Reliable knowledge in the scientific or practical field is always preceded by rational comprehension and evaluation of the factual material delivered by observation. This mental activity is accompanied by the construction of various kinds of conjectures and hypothetical explanations of the observed phenomena. At first, the explanations are problematic. Further research corrects these explanations. As a result, science and practice overcome numerous deviations, misconceptions and contradictions and achieve objectively true results.

The decisive link in the cognitive chain that ensures the formation of new knowledge is hypothesis.

A hypothesis is a natural form of knowledge development, which is a reasonable assumption put forward in order to clarify the properties and causes of the phenomena under study.

The most important among those noted in the definition will be the following characteristic features of the hypothesis.

(1) A hypothesis is a form of knowledge development that is universal and necessary for any cognitive process. Where there is a search for new ideas or facts, regular relationships or causal dependencies, there is always a hypothesis. It acts as a link between previously achieved knowledge and new truths and at the same time a cognitive tool that regulates the logical transition from the previous incomplete and inaccurate knowledge to a new, more complete and more accurate one.

Thus, the development inherent in the process of cognition predetermines the functioning of the hypothesis in thinking as a necessary and universal form of such development.

(2) The construction of a hypothesis is always accompanied by the proposition assumptions about the nature of the phenomena under study, which is the logical core of the hypothesis and is formulated as a separate judgment or a system of interrelated judgments. It always

has a weakened epistemic modality: is problematic judgment, in which inaccurate knowledge is expressed.

In order to turn into reliable knowledge, a hypothesis is subject to scientific and practical verification. The process of testing the hypothesis, proceeding with the use of various logical techniques, operations and forms of inference, ultimately leads to refutation or under" assertion and further proof.

Thus, a hypothesis always contains something that needs to be tested. probable knowledge. Proved on its basis, the position is no longer actually a hypothesis, because it contains verified and undoubted true knowledge.

(3) The assumption that arises when constructing a hypothesis is born as a result of analysis of factual material, based on the generalization of numerous observations. An important role in the emergence of a fruitful hypothesis is played by the intuition, creativity and imagination of the researcher. However, a scientific hypothesis is not just a guess, fantasy or assumption, but based on specific materials. rationally justified rather than an intuitively and subconsciously accepted assumption.

The noted features make it possible to more clearly define the essential features of the hypothesis. Any hypothesis has initial data, or grounds, and end result - assumption. It also includes logical processing of initial data and move on to guessing. The final stage of knowledge - verification a hypothesis that turns an assumption into reliable knowledge or refutes it.

Types of hypotheses

In the process of knowledge development, hypotheses differ in their cognitive functions and object research.

1. By function in cognitive hypotheses are distinguished in the process: (1) descriptive and 2) explanatory.

(1)Descriptive hypothesis - this is an assumption about the properties inherent in the object under study. It usually answers the question:

"What is this item?" or “What properties does this item have?”

Descriptive hypotheses can be put forward in order to identify composition or structures object, disclosure mechanism or procedural features of its activities, definitions functional characteristics of the object.

So, for example, the hypothesis about the wave propagation of light that arose in the theory of physics was a hypothesis about the mechanism of light motion. The chemist's assumption about the components and atomic chains of the new polymer refers to hypotheses about the composition and structure. The hypothesis of a political scientist or lawyer, predicting the immediate or distant social effect of the adopted new package of laws, refers to functional assumptions.

A special place among descriptive hypotheses is occupied by hypotheses about existence any object that is called existential hypotheses. An example of such a hypothesis is the assumption that the continent of the western (America) and eastern (Europe and Africa) hemispheres once co-existed. The same will be the hypothesis of the existence of Atlantis.

(2)An explanatory hypothesis is an assumption about the causes of the object of research. Such hypotheses usually ask: “Why did this event happen?” or “What are the reasons for the appearance of this item?”

Examples of such assumptions: the hypothesis of the Tunguska meteorite; the hypothesis of the appearance of ice ages on Earth; assumptions about the causes of extinction of animals in various geological epochs; hypotheses about the motives and motives for committing a specific crime by the accused, and others.

The history of science shows that in the process of knowledge development, existential hypotheses first arise, clarifying the fact of the existence of specific objects. Then there are descriptive hypotheses that clarify the properties of these objects. The last step is the construction of explanatory hypotheses that reveal the mechanism and causes of the emergence of the objects under study. The successive complication of hypotheses in the process of cognition - about existence, about properties, about causes - is a reflection of the dialectics inherent in the process of cognition: from simple to complex, from external to internal, from phenomenon to essence.

2. According to the object of study, hypotheses are distinguished: public and private.

(1)A general hypothesis is a reasonable assumption about regular relationships and empirical regularities. Examples of general hypotheses are: developed in the XVIII century. M.V. Lomonosov's hypothesis about the atomistic structure of matter; modern competing hypotheses of Academician O.Yu. Schmidt and Academician V.G. Fesenkov on the origin of celestial bodies; hypotheses about the organic and inorganic origin of oil and others.

