of unusual individuals. Therefore, we include among the important merits of this process the introduction of the characteristic features of the methods of scientific cognition to the person who is aimed at mastering the human experience in the educational process that is adequate for different educational spaces (targeting the goals set at the level and levels). Due to the results obtained in the process of mastering systematized knowledge, skills, habits, the interested party (student) who has the opportunity to enrich his personal qualities, benefits from the said opportunity at the level of familiarity with the characteristic features of the methods of scientific cognition, and attains his freedom in a better way. Various studies clearly show that students who are lagging behind in learning are distinguished by their low level of intellectual skills. [6; 80-81] It is known that the idea of the main function of the skills in question is related to the exteriorization of operations; the content of cognitive activity is determined by the idea of operations, and their realization in the process of activity directly depends on the level of intellectual skills. [2; 243]
In the textbooks of psychology (of course, known to us, which we study), the intellectual skills necessary for the organization of mental activity are explained in terms of purposeful perception, rational mastering, effective thinking. A logical question arises here: "How to develop intellectual skills?"
Scientific sources focus on two directions in the answer to this question:
1) Formation of intellectual skills in students through special tasks, which are designed based on the principle of modeling the structure of intellectual skills. As students fulfill them, they can determine the purpose of their work, systematize teaching materials from this point of view, collect materials independently, animate in imagination, etc. they acquire intellectual skills;
2) In the process of forming intellectual skills with special tasks, drawing attention to the knowledge of the characteristics of the students' own cognitive activity.
It should be emphasized here that the issue of "students knowing the characteristics of their own cognitive activity in the process of forming intellectual skills" is studied as a metacognitive system in psychology. For information, let's note that the American psychologist Flayvel studied and described some functions of metacognition in detail. The following can be mentioned among them: 1) Setting the problem and determining its possible solution; 2) To know what cognitive process is necessary to solve the task; 3) Activation of cognitive rules and methods; 4) Confidence in the possibilities of thinking; 5) Trying to solve tasks more efficiently.[3; 63-64]
According to our understanding, the functions of metacognition are realized with familiarity with the characteristic features of the forms and methods of scientific cognition, the acquired information about the characteristic features of the forms and methods of scientific cognition in intellectual skills acts as an "enabling component".
Here we need to highlight a regrettable fact. "Man's self-awareness has always been an actual problem of world philosophy, psychology and pedagogy. They approached a person's self-awareness from the perspective of personality and searched for its roots in the process of formation of a person's ideas about his own "I", but they did not value enough the understanding of the characteristics of a person's own mental world, the world of thinking, and cognitive processes. [2;243]
In order to consciously understand the characteristic features of the methods of scientific cognition, we consider it acceptable to adopt such a way of thinking: "The material world not only has infinite wealth, it is also a unity; qualitatively different objects and events also have an objective commonality and are subject to a number of general laws of development. The scientific method of cognition regulates the path of cognition, allows to take the correct orientation in scientific research, to reach the truth in a more rational way."
From the analysis of the research materials we have collected, from the adequate generalizations of the obtained materials, such a conclusion is obtained that the subject of the way of thinking focused on above is the study of the group of phenomena belonging to a certain field of reality, even the entire material and spiritual world, in addition to special specific methods with a limited field of application in various fields of science. does not hesitate to use the methods applied to the study of objects and
ОФ "Международный научно-исследовательский центр "Endless Light in Science"
phenomena, considers it acceptable to divide the methods into three groups, depending on the extent of the phenomena covered. These groups include: 1) the most general method applied at all stages of each specific process in all areas of reality; 2) General methods of scientific understanding applied in a number of fields of knowledge, even in all sciences; 3) Special methods that are suitable for the application of only certain phenomena of reality and are usually applied only within the limits of a science. It should also be noted that in recent times, metatheoretical methods of scientific cognition have also been discussed.
Unlike the most general method, the general methods of scientific cognition are applied not at all stages of concrete cognitive processes, but at certain moments that aim to reveal certain aspects, properties, and characteristics of the cognitive object; analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, experiment and observation, analogy and modeling, etc. are such methods. [5;44-45]
Under the competent pedagogical influence of the teacher, the student should understand that the most important and special methods of cognition in scientific research are not separate, but inseparable. The influence of the most general method, which is applied at all stages of each specific process in all areas of reality, on the course of cognition and its results is carried out through special methods. Each of the general methods of scientific cognition is similar in many ways to the most general method. This similarity is not only in the fact that many of the general methods are applied in all sciences as the most general method, but also in the fact that general methods such as analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, historical and logical, do not work separately from the dialectical method, but in connection with it. Methods are a form of action on the spiritual realization of reality.
As it is known, in the process of teaching each subject, which has a certain share in the realization of the goals of the educational program, the student acquires a relevant knowledge system. In our opinion, knowledge is the spiritual element of science, the mode of existence of consciousness. Knowledge is a theoretical system that reflects the objective regularities and important relationships of natural and social phenomena and is characterized by its system, logical structure, theoretical and social character. Depending on the structure and nature of the development of knowledge, two levels of it, empirical and theoretical, are now distinguished from each other at a substantial speed. Observation, comparison, measurement, installation, classification and description of experimental results take place at the empirical level, where only individual facts and information about the studied phenomena and processes are collected. [11; 11] At the theoretical level, which is a relatively higher level of scientific understanding, where knowledge is synthesized, scientific hypotheses and theories are established and developed, laws are formulated and logical conclusions are drawn from them, and various hypotheses and theories are reconciled.
It should be clear to the student - future professional or scientist that "the division of knowledge into empirical and theoretical levels is similar to the division of cognition into emotional and logical levels, but it is not the same." [7; 30] If the difference between the emotional and logical levels of cognition generally characterizes the dialectic of the cognitive process, the difference between empirical and theoretical levels only applies to the field of scientific cognition, where emotional and logical cognition are two distinct forms, each of which is carried out by a separate person; it characterizes the dialectic of emotional and logical individual cognition, and empirical and theoretical social cognition. This division also reflects the difference between the applied methods and the information obtained in the cognitive process. Thus, if the emotional level of cognition is characterized by emotion, perception and imagination, and the logical level is characterized by understanding, judgment and mental conclusion, then the empirical level of scientific cognition is characterized by the analysis and systematization of scientific facts based on experiments, observations, comparisons, as well as various inductive methods, theoretical level is characterized by putting forward hypotheses and turning them into theories based on social practice. As a result of idealization and formalization operations carried out at the theoretical level of cognition, mental models are installed, deductive or axiomatic methods are applied to create the theory. It is useful for
ОФ "Международный научно-исследовательский центр "Endless Light in Science"
the student to understand that "theoretical knowledge" and "theory" are not the same thing. Theory is a system of knowledge. But in order to become such a system, knowledge must go a long way. At first, knowledge exists in an empirical form, but as the essence of phenomena is revealed and explained, it gradually turns into theoretical knowledge. The development of theoretical knowledge continues along the line of progress from abstract to concrete. When events and empirical data are explained only from the essence, knowledge becomes a theory. [12; 119] Theory is the form of development of knowledge, the completion of a certain cycle in the rise of knowledge from abstract to concrete. However, this does not mean that the theoretical knowledge does not develop further. On the contrary, the theory is constantly refined and undergoes appropriate changes based on deeper principles. When talking about the relationship between theory and theoretical knowledge, it should be pointed out that not all theoretical knowledge is a theory, any theory is theoretical knowledge because it is a certain system of knowledge gained as a result of understanding the essence of the phenomenon. Different forms of knowledge, in which different objective relationships are determined - empirical and theoretical knowledge are connected in a certain way; theoretical knowledge is based on empirical knowledge, and empirical knowledge is an intermediate link between theoretical knowledge in objective reality. The essence of theoretical knowledge is that it penetrates deeper into objective reality than only empirical. He studies the cognitive object of "empirical knowledge" outside of its historical development, interaction with other objects, and, therefore, its internal contradictions. Although the laws discovered in such an approach express repeated, more continuous connections and relationships of objects, they cannot reveal the cause of these connections and relationships and explain them. Therefore, the logic-sense of empirical thinking is a formal logic related to the transition from the concrete to the abstract-general. [7; 31]
