modern informative norms of military-psychological research: possible and real standards

Stated above generalisation and position objectively bring an attention to the question on allocation of methodological bases – standards of construction of modern military-psychological research.
Differently, it is necessary to present system of informative norms by which it is guided and on which it is organised. Such set of norms, as a first approximation, can be presented in the form of a pyramid kognitivnyh values and the requirements based on them shown to process and results of scientifically-informative activity and means of their achievement. During various epoch and the periods this “the informative pyramid” essentially changed.

As already it was above underlined, the classical ideal of scientific character assumes presence of "a firm invariant kernel», consisting of a number regularly reproduced, stably and invariably operating osnovopolozheny. For science level, for example, it can be: definition of objective and subject areas, the formulation of the purposes and problems, presence conceptually-kategorialnogo the device, principles, laws, methods etc. For researches as those bases-requirements can act: ordering, matematizatsija, standardization, obligatory promotion of hypotheses, generalisations, forecasts etc.

As authors of standards and norms of scientific knowledge outstanding thinkers of the past Aristotle, F.Bacon, I.Newton, I.Kant, G.Gegel and many other things have acted. In psychology standards of its scientific character have been proclaimed in due time V.Vundtom, I.M.Setchenov, F.Brentano, E.Titchenerom, G.I.Chelpanovym, S.L.Rubinshtejnom, others, including modern representatives of a psychological science.

Realising a variety of the offered programs and prisoners in them of norms of construction of psychology, U.James on a boundary of the XIX-XX-th centuries wrote: «it seems To me, that the psychology reminds physics dogalileevskogo a variant: there is no valid fact any obshcherazdeljaemogo of generalisation". The modern generation of researchers continues to reap the fruits of this «a methodological mosaic", shown in rupture of three fundamental communications without which the uniform system of psychological knowledge basically is impossible: between separate fragments, forms and levels of psychological knowledge; between its past and the present; between its research and practical, ordinary and scientific components.

Given "ruptures" create difficult enough picture of process of psychological searches. Therefore it is quite natural, that the large quantity of approaches to the organisation and construction of various systems of psychological research assumes orientation in their specificity and features which, in turn, are shown in variety: the methodological installations realised in the course of generation of psychological knowledge; sources of reception of psychological knowledge; methods of psychological researches.

It is especially important, that today there is a radical and qualitative transition from the classical representations which have affirmed by centuries about a science to some new, even to its formed image and an ideal. This transition is expressed: in crisis of classical representations about an ideal of scientific research in its forms and updatings; in revealing, the analysis and its sharp criticism fundamental osnovopolozheny; in promotion of alternatives to postulates of a classical ideal of scientific character; in attempts of promotion of new standards and samples of scientific knowledge.

In the given context opened and rather sharp questions of the bases or criteria of construction of modern military-psychological researches are represented.
Definition and classification is a question of signs on which base are made their estimation, after all criteria on which was under construction and in overwhelming majority modern psychological research, including in the field of military psychology continues to be under construction, are closely twisted in the intellectual tradition generated still in antiquity. Long time, including in our country, they had character of some objective ochevidnostej, the alternative which mostly not only was not formulated, but even was not realised.

Revealing and rational critical discussion of substantive provisions of a classical ideal become possible only in the present when after dlitelnejshej development epoch naturally there comes its fundamental crisis and distinctly transition to essential to other representations about an ideal of scientific knowledge, the maintenance of process of its achievement is planned. However despite obvious crisis actually all basic bases of a classical ideal of scientific character find the active defenders up to today. Concerning a number of bases and their possible alternatives in psychology already the active discussions which outcome still far is not obvious today are conducted. Some of them really have not passing value and in the specified, modified form should enter into structure of a new, formed ideal of military-psychological researches.

So, we will allocate some methodological bases – standards on which base really is under construction or modern military-psychological research can be under construction.

The validity is represented the main value and the characteristic of scientific researches in any area of knowledge. But in military-psychological researches the validity is not only standard value, but also the necessary descriptive characteristic of the informative results applying for scientific character and practical realisation. Differently, the research result as a result should not only not contain «any impurity of errors» ("not to do much harm"), but also fruitfully to work.

As a matter of fact, here there will be pertinent two statements: first, the validity is central, the strongest reguljativom scientifically-informative activity of the military psychologist; secondly, the validity assumes a relativity of any knowledge which in the subsequent can be added and even is denied. We cannot be assured that all without an exception results of military-psychological researches adequately reflect an investigated reality – object or a subject of psychological knowledge. Thereupon we will especially notice, that in modern military-psychological researches the establishment of true knowledge is rigidly regulated (as the methodological requirement) at empirical level – fact level.

The fundamentalism remains for today to one of the most powerful bases of construction of modern military-psychological research. According to it the original scientific knowledge should be proved in the fundamental image.

The so-called fundamentalist paradigm has received expression in many kinds and forms. Main, central and basic for it was and there is an orientation to a principle of the sufficient basis. Already in days of antiquity distinctly expressed aspiration to possess not simply opinion or judgement, let even "correct", but strong and reliable knowledge which would not give any occasions to doubts in its validity was found out. Therefore the essence of actually scientific knowledge was seen in the decision of a problem of a substantiation. Such approach in scientific researches has remained up to now.

So, in the major ways of a substantiation of the knowledge received in military-psychological research repeated checks by supervision and experiment methods, the reference to primary sources and statistical data which are carried out by military psychologists in a complex and independently from each other today are. At a substantiation of theoretical concepts of the spent military-psychological researches by the obligatory requirements shown to them, consistency, conformity empirical are, including to experimental data, possibility adequately realities to describe the known psychological phenomena and to predict the new.

The long history of a fundamentalist paradigm is history of constant searches of "the knowledge beginnings», a starting point for substantiation process, «the reliable base», against which could lean (to be reduced to it or to be deduced from it) all system of the received scientific knowledge. To this base were shown and rather rigid demands continue to be made: it should be absolutely authentic and reliable. If such base is found, all other epistemo-logical problems, according to fundamentalist representations, dare simply enough.

At various schools and psychology directions those "bases" the-bases, as a rule, proclaimed explanatory principles (for example, activity, behaviour, function, structure, etc.) from which the "" set of psychological knowledge was deduced, in each case applying on «absolute scientific character» and, moreover, the validity.

Fundamentalism influence military-psychological researches as means of achievement of scientific knowledge have not avoided. As consequence, in domestic psychological researches as initial organizational bases-requirements obligatory application of methods of supervision and experiment without which military-psychological research admitted was proclaimed and frequently continues to admit not taken place. For today in our country and abroad the statement of the given methodological requirements to the maintenance of psychological researches is one of principal causes of the strongest criticism of a fundamentalist paradigm. At the same time there are also its defenders. Irrespective of an outcome of the developed discussion it is possible to confirm: the substantiation is the major procedure of modern military-psychological research, and the validity sign remains the necessary characteristic and universal criterion of its scientific character.

However on a basis only the general reasons already it is impossible to tell, what concrete place will occupy a validity sign in the future in hierarchical system of norms and standards of a new ideal of military-psychological researches. The answer to the given question demands studying as possibilities, potential of a fundamentalist paradigm and tendencies of its historical development in military psychology, and the arguments which are put forward against it.

Methodological reduktsionizm confirms representation about possibility of development of some universal (in historical and subject plans) the scientific character standard in military-psychological researches. The given representation serves as nutritious soil of two main hypotheses defining strategy methodological reduktsionizma. The first: the standard standard of scientific character of research can be formulated on base of the "most developed" and "perfect" area of knowledge or even the theory and the approach. The second: all other areas of knowledge will be tightened to the developed uniform standard.