General hypotheses play the role of scaffolding in the development of scientific knowledge. Once proven, they become scientific theories and are a valuable contribution to the development of scientific knowledge.

(2) A partial hypothesis is a reasonable assumption about the origin and properties of single facts, specific events and phenomena. If a single circumstance caused the emergence of other facts and if it is inaccessible to direct perception, then its knowledge takes the form of a hypothesis about the existence or properties of this circumstance.

Particular hypotheses are put forward both in the natural sciences and in the socio-historical sciences. An archaeologist, for example, puts forward a hypothesis about the time of origin and belonging of objects discovered during excavations. A historian hypothesizes about the relationship between specific historical events or actions of individuals.

Particular hypotheses are also the assumptions that are put forward in forensic and investigative practice, because here one has to conclude about single events, the actions of individuals, individual facts that are causally related to a criminal act.

Along with the terms "general" and "particular hypothesis" in science, the term "working hypothesis".

A working hypothesis is an assumption put forward in the early stages of the study, which serves as a conditional assumption that allows you to group the results of observations and give them an initial explanation.

The specificity of the working hypothesis lies in its conditional and thus temporary acceptance. It is extremely important for the researcher to systematize the available factual data at the very beginning of the investigation, rationally process them and outline the paths for further searches. The working hypothesis just performs the function in the research process the first systematizer of facts.

The further fate of the working hypothesis is twofold. It is not excluded that it can turn from a working one into a stable fruitful hypothesis. At the same time, it can be replaced by other hypotheses if its incompatibility with new facts is established.

In historical, sociological or political research, as well as in judicial and investigative practice, when explaining individual facts or a set of circumstances, a number of hypotheses are often put forward that explain these facts in different ways. Such hypotheses

called versions (from the Latin versio - "turnover", versare - "modify").

The version in legal proceedings is one of the possible hypotheses explaining the origin or properties of individual legally significant circumstances or the crime as a whole.

When investigating crimes and litigation, versions are built that are different in content and coverage of the circumstances. Among them are distinguished general And private versions.

(1)The general version is an assumption that explains all crimes as a whole as a single system of specific circumstances. It answers not one, but many interrelated questions, clarifying the entire set of legally significant circumstances of the case. The most important of these questions will be the following:

what crime has been committed? who made it? where, when, under what circumstances and in what way it was committed? what are the goals, motives of the crime, the guilt of the offender?

The unknown real reason about which the version is created is not the principle of development or an objective pattern, but a specific set of actual circumstances that make up a single crime. Covering all the issues to be clarified in court, such a version bears the features of a general summarizing assumption that explains the entire crime as a whole.

(2)A private version is an assumption that explains the individual circumstances of the crime in question. Being unknown or little known, each of the circumstances can be the subject of independent research; versions are also created about each of them, explaining the features and origin of these circumstances.

Examples of private versions can be the following assumptions: about the whereabouts of stolen items or about the whereabouts of the offender; about the accomplices of the act; about the method of penetration of the offender to the place of the act; about the motives for committing a crime and many others.

Private and general versions are closely interconnected with each other in the process of investigation. The knowledge obtained with the help of private versions serves as the basis for constructing, concretizing and clarifying the general version that explains the criminal act as a whole. In turn, the general version makes it possible to outline the main directions for putting forward private versions about the circumstances of the case that have not yet been identified.

Recall that hypothesis- this is the part that reveals the conditions (circumstances) in the presence or absence of which the operation of this rule is possible, that is, it contains indications of specific life circumstances, the conditions under which this rule of law comes into force.

In particular, the hypothesis can express:

• terms of entry into force of the legal norm;
• reaching a certain age of a citizen - a subject of law;
• the time and place of an event;
• "belonging" of a citizen to a particular state;
• state of health, on which the possibility of exercising the right depends.

Examples of hypotheses

A minor who has reached the age of sixteen (hypothesis) can be declared fully capable (disposition) if he works under an employment contract (continuation of the hypothesis) (Article 27 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on emancipation). In the norms of family law there are conditions for marriage: “Marriage is entered into in the civil registry offices” (clause I, article 10 of the RF IC) - a condition for the place or authority for marriage.

“The rights and obligations of spouses arise from the date of registration of marriage ...” (clause 2, article 10 of the UK) is a condition for the moment a marriage relationship arises.

Classifications and types of hypotheses

Hypothesis - element of the rule of law, indicating the conditions for its operation (time, place, subject composition, etc.), which are determined by fixing. A hypothesis is a part of a legal norm that indicates the life circumstances in which certain subjects enter into relations with each other.

Hypotheses can be simple or complex. Simple hypotheses point to one condition for the implementation of the norm (Article 242 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation) - the invariance of the composition of the court as a condition for considering the case or Article 21 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation - in case of detection of signs of a crime, the prosecutor, investigator, body of inquiry or interrogator take measures to establish the events of the crime, expose the person or persons guilty of the crime), complex - on several conditions (clause 1, article 72 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the RF IC) - parents (one of them) can be restored in parental rights in cases where they have changed their behavior, lifestyle and (or) attitude to raising a child ). Complex hypotheses can be cumulative and alternative.

Cumulative the hypothesis connects the implementation of the norm with the simultaneous presence of several conditions.

Alternative the hypothesis makes the realization of the norm dependent on the occurrence of one of several conditions.

In addition, according to the degree of certainty, hypotheses can be absolutely certain (simple), relatively certain (complex) and even indefinite (“if necessary”), and according to the method of presentation - casuistic and abstract.

Rice. 1. Types of hypotheses

According to the degree of complexity (depending on the structure), hypotheses are divided into:

• on the homogeneous (simple). They indicate one circumstance, with the presence or absence of which the operation of a legal norm is associated. Example:“The validity period of a power of attorney cannot exceed three years” (clause I, article 186 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation);
• compound (complex). In them, the operation of the rule of law is made dependent on the presence or absence of two or more circumstances at the same time. Example. The conditions for concluding a marriage for those entering into marriage: firstly, the mutual voluntary consent of a man and a woman, as well as the achievement of marriageable age (Article 12 of the RF IC); secondly, the absence of circumstances preventing marriage (Article 14 of the RF IC - the state of marriage of one of the spouses, close relationship, as well as incapacity recognized by the court);
• alternative. They contain several conditions, and in the presence of any of them, this legal norm comes into force. Example:“In cases where the buyer, in violation of the law, other legal acts or the contract of sale, does not accept the goods or refuses to accept them, the seller has the right to demand that the buyer accept the goods ...” (clause 3 of article 484 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation);
• complex-alternative. In this case, the hypotheses have both complexity and alternativeness.

By the presence or absence of legal facts (circumstances):

• positive - indicate the need for certain conditions for the operation of the norm;
• negative - suggest that the application of the rule of law is carried out in the absence of the conditions indicated in the hypothesis. Thus, the failure to provide assistance to the patient by a medical worker is considered as a negative hypothesis. For this, a measure of legal responsibility is established.

In terms of expression:

• general. They indicate common features, for example, the general condition for the operation of all criminal law norms is the achievement of the age of criminal responsibility;
• private. They are more specific. Thus, the condition for the operation of criminal law norms governing liability for malfeasance is the presence of a special subject, i.e. an official.

According to the form of expression of a hypothesis in the literature, it is also called abstract And casuistic.

An important form of theoretical thinking is a hypothesis - an assumption based on a number of facts and admitting the existence of an object, its properties, certain relationships.

Hypothesis- this is a kind of inference that tries to penetrate the essence of an area of ​​reality that has not yet been sufficiently studied.

Hypothesis- this is a scientifically based assumption about the causes or regular relationships of any phenomena or events of nature, society, thinking.

A hypothesis requires verification and proof, after which it acquires the character of a theory - a system of generalized knowledge, an explanation of certain aspects of reality. For example, the statement about the atomic structure of matter was a hypothesis for a long time. Confirmed by experience, this hypothesis has turned into reliable knowledge, the theory of the atomic structure of matter. On the basis of the visible, audible and tangible, people penetrate into the invisible. Inaudible and intangible. It is on this mediated knowledge that all science is based.

In science, in ordinary thinking, we move from ignorance to knowledge, from incomplete knowledge to more complete knowledge. We have to put forward and then substantiate various assumptions to explain the phenomena and their relationship with other phenomena. We put forward hypotheses that, when confirmed, can turn into scientific theories or individual true judgments, or, conversely, be refuted and turn out to be false judgments.

Types of hypotheses

Depending on the degree of generality, scientific hypotheses can be divided into general, particular, individual.

General hypothesis - this is a scientifically based assumption about the causes, laws and patterns of natural and social phenomena, as well as the patterns of human mental activity. General hypotheses are put forward in order to explain the whole class of the described phenomena, to deduce the regular nature of their relationships at any time and in any place. Examples of general hypotheses are: the hypothesis of the atomic structure of matter developed in the 18th century by M.V. Lomonosov, the modern hypotheses of Acad. O.Yu. Schmidt and acad. VG Fesenkov about the origin of celestial bodies, hypotheses about the organic and inorganic origin of oil.

Once proven, they become scientific theories and are a valuable contribution to the development of scientific knowledge.

Private hypothesis - this is a scientifically substantiated assumption about the causes, origin and regularities of a part of objects isolated from the class of considered objects of nature, social life or mental activity of a person.

Particular hypotheses find application both in natural science and in the socio-historical sciences. An atheologist, for example, puts forward a particular hypothesis about the time of origin and belonging of objects discovered during excavations. The historian puts forward a hypothesis about the relationship between specific historical events or the actions of individuals.

Private hypotheses are also those assumptions that are used in forensic and investigative practice, because here one has to infer about single events, people's actions, individual facts that are causally related to
crime.

Single hypothesis - a scientifically based assumption about the causes, origin and regularities of single facts, specific events or phenomena. The doctor builds single hypotheses in the course of treating a particular patient, selecting medicines and their dosage individually for him. In the course of proving the general, particular and single hypotheses, people build working hypotheses.

