1. Unity of cognitive and value objects in social-humanitarian perception

In modern science the activity of social-historical knowers that support the activity rules becomes decisive for the receiving veritable knowledge. It is more realized the «individual presence» in traditional forms and methods of scientific cognition. It is become aware of «theoretical loadings» of facts, its concrete-historical character; the functions of philosophical categories and principles, weltanschauung in submission and selection, and hypothesis substantiation called theories are clarified; the axiological, value aspects are disclosed in a formation and functioning of scientific methods. Not only across the influence of social institutes, capital investment politics and governmental support of science, and also value orientation systems of scientists, social-cultural and historical conditionality of scientific cognition are realized on the micro level.

The ideal system, methodological and communicative norms and rules of scientific-cognitive activity, vision and paradigm methods of world-outlook and ethical values with necessity influences to the character and results of scientific activities of researchers. It should be separately mentioned the role of a moral factor as a facility of effective influence on the explorer’s conscientiousness and honesty. Methodology of science joins not only with the social psychology, but also with ethics, defined principles of it also can execute the regulative functions in scientific cognition, and also to gain a methodological role meaning of moral value which is proved in its classic aspect of edging production of this problem as a dialectics, interdependence of theoretical and practical reason.

By Kant’s rules, the theoretical (scientific) reason is directed to the perception of «the world real». Practical (moral consciousness) reason is turned to «the world of due», also to norms, rules, and values. In this world the moral law, absolute freedom and justice, and human aspiration to good things reign. Basic novelty consisted here that to the practical reason, moral (valuable) consciousness was taken away special and leading role in human activity, the place and a role of theoretical reason at the same time are in a new way defined, its limits and a coverage are found out and proved. «Dangerous opportunities» of theoretical reason are shown, in particular, that it possesses unreasonable claims to solve all human problems, in all spheres of life whereas actually out of its opportunities there is a sphere due to call of duty and self-sacrifice, love, fine. Theoretical reason, owning imagination, logical and constructive opportunities, can create the illusory worlds and give out them for real-life [3, p. 598; 4, p. 250, 274]. