下面是Fanessay分享的一篇Paper代写范文--About the natural view and natural science，本篇文章阐述的内容是关于自然观与自然科学，可以供同学们了解下。自然观探讨自然界的一般存在，是一个相对优化额的科学模型，是正确抽象对象的关键因素，在逻辑上，自然观的一般存在有着充当研究对象关键因素的可能。在这个意义上，模型的构成关键因素是有两个部分，一个是自然观因素，一个是具体因素，自然科学理论模型里的创建会应用自然观的成果，并使其理论获得成功。
The development of science is closely related to the innovation of the view of nature. The nature of natural science is the approach system of human brain to the law. The view of nature discusses the nature of the general existence and its changing rules, and provides ontological rules for the research field of natural science, which has the function of model leading and method guiding. The innovation of the natural view is the theoretical forerunner of the natural science revolution. The revolution of the natural science verifies the natural view and expands the width and depth of human understanding, which leads to the new crisis of the natural science at a higher level and means that the natural view is facing the innovation again. Natural view and natural science develop together in an interactive way and approach to the law gradually.
British philosopher and historian colin wude pointed out at the beginning of the concept of nature that there were three periods in the history of European thought when the concept of nature became the focus of thought. "the specific natural sciences based on it were successively endowed with new features." In the history of science, the rise of modern science and the change of view of nature are interrelated. The modern scientific revolution was inevitably connected with the revival of the ancient Greek view of nature. "This revolution is above all a revolution of ideas." The comprehensive establishment of modern science is related to the rise of mechanical view of nature in the 18th and 19th centuries. In the 19th century, a series of scientific theories, such as thermodynamics and electromagnetism, were established by applying the mechanical view of nature and taking mechanics as the model. "Even in the 20th century, mechanistic ways of thinking were still quite popular, for example in the form of reductionism, which played an important role in fields such as molecular biology." The physical revolution in the 20th century and the breakthrough of Newton's classical view of nature are also born and followed.
Why does the great change of natural view lead to the great breakthrough of natural science? What is the relationship between the development of natural science and the change of natural view? To answer these two questions, it is necessary to conduct an in-depth analysis of the interaction between natural view and natural science.
The view of nature provides a core idea for the theory of natural science to be produced, and an important train of thought for the formation of the theory of natural science. As Engels pointed out in dialectics of nature, "propositions that have been put forward in philosophy hundreds of years ago, and have long been rejected in philosophy, often appear as new wisdom to natural scientists who study theories, and even become fashionable at a time." Some of the philosophical propositions he's talking about here are really views of nature. The view of nature is an important factor in the research activities of natural science.
The view of nature discusses the general existence of nature and provides ontological provisions for the research field of natural science. In the early natural science has not been independent, the view of nature performs the function of natural science interpretation and prediction. After natural science is bred and matured in natural philosophy, philosophers abstract the cognitive achievements of natural science about concrete existence and form conclusions about general existence. Form the view of nature is the key to science of concrete existence results for abstract description of the general existence, "in order to understand the nature, we must first to abstract nature, constructing a certain object itself is not nature in your mind, but it greatly simplifies the object, focusing on study of the simplified the object, is possible for the simplified model to build a precise theory, and then is possible by means of the precise theory to better understand the complicated nature". This is to generalize the properties of small classes to large classes, which is against formal logic. No theory based on formal logic can provide sufficient proof of the correctness of this abstraction, and the view of nature cannot be directly verified, which is why the view of nature is named "view".
When scientists investigate objects in research, they reverse apply the accepted view of nature to the object, and they will unconsciously form the method of interbreeding with their view of nature. When they rise to the level of philosophy, it is methodology. For example, in the early days, the witchcraft view of nature explained natural phenomena with the unsystematic "all are miracles" method; The methodology of patristics and scholasticism came into being when Christian theology view of nature; When Newtonian mechanics emerged and finally established the dominance of mechanical nature, the methodology of mechanical reductionism was summarized. The mechanical view of nature holds that the world is all material, which is made up of absolutely simple and indivisible particles of matter. All phenomena in the world are produced by the mechanical interaction between such particles of matter; If you know what happens to all of these particles at any given moment, you can calculate what happens to the world at any given moment forward and at any given moment backwards. Since all matter is produced by the interaction of such particles, when scientists reverse apply the mechanical view of nature to the research object, they reduce the object to simple particles and understand the phenomenon of matter as the mechanical interaction between particles. By studying the interaction between these particles and reproducing their overall motion rules, the existing phenomenon of the object can be explained and the phenomenon that the object has not yet shown can be predicted.
The general process of the establishment of the theory of natural science is as follows: scientists find experimental laws in scientific observation or scientific experiment; He went on to ask what the deeper causes of such experimental laws were. He examined his subjects in greater detail, and made several rules or assumptions about their properties; Use these rules or assumptions as a source for deductive reasoning, leading to experimental laws to be proved and more inferences. If one is limited by technical limitations or is logically impossible to observe these rules or assumptions directly, relevant bridging rules or assumptions are needed to relate them to observable properties. Scientists design relevant scientific observations or experiments to verify the inferences made to determine abandonment.
The more natural science develops to the field that cannot be observed by human eyes, the more the rules or assumptions about the nature of objects cannot be directly observed, and the more important the rules or assumptions of bridging become in scientific theories. Scientific hypotheses are generally divided into three levels: basic assumptions, i.e. assumptions about the nature of objects; The bridge hypothesis makes the basic hypothesis that cannot be observed directly verified by indirect observation. A deductive law is a description of the laws of change of objects. For the experimental law, this step is to explain in a deeper level, so that people know the applicable conditions of the experimental law; For previously undiscovered laws, the job is to predict. Finally, the scientific hypothesis is verified by scientific observation or experiment for a long time, and if there is no counter example, it is elevated to scientific theory.
The basic hypothesis is the hypothesis about the nature of the object, and the core is the construction of the model of the research object. The establishment of the theory of natural science is inseparable from two cornerstones, one is the construction of object model, the other is scientific observation and scientific experiment. Things are universally related. The development of a thing's motion is always related to an infinite number of other things. To study the law of its motion, one must simultaneously deal with an infinite number of relations, in other words, it is equivalent to dealing with an infinite function of the thing. Due to physical limitations, the human brain cannot process infinite functions, so people have to use models instead of studying objects. Model is to simplify and abstract the concrete things, that is, only a few key factors are extracted, and the non-key factors are ignored. Therefore, the birth of science, with its own inevitable approximation. Although generations of scientists have made continuous progress in building models and processing tools, they still cannot fundamentally solve the problem of approximation.
In fact, even three-way second order partial differential equations are almost unmanageable without infinite functions. Scientific experiments themselves have limitations that can never be overcome. This is mainly reflected in the limitations of experimental devices and detection instruments. Take coulomb's law as an example. Firstly, no one can make absolutely round metal balls. Moreover, due to the accuracy limitations of ranging instruments, coulombs and dynamometers, r,Q and F cannot get accurate values. Observation also has its own limitations, in the observation of people will unconsciously his inherent experience and knowledge into the observation. In addition, negligence in observation may also produce errors and one-sidedness of observation. Of course, scientific instruments can enhance the function of the senses and eliminate some illusions caused by the senses and the mind. But any scientific instrument is made and used by human beings and has a certain range of application and sensitivity. These alone are not difficult to derive, the experimental law is also an approximation. "No scientific theory can be the law itself, with its own insurmountable defects. It's just the human brain's approximation of rules."
The historical school of philosophy of science and technology has long examined the position and function of the view of nature in natural science. Its representative Thomas Kuhn in his "the structure of scientific revolutions" discourse "paradigm", points out that the "paradigm" as well as the methods including law, assumption and application standards and instrument manufacture and use of technology, also includes one kind "the promise of higher level, quasi metaphysics", "the promise is both the metaphysical methodology. As a metaphysical promise, it tells scientists what kind of entities the universe contains and what kind of entities it does not contain. Kuhn's "quasi-metaphysical promise" is naturalness. In progress and its problems, laudan puts forward the concept of "research tradition". "simply put, research tradition provides a set of guiding principles for the development of specific theories. Part of these guiding principles constitutes ontology, which generally prescribes the types of essential entities that exist in the field or in the field in which the tradition of research is based." According to him, the "research tradition" shows some metaphysical or philosophical beliefs, which refer to the entity and process of natural existence in ontology, so it can be seen that this belief is actually the view of nature. The view of nature plays a methodological role of model guidance and model construction for the theory of natural science.
The view of nature discusses the general existence of nature, and a relatively optimized scientific model is the key factor of correct abstract object. In this sense, the key factors of the model are divided into two parts: one is the factor of natural view, the other is the specific factor of the object. The application of the results of natural view in the establishment of the theoretical model of natural science makes the theory successful.
Newton's absolute view of time and space is embedded in the basic assumptions of the Newtonian mechanical model. "Absolute, real, mathematical time, determined by its very nature, passes by itself uniformly, independent of all external things, and is called continuity; ... Absolute space: its own characteristics are independent of all external things, uniform everywhere, never moving." These two hypotheses seem to exist a priori and need not be proved first. Newton himself thought so, "I don't define time and space... Because they're known." Newton's absolute view of time and space is the premise of describing the motion of particles in Newtonian mechanics. Dalton's basic assumptions about element atoms in his new system of chemical philosophy and maxwell's basic assumptions about ideal gas molecules are both concrete applications of mechanical view of nature in the field of chemistry and gas movement.
In the process of creating models, scientists will consciously or unconsciously apply the results of natural view. Assuming that scientists do not know the meaning of the view of nature, it is impossible to consciously apply the view of nature. Through experiments, he found the experimental law of the research object. In order to deduce the experimental law theoretically, several basic assumptions must be set for the object as the premise of logical derivation. He abstracts a number of properties from the known things, and constructs several models of the properties of the objects of study by analogy. After trial and error, some models may succeed or fail altogether. If all else fails, he either continues to learn from what is known, or builds up a particular hypothesis for the object, so that the experimental laws can be logically deduced. The process of scientists learning from known things is a process of unconsciously abstracting natural view factors and applying them to model construction. From this point of view, Newton, as a particular opponent of metaphysics, tried to exclude speculative metaphysical concepts from his theory, but he also had to use the absolute concept of time and space in his theory.
The guiding effect of natural view on the establishment of natural science is reflected in the guiding effect of methodology derived from natural view on model construction. This effect takes place in the thinking process of scientific workers building models, which is largely hidden and not as obvious as the leading role of models in the view of nature.
Scientists make a lot of guesses about the likely structure of a subject over time, and the final model is determined by trial and error. In the process, experienced scientists use analogies and simulations of objects that have been successfully modeled before. This is no way, human can only start from the known to unknown things for assimilation and cognition.
In long-term scientific research, scientists extend some common properties of specific objects and abstract them into patterns about general existence. When dealing with new research objects, the general existing pattern is reversely applied to the object, the object solution is formed into the general existing pattern, and then several models are constructed by combining the specific properties of the object. The resulting model is trial-and-error to determine a model that conforms to the object. The general approach to successful modeling comes from the second step. Take mechanical reductionism and systematic method as examples. In the view of mechanical reductionism, objects will be constructed to form some parts of the same nature, and these parts will have the same action relationship with each other. In the system approach, objects are constructed to form parts that are organized according to a structure, and their properties and functions and relationships depend on where they are in the structure.
It can be seen that the leading role of the model of the view of nature is reflected in some provisions of the view of nature itself, which can directly serve as the key factor of constructing the model, and the methodology derived from the view of nature directly guides the form of constructing the model.
The view of nature plays a methodological role of model leading and guiding the construction of model forms in the theory of natural science, but it does not mean that the theory can be successful if it gives full play to the two roles of view of nature. The first role can be played on the premise that some provisions of the view of nature coincide with the key factors of the research object, and the second role can be played on the premise that the model structure of the research object conforms to the view of nature. These two premises are that the view of nature correctly reflects the research object, which is a necessary condition for the view of nature to play a role in the creation of theory. However, there is no way to predict whether the view of nature correctly reflects the research object, and no theory can prove it. It is only possible that the view of nature correctly reflects the research object. Therefore, in the process of the establishment of natural science theory, the application of the view of nature may not be successful, but the application of the view of nature is more likely to succeed than the non-application of the view of nature, and the conscious application of the view of nature is more likely to succeed than the unconscious blind exploration. That's the first point.