Working hypothesis - this is an assumption put forward, as a rule, at the first stages of the study. The working hypothesis does not directly set the task of elucidating the real causes of the phenomena under study, but serves only as a conditional assumption that makes it possible to group and systematize the results of observations into a certain system and give a description of the phenomena consistent with the observations. In judicial and investigative practice, when explaining individual facts or a set of circumstances, a number of hypotheses are often put forward that explain these facts in different ways. Such hypotheses are called versions.

The logical law according to which either the proposition itself or its negation is true. The law establishes a connection between statements that contradict each other: one of such statements is true. For example: “Aristotle died in 322 BC. or he didn't die this year." “Tomorrow there will be a naval battle, or tomorrow there will be no naval battle,” etc.
The very name of the law expresses its meaning: the matter is as described in the statement under consideration, or as its negation says; there is no third option (“the third is not given”).
Z.i.t. was known before Aristotle. However, he was the first to formulate this law, emphasizing its importance for understanding thinking: “There can be nothing intermediate between the two members of the contradiction, but with respect to one thing, it is necessary to either affirm or deny something.”
From Aristotle comes the tradition of giving Z.i.t. different interpretations.
1. The law is interpreted as a principle of logic, speaking about propositions and their truth: either the proposition or its negation must be true.
2. The law is understood as a statement about the structure of the world itself: every object either really exists or does not exist.
3. The law sounds like the principle of the methodology of scientific knowledge: the study of each object must be carried out until then and be so complete that with respect to each statement about this object it can be decided whether it is true or not.
It is often assumed that these three interpretations - logical, ontological and methodological - differ from each other only verbally. Actually it is not. The structure of the world, which occupies ontology, and the originality of scientific research, which is of interest to methodology, are topics of empirical, experimental study. The provisions obtained with its help are empirical truths. The principles of logic do not follow from ontological considerations and are not empirical, but logically necessary truths.
Aristotle doubted the applicability of Z.i.t. to statements about future events: at the moment, the onset of some of them is not yet predetermined. There is no reason for them to happen, nor for them not to happen. “Five years from now it will rain on the same day” - this statement is neither true nor false at the moment. So is its denial. Now there is no reason for it to rain in five years, nor for it not to be. But Z.i.t. asserts that either the proposition itself or its negation is true. Hence, Aristotle concluded, the law should be limited to statements about the past and the present and not applied to statements about the future.
In the 20th century Aristotle's reflections on Z.i.t. prompted the idea of ​​the possibility of a fundamentally new direction in logic. Multivalued logic has been created.
Consistent criticism of Z.i.t. originates from the goal. mathematics and logic L. Brauer. Brouwer's criticism marked the beginning of a new direction in formal logic - intuitionistic logic.
One of the prerequisites for special attention to Z.i.t. is its wide applicability in various areas of reasoning. A person speaks prose or does not speak prose, someone weeps or does not weep, it rains or it doesn't, and so on. - there are no other options. This is known to everyone, which shows how rooted Z.i.t. in our thinking and with what automaticity its application in reasoning is carried out.

conditional inferences

conditional inference

a conclusion that includes premises that are conditional propositions (see: Conditional statement). U. u. may consist of only one conditional

ki, may include, in addition to the conditional, other premises that are not conditional, and may also consist of many premises - conditional propositions. An example of a U.U., consisting of one conditional premise, can be a simple inference called a simple contraposition of a conditional proposition (see: Contraposition laws). Its structure is as follows:

If S is P, then S1 is P1._____

If S1 is not P1, then S is not P. (1)

This means that in order to obtain a conclusion, it is required to take the negation of the reason and the negation of the consequence in the conditional premise and swap them. Example:

If k.-l. If an animal is a mammal, then it is also a vertebrate.

__________________________

If k.-l. If an animal is not a vertebrate, then it is not a mammal either.

The simplest type of inference, containing other premises that are not conditional, can be a conditionally categorical inference: the second premise in it is a categorical judgment. Example:

If this substance is sodium, then the spectrum of its hot vapors gives a yellow line.

This substance is sodium.

The spectrum of its hot vapors gives a bright yellow line. The first premise in these U. at. - conditional judgment, the second - categorical. If the structure of the conditional proposition is written in the form of the expression "AE B", where A, B are categorical judgments, E is a link, "if ..., then", then four varieties (modes) of a conditionally categorical inference can be represented: Here the sign " u" is a negation sign of a judgment and reads "it is not true that...". Among the listed varieties (modes), only modes (1) and (2) are correct: in all cases, if the premises are true, they give true conclusions. The mode (1) is called the ponens (affirming) mode, the mode (2) is called the tollens (denying) mode. Modes (3) and (4) can give false conclusions if the premises are true. Modus example (4):

If n is divisible by 10, then it is also divisible by 5.

This number n is not divisible by 10.

This number n is not divisible by 5.