According to strategy methodological reduktsionizma many modern scientists in psychological researches see the scientific character standard in natural sciences, and in the natural sciences address to physics more often. The mentioned standard is shown in clearness and definiteness of concepts, categories and laws, methods of skilled supervision, measurement and processing of empirical data, orientation to concrete object, possibility of transformation and forecasting of its conditions, an exception of value judgment etc. Moreover, the psychology borrowed many units of measure or "has hired" at natural sciences.

Affirmed from I.Newton's times (the author of the well-known aphorism «Hypotheses I do not invent») bessubektnost a physical science has got into psychology. In methodology of psychological research the imperative bessubektnosti includes, as a rule, three components:

The knowledge should be constructed «of object» which is delimited from the subject of knowledge, acts for it as «other person»;

Knowledge process should be constructed "objective" means – is based on supervision, experience, experiment and application measuring – quantitative methods;

All subjective should be removed not only from the maintenance, but also from a substantiation of results of knowledge.

As objection of exclusive absolutization of such approach it is possible to put forward following arguments: first, at each investigation phase «the contribution» to its maintenance specific features of the researcher, its adherence to school, a direction bring, theories etc.; secondly, the empirical facts and indicators do not speak for themselves; thirdly, results of various methods of psychological research find sense only within the limits of "life experience". Thus, absolutization of data of "physically focused" requirements not only impoverishes psychological knowledge, but also it is represented for today absurd and insolvent, and «scientific psychology» is strict and is groundless delimits itself from so-called psychology of "common sense", the moral maintenance of psychological problems of persons and various groups, objective and subjective conditions of their ability to live.

As a result the question, than will end "mismatch" of psychology with physics or mathematics, for today remains opened. “But that it for a society, – was written by V.S.Solovev, – consisting of deprived of civil rights and impersonal creatures, from moral zero. Whether there will be it anyway a society human?“

However it is necessary to recognise, that orientation only on one physics neither in history, nor in the present is not in military-psychological researches unique. In world practice of psychological researches powerful attempts to realise strategy methodological reduktsionizma are known and to construct corresponding ideals on the basis of promotion as exemplary, reference type of knowledge not only physics, but also socially-humanities. Such orientation finds today the expression in the direction of psychology with the same name, including in domestic military-psychological researches and practice.

Sistemnost in the organisation and carrying out of military-psychological researches it is possible to consider as consequence of a fundamentalist paradigm. We meet various forms of the organisation of knowledge not only in a science. The example of classification of animals which is given in one of ancient Chinese encyclopaedias is widely known. In it animals are subdivided as follows: belonging to the emperor, the embalmed, tamed, dairy pigs, sirens, the fantastic, vagrant dogs drawn by very thin brush from the camel wool, from apart seeming flies, etc.

Unlike the resulted classification scientific knowledge and means of its achievement exist in a kind vysokoorganizovannyh systems. Such systems are the cores formoobrazovanijami in the science world. Concept "system" (from grech. – whole, made of parts, connection) designates whole, made of the elements which are in relations and communications with each other, and forms certain integrity, unity.

In modern scientific knowledge to system principles, as a rule, carry:

Integrity (basic nesvodimost properties of system to the sum of properties of its elements and on the contrary; dependence of each element on a place in system; stability preservation);

strukturnost (possibility of the description of system through its structure, i.e. communications and relations of elements; conditionality of behaviour of system properties of investigated structure, instead of separate elements);

Interdependence of system and environment (shows properties in the course of interaction with Wednesday, is a leading component of interaction);

Hierarchy and mnogourovnevost (each system is represented as a component of wider and at the same time with the it is certain ranzhirovannymi by levels system).

The system approach includes studying means in psychology slozhnoorganizovannyh diverse objects of the validity and means, first of all, possibility of plurality of their description. According to the given approach the person as the difficult self-regulated system in itself is in «raznoporjadkovyh systems», therefore «about its existence it is possible to speak as about polysystem process». From here all its attributes and formations, including mentality and consciousness, should be considered as «something complete and integrated».