The general methods applied in scientific cognition depend on the level of scientific research and the goal pursued in scientific research. Common methods of scientific cognition include the following methods that have a limited scope of influence: 1) methods applied not to all areas of knowledge, but to certain areas; 2) methods used not at all levels of scientific understanding, but at a certain level. For example, idealization, formalization, and axiomatic methods are used at the theoretical level of cognition, while observation, comparison, measurement, and experimentation are mainly used at its empirical level. 1) methods applied not to all areas of knowledge, but to certain areas; 2) methods used not at all levels of scientific understanding, but at a certain level. For example, idealization, formalization, and axiomatic methods are used at the theoretical level of cognition, while observation, comparison, measurement, and experimentation are mainly used at its empirical level. According to the two levels of scientific research, which are dialectically united with each other -empirical and theoretical levels, it is considered appropriate to divide the general methods of scientific understanding into three large groups: a) methods of empirical research (observation, comparison, analogy, measurement, experiment); b) empirical-theoretical methods of scientific research (abstraction, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, modeling, historical and logical); b) methods of theoretical research (abstract and concrete, idealization, formalization, axiomatic method). [13; 7-8]
Empirical cognition is carried out in the process of experience involving the interaction of the subject and the object, that is, in a process in which the subject does not only reflect the object passively, but also actively interferes with it and changes it appropriately. [7; 35] The main forms of empirical knowledge are observation and experiment. Empirical cognition also includes comparison and measurement operations. The starting point of empirical research is observation, since it includes both experimentation and measurement and can be carried out without experimentation and measurement itself. The main forms of empirical knowledge are observation and experiment. Empirical cognition also includes comparison and measurement operations. The starting point of empirical research is observation, since it includes both experimentation and measurement and can be carried out without experimentation and measurement itself. Mu§ahida dedikda obyektin muntazam olaraq maqsadli suratda qavranilmasi nazarda tutulur. Observation is an active cognitive
ОФ "Международный научно-исследовательский центр "Endless Light in Science"
process based on the work of human senses and its material activity. However, this does not mean that human thinking, knowledge and experience are not involved in the observation process, and human perception of the object does not depend on these factors. On the contrary, the science of psychology has determined that the content and direction of the purposeful perception of the object depends on the knowledge and interest, experience and views of the person, and his attitude to reality. What is important for understanding the nature of observation is not the observation of the object in its natural state or without being influenced by the observer, but the transmission of the agent of communication from the object to the observer. Observations are scientific and non-scientific depending on the goal and task pursued in scientific research.
Scientific observations perform three main functions in empirical research: 1) it consists of setting new problems and putting forward hypotheses, as well as obtaining empirical data necessary for testing these hypotheses; 2) it consists of checking hypotheses and theories, which cannot be directly implemented through experiments; 3) it consists of reconciliation of the results obtained in theoretical studies, verification of their adequacy and authenticity. [14; 63-64] The degree of objectivity and authenticity of the information obtained on the basis of observation: 1) with the conditions under which the observation was carried out; 2) with the level of scientific organization of the observation system; 3) conditioned by the devices and apparatus used. In general, the cognitive capabilities of the observation method mainly depend on the nature and intensity of sensory perception, the degree of perfection of the devices and apparatus used in the observation process, the characteristics of the object of observation, observation conditions, etc. depends on factors.
Despite all its merits, the possibilities of the observation method are not unlimited. This method, which allows to record the properties and relations of the object, does not allow to explain the nature and essence of its properties and relations, to reveal their development trend.
A certain comparison of the facts obtained during the observation process is also carried out. As a result of the collected facts, this comparison, conducted in order to select those that are most suitable for the purpose of the research, acts as a basis for putting forward hypotheses at the empirical level of scientific research. In order to be a productive method of scientific understanding, comparison must meet two main requirements: 1) comparison must be made only between phenomena with objective commonality; 2) in order to understand the objects, the comparison should be made not according to all their signs, but only according to their important, important signs. Objects of interest to the researcher can be compared in two ways: direct and indirect.
Objects and phenomena of reality can be compared in many ways. Among these comparisons, the comparison of the qualitative and quantitative relations of objects is of primary importance. Comparison of objects and processes in terms of quantitative relations can happen in three ways: 1) objects and events can be compared only according to their quantitative characteristics - volume, pace, weight and intensity, considering their qualitative characteristics; 2) it is possible to quantitatively compare different bodies and events in kinetic relationship; 3) the objects and events of reality can be compared according to the various quantitative characteristics they can have within the limits of the size of this quality while maintaining their qualitative state.