It is clear that if some fixed number is not divisible by 10, then, depending on the value of n, it may turn out to be divisible by 5: such numbers include 15, 25, 35, etc. Propositions A and B as part of the conditional proposition "AE B " may have a more complex structure: they may, for example, be either conjunctive or disjunctive. Then inferences having the structure (1) and (2) are referred to as modus ponens or modus tollens, but they are not called conditionally categorical inferences (see: Modus ponens, Modus tollens). U. u. may include premises that are only conditional propositions. Example:

If the triangle is right-angled, then the larger side also lies opposite the larger angle.

If the triangle is not right-angled, then the larger side lies opposite the larger angle.

The larger side of a triangle always lies opposite the larger angle.

The common structure of W.u. is the following:

If a work of fiction is devoid of sincerity and truthfulness, then it does not excite the reader, does not arouse deep feelings in him.

If a work of fiction does not excite the reader, does not arouse deep feelings in him, then it does not have a beneficial educational effect on him.

___________________________________________________

If a work of fiction is devoid of sincerity and truthfulness, then it does not have a beneficial educational effect on the reader. Such U. at., in which not only premises, but also conclusions are conditional judgments, are called purely conditional (purely hypothetical). They can include not only two parcels, but many more.

If we take into account not only the variables A, B, C for judgments, but also their denials, then if the following structures are observed, we will receive true conclusions when the premises are true. These are, for example, logical structures: Example:

If I'm free, then I'll be at home.

If I'm not free, I'll be at school.

1) If I am not at home, I will be at school.

2) If I am not at school, I will be at home.

This is U. u. constructed in accordance with the structure (III).

relationships between concepts

Considering the relationship between concepts, it is necessary to define the concepts comparable And incomparable. Incomparable concepts are far from each other in their content and do not have common features. So, "nail" and "vacuum" will be incomparable concepts. All concepts that cannot be called incomparable are comparable. They have some common features that make it possible to determine the degree of proximity of one concept to another, the degree of their similarity and difference.

Comparable concepts are divided into compatible And incompatible. This division is carried out on the basis of the volumes of these concepts. The volumes of compatible concepts coincide completely or in part, and the content of these concepts does not have signs that exclude the coincidence of their volumes. Volumes of incompatible concepts do not have common elements.

For the sake of greater clarity and better assimilation of the relationship between concepts, it is customary to depict using circular diagrams, called Euler circles. Each circle denotes the volume of the concept, and each of its points - the object contained in its volume. Circular diagrams allow you to represent the relationship between different concepts.

Compatibility relationships can be of three types. This includes equivalence, overlap And subordination.

Equivalence. The relation of equivalence is otherwise called the identity of concepts. It occurs between concepts containing the same subject. The volumes of these concepts coincide completely with different content. In these concepts, either one object or a class of objects containing more than one element is conceived. More simply, in relation to equivalence, there are concepts in which one and the same object is thought.

As an example illustrating the relationship of equivalence, we can cite the concepts of "equilateral rectangle" and "square". These concepts contain a reflection of the same object - a square, which means that the volumes of these concepts completely coincide. However, their content is different, because each of them contains different features that characterize the square. The relationship between two similar concepts on the circular diagram is reflected in the form of two completely coinciding circles (Fig. 1).

Crossing (crossing). The concepts that are in relation to the intersection are those whose volumes partially coincide. The volume of one is thus partly included in the volume of the other and vice versa. The content of such concepts will be different. A schematic representation of the intersection relationship is in the form of two partially aligned circles (Fig. 2). The point of intersection on the diagram is hatched for convenience. An example is the concepts of "peasant" and "tractor driver"; "mathematician" and "tutor". That part of circle A, which is not intersected with circle B, contains a reflection of all the villagers - not tractor drivers. That part of circle B that is not intersected with circle A contains a reflection of all tractor drivers who are not villagers. At the intersection of circles A and B, villagers-tractor drivers are conceived. Thus, it turns out that not all villagers are tractor drivers and not all tractor drivers are villagers.

Subordination (subordination). The relationship of subordination is characterized by the fact that the scope of one concept is completely included in the scope of another, but does not exhaust it, but is only a part. When two concepts enter into a subordination relation, each of which is general (but not singular), concept A (subordinate) becomes a genus, and B (subordinate) becomes a species. That is, the concept of "planet" will be a genus for the concept of "Earth", and the latter is a species. There are cases when a single concept can be both a genus and a species. This occurs if the concept of the genus, which contains the concept of the species, refers to the third concept, which is wider than the last in scope. It turns out a triple subordination, when a more general concept subordinates a less general one, but at the same time is in a relationship of subordination with another, which has a larger volume. The following concepts can be cited as an example: "biologist", "microbiologist" and "scientist". The concept of "biologist" is subordinate to the concept of "microbiologist", but is subordinate to the concept of "scientist".

It's a relationship genus -> species -> individual.

In this relation are, for example, the concepts of "planet" and "Earth"; "athlete" and "boxer"; "scientist" and "physicist". As you can easily see, here the scope of some concepts is wider than others. After all, the Earth is a planet, but not every planet is the Earth. In addition to the Earth, there are also Mars, Venus, Mercury and many more planets, including those unknown to man. The same situation occurs in the other examples given. Not every athlete is a boxer, but a boxer is always an athlete; any physicist is a scientist, but speaking of a scientist, we do not always mean a physicist, etc. Here one of the concepts is subordinate, the other is subordinate. Obviously, it subordinates a concept that has a larger volume. The subordinate concept is denoted by the letter A, the subordinate - by the letter B.