Thereupon B.F.Lomov has put forward idea sistemnosti as the main methodological basis of the organisation and the maintenance of psychological research. Its basis is formed by following principles:

Diversity of the analysis of the phenomena of mentality and the consciousness, assuming necessity and possibility of allocation of the various parties and aspects of an investigated reality. In a modern psychological science there are following possible "plans" of the analysis of mental processes and the consciousness phenomena:

As the qualitative units (system) having specific laws;

As parts of the rodovidovoj the macrostructures to which laws they submit;

As sets of the microsystems to which laws they as submit;

In respect of their external interactions, i.e. together with conditions and factors of their existence;

Understanding of the mental phenomena and consciousness as multidimensional and the requirement of use of various systems of measurement following from here at their studying. As has fairly noticed B.F.Lomov, «it is impossible to restore a difficult volume body under the image of its one and only projection to a plane»;

The mental phenomena and consciousness should be considered as multilevel, having the difficult hierarchical structure, including various subsystems making them: reguljativnuju, communicative, kognitivnuju and other, having subtotals (for example: sensorno-pertseptivnyj, predstavlenchesky, reche-cogitative, etc.);

raznourovnevost and raznoporjadkovost the mentality and consciousness phenomena, leaning against plurality of relations of the person with the world surrounding it, necessities of working out of multidimensional classification of investigated psychological qualities and consciousness characteristics lead. It is possible to carry to the possible bases of classification of studied properties:

Individual (psychophysiological, psychosomatic, psychoneurological, psychopathological etc.);

System, arising from an accessory of the individual to the certain system in turn differentiated on mono-and polysystem (for example, the abilities which disclosing is possible only through results and the analysis of activity of the individual in which they are shown and formed);

Along with the analysis of the system organisation in spent researches it is necessary to study and analyze system determination of the phenomena of mentality and consciousness. Here it is necessary to distinguish and consider determination of development and development of determination mental and consciousnesses. Therefore we will separately underline, that system determination in the given foreshortening includes allocation of all variety of objective and subjective communications and relations: conditions, factors, features of environment, preconditions of change and development, the formation reasons etc.;

As a separate principle sistemnosti researches it is necessary to designate consideration of the phenomena of mentality and consciousness in development, i.e. revealing of how develops, arises and studied integrity is formed. Accordingly, as underlined B.F.Lomov, «the theory of development of mentality should lean against the theory of development of the person in whole, in its relations and displays».

Thus, scientific ordering in psychological research possesses variety of the important features, basic of which act: aspiration to the completeness, clear representation about the bases of ordering and their consistency.

Intersubektivnost in psychological researches assumes constant aspiration to prove scientific knowledge, its openness for the competent criticism that does a psychological science by the sample of rationality. We will recollect N.Bora's well-known expression that originally deep new theory should be the madwoman in a sense. It should break off with former image of thought, with old standards of thinking and knowledge.

Classical samples of such theories are neevklidovy geometry, the evolution theory, molecular genetics, the theory of a relativity and the quantum mechanics. Structures concern the given class of scientific achievements and functioning of a human brain, disclosing of laws antropogeneza psychological penetration into the world unconscious, in particular, revealing of universal structures in language etc. At the same time orientirovannost on an innovation is combined in psychological researches with rigid conservatism which represents a reliable barrier against introduction in psychology of early and unreasonable innovations.

At all dynamism of development of modern military-psychological researches all set shown to them rigid, sometimes conservative requirements gives the chance to eliminate nevertheless from results of scientific activity all subjective, connected with specificity of the researcher and its attitude.

Sotsiokulturnaja the autonomy of military-psychological research assumes scientifically-world outlook and methodological independence of norms of its organisation and carrying out. According to classical representations the scientific knowledge and standards of its substantiation should be completely independent of social, economic, cultural-historical, ideological and political conditions of their formation. As consequence, conclusions of military-psychological researches should be carried out according to the universal standards of a substantiation accepted in military psychology and to be defined only by the most studied reality (mentalities or consciousnesses) irrespective of conditions and factors of its studying. At the same time until recently – the middle the eightieth context of military-psychological researches in our country was set as a whole by character official state – communistic ideology.