The comparison of objects and processes of reality can be carried out on the basis of space-time relations, at different levels of cognition, at the spontaneous-empirical and scientific levels. As a result of these comparisons, certain knowledge is formulated about the common and different signs of events, which differ from each other in their depth and perfection. The spontaneous-empirical level comparison reflecting the external signs and relationships of knowledge and phenomena provides some materials for drawing conclusions about the quantitative differences and similarities of their external signs. The comparison of events at the scientific level explains their essence, the causal relationships of the elements of the studied system and a number of other regularities. [7; 44] It should be taken into account that the comparison made at this level is based on rich empirical knowledge about the studied phenomena.
The comparison also allows to reveal the qualitative stages in the development of the event. Comparison of different stages in the development of the system allows to determine its quality changes. These changes are determined by discovering new important features of the system that were previously unknown.
Through comparison, information about the object is mainly obtained in two different ways: 1) in most cases, this information is the result of comparison; 2) sometimes the main purpose of the comparison is not the "primary" information obtained about the object, but the secondary or derivative information obtained based on the reprocessing of this information. A widespread scientific cognitive method of such elaboration is analogy.
Analogy is usually defined as the similarity of two or more objects and events in any respect. In formal logic, analogy is defined as a transductive type of mental conclusion. The essence of the mental conclusion made on the basis of anology is as follows: Based on the similarity of a number of important signs of two or more objects, the conclusion that a new sign observed in one of them can be possible in the other is drawn.
Reasoning based on analogy has a special role in scientific research. The fact that a mental conclusion made by analogy led to important scientific discoveries is not a unique event in the history of science. Since the mental conclusion made on the basis of analogy occurs after a series of cognitive operations to which the object of cognition is subjected, these operations form the structure of anology as a cognitive method. These operations include 1) gathering knowledge about individual aspects and aspects of the studied object and systematizing them based on certain epistemological principles; 2) the structure of analogy includes the adaptation of the studied object to another object whose properties are better studied; 3) determining the necessary and important relationships between the common features of the adapted object and the features present in the model and transferred to the studied object.
As a research method, anology is used only in those cases when it is not possible to obtain accurate knowledge about the object of cognition with other methods.
In the cognitive process, analogy is also used as a proof method. In this case, it should be taken into account that only analogies, which are not too unlikely, can serve as evidence. The results obtained by analogy can be used as evidence only if there is no doubt about the authenticity of these results.
Observation and comparison are not the only methods of empirical cognition. Along with these methods, the measurement method is also widely used at the empirical level of knowledge. Although the method of measurement is historically derived from the operation of comparison that forms its basis, it is a more powerful and universal method of cognition than comparison. Measurement is one of the important operations of observation and experiment. Measurement is a numerical comparison of quantities characterizing the same quality. Being an empirical cognitive method, measurement is possible only under certain preconditions. The measurement process consists of the following elements: 1) measurement object; 2) measurement unit, that is, standard object; 3) measuring devices; 4) measurement method; 5) the observer, in other words, the subject who carries out the measurement with certain cognitive goals. [10; 7]
The subjective factors in the measurement process include the organization of this process, the selection of measurement methods, the personal quality and persistence of the researcher, his level of preparation and scientific ability, his ability to use measuring devices, etc. includes. Although these subjective factors have a significant impact on obtaining accurate and objective information in the measurement process, the decisive importance here belongs to the correct scientific explanation of the nature and importance of the objective factors that affect the results of the measurement. Therefore, the absoluteization of the subjective factor in the measurement process, and the neglect of its objective side, can lead to the distortion of the information obtained from the measurement. Correct determination of the ratio of objective and subjective factors in this process is of great importance in order to obtain an accurate and objective result during measurement.
ОФ "Международный научно-исследовательский центр "Endless Light in Science"
One of the widespread methods of scientific research is the experiment. In contrast to observation, in the experiment, a person is not satisfied with just observing the phenomena, but also actively interferes with them, selecting some of them and bringing them to an artificial state, in which case it is easier to study their properties than in the natural state. During the course of the experiment, the researcher who is not satisfied with the passive observation of events, but consciously intervenes in their natural course, achieves this in different ways: either by directly affecting the studied process, or by changing the real conditions in which the processes take place. Complementing simple observation with active influence on the process makes the experiment the most effective method of empirical research. [8; 87]
Experimental study of the object has a number of advantages compared to observation: 1) through it, it is possible to select, separate and study the relationships, relationships and aspects of the object being studied that are interesting to the observer; 2) allows to study the properties of the object in the most diverse extreme conditions; 3) the observation, comparison and measurement necessary during the experiment can be repeated many times until accurate information is obtained. [7; 57]
This aspect of the experiment, which makes it especially valuable in science, is determined mainly by two reasons: 1) it is always possible to influence the research object in the experiment; 2) the conditions for observation in the experiment are created by the observer himself, the fact that it is convenient and repeatable makes the experiment one of the important tools for checking scientific considerations and theoretical results.