In the diagram, the relationship of subordination is displayed as two circles, one of which is inscribed in the other (Fig. 3).

A situation is possible when the general and singular concepts enter into the relationship of subordination. In this case, the general and concurrently subordinating concept is a species. The individual concept becomes an individual in relation to the general. This type of relationship illustrates the subordination of the concept of "Earth" to the concept of "planet". You can also give the following example: "Russian writer" - "N. G. Chernyshevsky. Looking ahead, it can be noted that the relation - > view - > individual" is used in such logical operations with concepts as generalization, restriction, definition and division.

Thus, the relationship of subordination can be simplified in linear diagrams: "genus -> kind -> kind".

Hypothesis — it is a scientific assumption arising from a theory that has not yet been confirmed or refuted,

In the methodology of science, there are:

Theoretical hypotheses and

Hypotheses are empirical assumptions that are subject to experimental verification.

The first ones enter into the structure of theories as the main parts.

essence: Theoretical hypotheses are put forward to eliminate internal contradictions in the theory or to overcome discrepancies between theory and experimental results and are a tool for improving theoretical knowledge.

A scientific hypothesis must satisfy principles:

*falsifiability(if during the experiment it is refuted) and

*verifiable(if during the experiment it is confirmed).

Napom n yu that:

- the principle of falsifiability is absolute, for the refutation of a theory is always final.

- The principle of verifiability is relative, since there is always the possibility of refutation of the hypothesis in the next study.

We are interested in second type of hypotheses assumptions put forward to solve the problem by the method of experimental research. These are experimental hypotheses that do not have to be based on theory.

More precisely, can be identified at least three types of hypotheses on them origin .

1. Hypotheses of the first type are based on a theory or model of reality and represent predictions, consequences of these theories or models (the so-called theoretically based hypotheses). They serve for
testing the consequences of a particular theory or model.

2. The second type is scientific experimental hypotheses, also put forward to confirm or refute certain theories, laws, previously discovered patterns or causal relationships between phenomena, but not based on existing ones
theories, but formulated according to the Feyerabend principle: "everything fits". Their justification is in the researcher's intuition: "Why not?"

3. Third type- empirical hypotheses that are put forward regardless of any theory, model, that is, they are formulated for a given case. The classic version of this hypothesis is
Kozma Prutkov's aphorism: "Click a bull in the nose, he will wave his tail." After experimental verification, such a hypothesis turns into a fact, again - for this case (for a particular cow, its tail and the experimenter).

However, about the main feature of any exp ri mental G mortgage isthat they are operational.

Bottom line: Simply put,they are formulated in terms of a specific experimental procedure. You can always conduct an experiment to directly verify them.

A) phenomena;

B) connections between phenomena;

C) a causal relationship between phenomena.

Type A Hypothesis Testing- an attempt to establish the truth: "Was there a boy? Maybe there was no boy?" Do ESP phenomena exist or not, is there a “risk-to-risk” phenomenon in group decision-making about how many symbols a person holds simultaneously in short-term memory? All of these are hypotheses about facts.

Type B hypotheses about relationships between phenomena. These assumptions include for example:

The hypothesis about the relationship between the intelligence of children and their parents, or the hypothesis that extroverts are risk-averse, and introverts are more cautious.

These hypotheses are tested in a measurement study, more commonly referred to as correlation research. Their result is the establishment of a linear or non-linear relationship between processes or the detection of the absence of such. Actually experimental hypotheses chno consider only hypotheses type B — about cause and effect relationships.

The experimental hypothesis includes:

* independent variable,

* dependent variable,

*relations between them and levels of additional variables.

Gottsdanker identifies the following variants of experimental hypotheses:

1. -— counterhypothesis — experimental hypothesis, alternative to the main assumption; occurs automatically;

2. — third competing experimental hypothesis- experimental hypothesis about the absence of influence of the independent variable on the dependent; verified only in a laboratory experiment;

5. — exact experimental hypothesis - an assumption about the relationship between a single independent variable and a dependent variable in a laboratory experiment; verification requires the selection of an independent variable and the "purification" of its conditions;

4. — experimental hypothesis about the maximum (or minimum) value
- an assumption about at what level of the independent variable the dependent variable takes on the maximum (or minimum) value. The "negative" process, based on the concept of two basic processes that have an opposite effect on the dependent variable, becomes stronger than the "positive" one when the independent variable reaches a certain (high) level; checked only in multilevel
experiment;

5. — experimental hypothesis about absolute and proportional relations - an exact assumption about the nature of the gradual (quantitative) change in the dependent variable with a gradual (quantitative) change in the independent; verified in a multilevel experiment;

6. - experimental hypothesis with one relationship - the assumption of a relationship between one independent and one dependent variable. A factorial experiment can also be used to test an experimental hypothesis with one relation, but the second independent variable is the control;

7. - combined experimental hypothesis - the assumption of
relation between a certain combination (combination) of two (or several) independent variables, on the one hand, and a dependent variable, on the other; checked
only in a factorial experiment.

