THREE EPISTEMOLOGICAL PARADIGMS: CLASSICAL, NON-CLASSICAL, POST-NON-CLASSICAL

Abstract

During the global evolution of science there was a change of four of its cultural and historical types: ancient Oriental science, ancient science, medieval European science, modern science. The formation of the last cultural and historical type occurred in Europe in the Renaissance and Modern times. It is based on an experimental study of cognizable objects at the empirical level and a mathematical description of their laws at the theoretical level. However, this cultural and historical type of science has also passed in its development a number of stages: classical science (17th - 19th centuries), non-classical science (early 20th century - late 20th century), post-non-classical science (late 20th century - present time.) These stages differ qualitatively not only in their ontology (the predominant type of research objects): macro objects - classical science, micro objects - non- classical science and natural and social systems -post-non-classical science), but also in their epistemological and methodological foundations. The epistemological difference between them can be formulated as: inductivism (classical science), neo-inductivism (non-classical science) and constructivism (post-non-classical science). The article provides a rational reconstruction of the epistemological foundations of classical, non-classical and post-non-classical science and concludes on the qualitative, paradigmatic difference between classical, non-classical and post-non-classical epistemology. The article is aimed at the experts in ontology, epistemology, lecturers in philosophy and postgraduate students