The experiment also has a number of other advantages: it is possible to accurately determine the conditions in which the experimental event takes place, to change it, to study unobservable phenomena, to create analogs and models of natural processes and to study them more accurately by increasing the speed of these processes, by deeply and accurately understanding the studied phenomena allows to expand its scope and finally to reveal the inner causes of events. Mu§ahida ila muqayisada eksperiment daha daqiq va etibarli naticalar 9ixarmaga imkan vermakla ona nisbatan bir sira ustunluklara malik olsa da, eksperiment mu§ahidasiz mumkun deyildir.
The nature of the experiment is complex. Experiment is a method of material impact of a person on an object, a method of practical assimilation of reality by him. However, the experiment is conducted in order to meet the needs of human life. Therefore, in the experiment, we come across aspects that are characteristic not only for practice, but also for theoretical thinking - the selection and separation of the sides that annoy the researcher and neglecting them from other sides. Therefore, the experiment is a kind of practical abstraction. [15; 116]
As a method of scientific cognition, the experiment is closely related to theoretical thinking. The connection between the experiment and the theory finds its expression in experiments, an idea that is gaining more and more importance in scientific understanding. A thought experiment differs from a real experiment in that the researcher who uses the objects themselves in the real experiment uses images and imagination in the thought experiment.
While performing the thought experiment, the structure and conditions of the real experiment are restored in the mind. A mental experiment includes the following operations: 1) installation of a mental model of an object, idealized conditions and idealized "devices" affecting the model based on certain rules; 2) conscious and planned change of conditions and ensuring its effect on the model; 3) the conscious and accurate application of the idea of objective laws and facts established in science at all stages of the experiment.
The role of thought experiment in scientific understanding is great. The analysis of the thought experiment shows that its main role in scientific research is to justify the proposed principles and hypotheses.
Depending on the purpose, the subject of research, the nature of the experimental technique used and other factors, the experiment is divided into different types. According to its main purpose,
all experiments can be divided into 3 main groups: research, verification, and demonstration experiments.
One of the most universal methods of human mental activity is abstraction. Each step of thought is related to either the process itself or the use of its result. The essence of the abstraction method consists in removing the objects from their unimportant properties, relationships and relationships, and at the same time selecting and separating one or more important aspects of these objects that interest the researcher.
The result of the abstraction process is an abstraction. The main function of both the process of abstraction and its result is that they allow us to replace the complex with a simpler one in cognition, to get out of the diversity of reality phenomena through differentiation. [7; 66]
The process of abstraction can be contradictory. From the point of view of the logic of science, the following types of abstraction are especially widely used in its various fields: identification abstraction, isolation abstraction, constructivism abstraction, actual infinite abstraction, potentially realized abstraction. Abstraction is one of the fundamental operations of scientific cognition.
Analysis and synthesis occupy a special place among the methods applied equally at the empirical and theoretical levels of scientific research.
Analysis is a cognitive method, and it is a set of methods and regularities used to mentally divide a complete or complex phenomenon into its constituent parts and material elements, and to select and separate its separate aspects, properties and relationships. Analysis is not the end of the cognitive process, but only the beginning. In order to study any phenomenon, it is not enough to study only its separate parts. In addition, it is necessary to study the interrelationships and interdependencies of these parts, to look at these parts as a whole, to review the studied parts and elements in their entirety. [9; 274]
Synthesis is a method of cognition, it is a set of methods and regularities that allow to combine separate parts and elements of the body into one whole. In the process of synthesis, the place and role of each of the elements that make up the whole is determined, and their manifestation in specific conditions is understood. If in the process of analysis one moves from concrete to abstract, from only to general, from complex to simple, in the course of synthesis, the process moves from abstract to concrete, from general to only, from simple to complex. Unlike analysis, which allows to study the constituent elements of the system and clarify their nature, synthesis allows to combine the elements of the system into a whole, to create an adequate copy of the object in the mind.