Researchers distinguish:

*scientific and

*statistical hypotheses.

Scientific hypotheses are formulated as a proposed solution to a problem.

Statistical hypothesis - a statement about an unknown parameter, formulated in the language of mathematical statistics. Any scientific hypothesis requires
translation into the language of statistics. To prove any of the patterns of causal relationships or any phenomenon, many explanations can be given.

During the organization of the experiment, the number of hypotheses is limited to two:

Main and

alternative, which is embodied in the procedure of statistical interpretation

data. This procedure is reducible to an assessment of similarities and differences. When testing statistical hypotheses, only two concepts are used. H1 (the difference hypothesis) and Ho (the similarity hypothesis). As a rule, a scientist looks for differences,

patterns.

Confirmation of the first hypothesis indicates the correctness of the statistical statement H1,

And the second is about accepting the Ho statement about the absence of differences [Glace J., Stanley J., 1976].

An experimental hypothesis serves to organize an experiment,

And statistical for the organization of the procedure for comparing the recorded parameters. That is, a statistical hypothesis is necessary at the stage of mathematical interpretation of empirical research data. Naturally, a large number of statistical hypotheses is necessary to confirm or, more precisely, to refute the main experimental hypothesis.
hypotheses.

The experimental hypothesis is primary,

Statistical is secondary.

Hypotheses that are not refuted in the experiment turn into components of theoretical knowledge about reality.

patterns,

The process of putting forward and refuting hypotheses can be considered the main and most creative stage of the researcher's activity.

It has been established that the quantity and quality of hypotheses is determined by the creativity (general creative ability) of the researcher - "generator of ideas" 1 .

Let's sum up the intermediate result.

The theory cannot be directly tested experimentally. Theoretical statements are universal; particular consequences are derived from them, which are called hypotheses.

They should be:

*operational (potentially refutable) and *formulated as two alternatives.

*The theory is refuted if the particular consequences derived from it are not confirmed in the experiment.

The conclusions that the result of the experiment allows to draw are asymmetric.: a hypothesis may be rejected, but it can never be finally accepted. Any hypothesis is open for further testing. .

Hypotheses are differentiated on the following grounds:

a) according to the complexity of the object under study

b) according to the degree of reliability

Depending on the degree of generality, scientific hypotheses can be divided into general, particular and singular.

A general hypothesis is a scientifically based assumption about the laws and patterns of natural and social phenomena, as well as the patterns of human mental activity. They are put forward to explain the whole class of described phenomena, to deduce the regular nature of their interrelations at any time and in any place. Examples of general hypotheses: the Democritus hypothesis on the atomistic structure of matter, the Kant-Laplace hypothesis on the origin of celestial bodies, A. I. Oparin's hypothesis on the origin of life on Earth. A general hypothesis, once proven, becomes a scientific theory.

A private hypothesis is a scientifically based assumption about the origin and regularities of a part of objects isolated from the entire class of considered objects of nature, social life or thinking. Examples of private hypotheses: hypotheses about the origin of viruses, about the causes of malignant tumors, including the hypothesis about oncogenic RNA containing viruses, etc.

A single hypothesis is a scientifically based assumption about the origin and patterns of single facts, specific events and phenomena. For example, when digging a pit for the foundation of a building in Italy, a coffin with the body of an 8-year-old girl was discovered, whose embalmed corpse was completely preserved, although, according to scientists, the girl was buried about 1800 years ago. Several single hypotheses immediately arose: about the time of burial, about the girl’s belonging to noble people, about the reasons that contribute to the preservation of her body, etc. The doctor builds single hypotheses in the course of treating a particular patient, selecting individual doses of the medicine he needs.

General A hypothesis is a type of hypothesis that explains the cause of a phenomenon or a group of phenomena as a whole.

Private A hypothesis is a kind of hypothesis that explains some particular side or a particular property of the phenomenon or event under study.

At the same time, it must be borne in mind that the division of a hypothesis into general and particular makes sense when we correlate one hypothesis with another. This division is not absolute; a hypothesis can be particular in relation to one hypothesis and general in relation to other hypotheses. Thus, a general hypothesis explaining a crime as a whole will be a particular one when compared with a hypothesis explaining the causes of all crime in a particular state.

In addition to general and particular hypotheses, there are also scientific and working hypotheses.

Scientific called a hypothesis that explains the patterns of development of natural phenomena, society and thinking. To be scientific, a hypothesis must meet the following requirements: a) it must be the only analogue of a given process, phenomenon; b) it should give an explanation for as many circumstances connected with this phenomenon as possible; c) it must be able to predict new phenomena that are not among those on the basis of which it was built.

working A hypothesis is a temporary assumption or assumption that is used in constructing a hypothesis. A working hypothesis is put forward, as a rule, at the first stages of the study. It does not directly set the task of elucidating the real causes of the phenomena under study, but serves only as a conditional assumption that makes it possible to group and systematize the results of observations and give a description of the phenomena consistent with the observations.