On the mentioned question in psychology the sharpest discussions today are conducted. Frequently in these disputes the hypertrophied polar positions are defended: or full sotsiokulturnaja an autonomy of researches, or such treatment of their determination sotsiokulturnymi factors which conducts to actually full reljativizatsii (relativities) of scientific knowledge.

But in the given polemic, in our opinion, the most radical withdrawal from classical representations about the military-psychological knowledge for which sources it is necessary to search in the objective compromise of the stated sights is planned. Such approach in our opinion to the most constructive also will lead to positive results, promoting finally to forward development of a military-psychological science, therefore:

In development of modern sights about system of standards of scientific character of military-psychological research orientation to norms only is represented to one of areas of psychological or other knowledge, the unique paradigm, the theory or the concept obviously insolvent;

It is necessary to start with the fact of presence of essentially various forms of real scientific psychological knowledge, special types of scientific character;

Unity of process of military-psychological knowledge, as well as the unity of the world reflected in it and forms of its display (activity, consciousness, behaviour, mentality etc.), should not mean uniformity in the organisation of their research at all;

Presence of special types of scientific character is defined, first of all, by variety of forms of the mental reality reflected in the course of military-psychological research, and also that a military psychological science – the multipurpose phenomenon satisfying rather specific material and spiritual needs of the modern Russian state and its "defensive" institute, that, in turn, finds certain reflexion in the maintenance of military-psychological knowledge;

The historical analysis of experience of psychological researches in army and on fleet testifies to constantly increasing communication of military-psychological researches with the most various interests of a society and Armed forces that calls into question position about them sotsiokulturnoj autonomies.

The stated positions give us the basis to speak about outlined crisis of classical representations about an ideal of military-psychological knowledge of its forms and updatings. The criticism of former standards of the maintenance of military-psychological researches carried out in the present is accompanied by promotion of the alternatives which are in most cases direct antitheses standard classical osnovopolozhenijam.

The problem consists today not in methodologically to prove theoretical advantage of this or that approach of school or a psychology direction (it as we were convinced, is objectively impracticable), and in that, integrating them, to use all arsenal of psychological means for optimum achievement of a positive end result. In the tideway of the given tendencies there should be a formation new, it is essential other representations about ideal of the scientific character, capable to enrich an arsenal of informative and practical means of military-psychological researches.

Realisation of such problem, in our opinion, is possible only within the limits of so-called «an optimising field» the military-psychological researches, assuming the presence, at least four conditions:

Set or not less than two variants of decisions of a problem of concrete military-psychological research from which it is necessary to prefer the best – optimum;

Definitions of set of criteria of the optimum decision of problems of military-psychological research;

Freedom in choosing of variants of the decision of a military-psychological problem;

Comparable parametres or criteria of a choice of various variants of achievement of the purpose of military-psychological research.
<< | >>
A source: Antsupov A.J., Pomogajbin V. N.. Methodological problems of military-psychological researches. 1999

More on topic modern informative norms of military-psychological research: possible and real standards:

  1. a problem of a subject of military-psychological research
  2. a parity of the theory, experiment and practice in the course of military-psychological research
  3. the problem of a choice of a subject of military-psychological research
  4. sources of military-psychological knowledge: approaches to the analysis and an estimation
  6. methodology and the theory of military-psychological researches: the essence and the maintenance
  7. the Role and problems of the historical analysis of military-psychological researches
  8. the basic methodological approaches, means and results of military-psychological researches
  9. the Problem of conceptual schemes of the system description of the military-psychological phenomena
  10. a situation as unit of the analysis of the military-psychological phenomena
  11. psychological relizery to successful professional adaptation of teachers-employees of the higher military educational institutions
  12. the Estimation of results of activity and behaviour of the person, collective – a powerful method of military-psychological researches
  14. Antsupov A.J., Pomogajbin V. N.. Methodological problems of military-psychological researches, 1999