Analysis and synthesis are not separate cognitive methods. The interaction of analysis and synthesis in cognitive activity finds its concrete manifestation in the following aspects: 1) analysis and synthesis condition each other mutually; 2) analysis and synthesis not only require each other, they also accompany each other; 3) analysis and synthesis are in a dialectical relationship and act as an inseparable unity of opposites. (Being methods of cognition, the basis of the dialectic of analysis and synthesis is the objective dialectic of part and whole, only and general).
Empirical, return and structural-genetic types of analysis and synthesis are used in scientific cognition, depending on the degree of understanding of the object and the depth of penetration into its essence. Analysis and synthesis are inextricably linked not only with each other, but also with other methods of scientific understanding.
The dialectical nature of the transition from facts to theory in the cognitive process has a number of objective, ontological foundations. The general aspect inherent in objective reality does not exist outside of the general law and important related concrete objects and events. Therefore, the general can be learned only through individual facts obtained from direct observation and experiments. On the other hand, general laws and the essence of events do not lie on the surface of facts. The task of scientific understanding is to study many events and facts, to discover their inner connection, essence, and the laws that form the basis of them.
The transition from the analysis of facts to their theoretical synthesis is carried out through the methods of induction and deduction, which constitute the content of this complex dialectical leap.
ОФ "Международный научно-исследовательский центр "Endless Light in Science"
[1;51] These double, polar methods of scientific cognition occupy a special place in the system of scientific methods. These methods are distinguished from each other by the presence of inductive and deductive types of mental results.
In recent years, the role of deduction in scientific cognition has been constantly increasing due to the fact that science deals with objects that are not capable of direct sense perception (the microcosm, the past of mankind, etc.). Another reason for increasing the role of deduction in scientific understanding is the increasingly widespread application of the formalization method in modern science. As a method, deduction is a special type of theory building.
In modern logic, several types of deductive method are applied according to certain principles. The axiomatic and genetic types of the deductive method are distinguished on one basis, and on the other, definitive and hypothetical types. The axiomatic method is a method of constructing a scientific theory in which certain unproven propositions and postulates are taken as the basis of the considered theory, and all the rest of knowledge is derived from those propositions and postulates based on certain logical rules and laws.
The essence of the genetic-deductive method, which differs from the axiomatic method in terms of the method and logical technique of introducing objects into the theory, is that in this case, general propositions are taken as hypotheses and individual conclusions drawn from them are compared with empirical facts.
Being a method of scientific cognition, modeling is based on a person's ability to abstract similar properties and signs of objects and events and establish a certain relationship between them. The modeling method is very close to the analogy method. Even in a certain sense, equating these two methods, they consider modeling a special type of analogy. However, since it is impossible to create a complete analogy between the object of research and its model, the scientific knowledge gained through modeling cannot be absolute truth. Nevertheless, modeling plays an exceptional role in scientific research. Through the model, it is possible to gain such knowledge, to establish such assumptions and considerations, which are either very difficult to obtain through the direct study of the studied object, or at all, it is not possible at all. Despite the similarity between them, all analogies are not modeling. In the philosophical literature, the difference between modeling and analogy is defined as follows: "... when creating analogies of different objects, one of them is studied as similar to the other, and based on the knowledge gained about one of them, it is possible to draw necessary conclusions about the other, we work with modeling." [7; 84]
The model is a tool of scientific understanding, it is inseparable from modeling as it is a universal method of direct understanding of the object. The model that produces or reflects the object of cognition is a material or ideal system and is in a relation of objective compatibility with it. [ 4; 57-58 ]
The role of models in modern scientific understanding is large and multifaceted. Models that allow to visually describe processes that are not capable of emotional impact play the role of a support of thought in theoretical studies, help to explain mathematical equations and see a certain physical reality behind them, in other words, to build a bridge from theory to objective reality.
Idealization, one of the methods of scientific research, is organically connected with the process of abstraction and is one of its types. Idealization is at the same time a special intellectual process, a simplification that allows us to ignore properties and relationships that are not important in theoretical groupings from the point of view of scientific research.
Although idealization is one of the types of abstraction, it does not lead to it. Idealization is the stage of simplification, impoverishment, schematization of reality after abstraction.