A version of a private hypothesis is a version.

Version(from Latin versio - turnover, modification; French version - translation, interpretation) - one of several possible, different from others, explanation or interpretation of any fact, phenomenon, event.

A version is a hypothesis in a forensic study. But the term version is not specifically legal; it is also used in other areas of knowledge.

The logical structure of the version is the same as the logical structure of the hypothesis. In this regard, the version does not differ from any kind of hypothesis. However, the version and the scientific hypothesis have some differences between themselves.

1. The subject of scientific hypothesis are the laws of development of nature and society.

Hypotheses are created to explain significant events and phenomena,

substantiated by long-term observation. Versions are subject to

individual isolated phenomena and facts, sometimes very insignificant. At

the construction of the version does not aim to discover this or that regularity. The version has a more modest cognitive task - to explain a separate,

unique single event or single fact. The version is substantiated by a relatively limited range of observations.

2. Scientific hypotheses can exist and be developed for a long time, years and even decades. Versions are put forward and tested in a relatively short period of time.

3. Scientific hypotheses explaining a phenomenon can be put forward by several or only one. The version in the forensic investigation, for example, cannot exist alone. For each criminal case, for each individual circumstance, several versions should be put forward; here one cannot confine oneself to advancing and proving any one, albeit the most probable, version.

descriptive A hypothesis is an assumption about the existence of a particular phenomenon or relationship. Thus, the assumption of an increase in the social danger of crimes in the region during the study period is a descriptive hypothesis.

Explanatory hypothesis - an assumption about causal relationships in the object under study. Such are, for example, hypotheses about the relationship between the growth of acquisitive crime and the deepening of the property differentiation of the population in the region; on the causal dependence of the level of crime associated with the clandestine manufacture of alcoholic products, and changes in state policy in the field

trade in alcoholic beverages.

In the course of proving a general, particular or single hypothesis, the researcher or any other person builds working hypotheses, i.e., assumptions that are put forward most often at the beginning of the study and do not yet set the task of clarifying the causes or patterns of the phenomenon under study. IP Pavlov often changed his working hypotheses.

At the beginning of this section, a definition of a hypothesis is given, types of hypotheses (including false ones) are considered. An example of a false hypothesis can be found in Stefan Zweig's book "The Feat of Magellan". In 1519-1521, rounding South America, Magellan opened between it and the archipelago of Tierra del Fuego the strait, called Magellan, and left the Atlantic Ocean for the Pacific. His expedition made the first circumnavigation of the world.

The circumstances of this story are such that Magellan believed in the existence of the strait due to the geographical map, which turned out to be erroneous, because on it the strait was marked at forty degrees south latitude, but in fact it was at fifty-second.

What is the role of a false hypothesis? Stefan Zweig writes about this as follows: “The delusion, in which he honestly believed, is what ultimately constituted the mystery of Magellan.

But do not despise delusions! Out of the most reckless error, if genius touches it, if chance guides it, the greatest truth can grow. Hundreds, thousands, in all fields of knowledge, there are great discoveries that arose from false hypotheses.

Columbus would never have ventured into the ocean had it not been for Toscanelli's map, which absurdly incorrectly determined the contour of the globe and deceitfully told him that he would reach the eastern coast of India in the shortest possible time. Magellan would never have been able to persuade the monarch to provide him with a flotilla if he had not believed with such reckless persistence in an erroneous map. ... Only by surrendering to the transient delusion with all his heart, he discovered the eternal truth. Magellan puts forward a new hypothesis: if this strait exists at all, then it should be located to the south. And sailing continues south. “It's getting harder and slower to swim. Magellan steadily keeps course along the coast. He examines every, even the smallest bay and everywhere makes measurements of depths. True, he had long ceased to believe in the mysterious map that lured him to sail and then betrayed him along the way ... When on February 24 the flotilla again approaches some immense wide bay ... Magellan again sends forward small ships ... in order to to determine whether a passage to the Moluccas would open here. And again - nothing! Again, only a closed bay. In the same vain they examine the other two bays...” .

We have cited these passages in detail from the book by S. Zweig “The Feat of Magellan” because with their help it is possible to solve a number of problems, namely: firstly, to illustrate what a false hypothesis is; secondly, to show the essence of the logical error called the “basic error”, i.e., the falsity of the grounds (the fallacy of the map); thirdly, give examples to refute hypotheses; fourthly, to illustrate the construction of new hypotheses by Magellan, i.e. hypotheses about the possible existence of a strait south of the fortieth latitude, and the subsequent refutation of new false hypotheses.

As we noted, in the course of proving general, particular, or single hypotheses, people build working hypotheses. In a forensic investigation, the hypotheses put forward are called versions. All these types of hypotheses are recommended for the teacher to explain with examples, firstly, on the material of major disciplines and, secondly, on the material of psychology and pedagogy.