In the process of idealization, not only individual properties are idealized, but also essential relations. This is a special and high type of idealization. The logical form of this type of idealization is judgment. Idealization is more pronounced when the law is expressed in mathematical form. In laws that are not expressed in mathematical form, the issue becomes more complicated. But in both
cases, it has a certain degree of idealization. Therefore, the laws of science are nothing but idealized reality, approximate copies of objective laws.
The structure of scientific cognition is extremely complex and multifaceted, and is composed of various elements. It does not fully reflect the specificity of knowledge, but differs from each other according to a number of formal features and constitutes the "macrostructure" of scientific cognition, along with concepts, judgments, mental conclusions, as well as more complex problems, issues, ideas, principles, laws, models of logical cognition. , theory, hypothesis, etc. forms are also included. Creating a concrete and clear idea of the structure of scientific research in students is also included among the tasks that the educator should focus on.
The theoretical significance of the study. "In the educational process, the students' realization of learning methods "at a closer level" to the methods of scientific cognition, the existence and development of their intellectual skills, the ability to rise to the level of the subject of spiritual exploration of reality by referring to their existing experience, and the performance of metacognitive functions, the information they have mastered about the specific features of the methods of scientific cognition " Putting forward the idea of acting as an "enabling component" is a contribution to the solution of a complex problem related to the development of a system of tasks to be applied in the process of teaching subjects at different levels of education and the development of the technology of their use on scientific-pedagogical grounds, it means the solution of one of the cognitive issues of the problem.
Practical application of research. The form of scientific cognition "In the educational process, the students' learning methods are "closer to the level" of scientific cognitive methods, in the presence and development of their intellectual skills, in their ability to raise the reality to the level of the subject of spiritual exploration by referring to their existing experience, and in performing metacognitive functions, with the characteristic features of the methods of scientific cognition. The idea that the information they have mastered in connection with acting as an "enabling component" is valuable in terms of guiding practical educators to apply the technology of teaching subjects in a more advanced manner.
The result. The idea formulated as a form of scientific cognition in the research process: 1) is a solution to one of the cognitive issues included in the solution of a complex problem related to the development of a system of tasks to be applied in the process of teaching subjects at different levels of education and the processing of their application technology on a scientific-pedagogical basis; 2) it has an important role in terms of the development of the student's learning methods according to scientific cognitive methods; 3) provides opportunities for applying the principle of constructivism in the educational process; 4) acts as a component in the realization of metacognitive functions; 5) directs the improvement of teaching technology.
LiTERATURE:
1. Abbasov A.N., Mammadzade R.R., Mammadli L.A. Pedagogy: Muntakhabat. Textbook for higher education institutions. Baku, "Mutarjim", 2021, 608 p.
2. Alizade A.A., Alizade H.A., Alizade S.H. Psychopedagogy. Baku, "Ecoprint" publishing house, 2019, 368p.
3. Alizade A.A. Psychological problems of the modern Azerbaijani school. Baku, "Pedagogika", 2004, 432p.
4. Ibrahimov F.N. Lectures on the methodology of teaching mathematics in secondary schools. Textbook. Baku, "Mutarjim", 2019, 480 p.
5. Ibrahimov F.N. Didactics of mathematics in general schools. Baku, "Mutarjim", 2017, 496p.
6. Ibrahimov F.N., Abdurahmanov V.A., Karimova M.N. Technology implementation of standards on numbers and actions content line. Baku, ADPU, 2022, 671p.
7. Nasirov V.H., Mammadov A.B. Methods and forms of scientific cognition. Teaching -methodological resources. Baku, "Maarif", 1980, 148 p.
8. Bykov V.P. Scientific experiment and experimental methods. Sat. "Some problems of the methodology of scientific research", M., 1968.
9. Dialectical materialism. M., ed. "High School", 1974.
10. Melnikov O.A. On the role of measurements in the process of cognition. Novosibirsk, Ed. "Science", 1968.
11. Kostyuk V.N. Methodology of scientific research. Ed. "Your school", Odessa, 1976.
12. Shtoff V.A., Mikeshina L.A. Forms and methods of scientific knowledge. "Philosophical Sciences", No. 5, 1974.
13. Sichivitsa O.M. Methods and forms of scientific knowledge. Ed. "Higher School" M., 1972.
14. Ruzavin G.I. Methods of scientific research. M., ed. "Thought", 1974.
15. Rozov M.A. Problems of empirical analysis of scientific knowledge. Ed. "Science", Novosibirsk, 1977.
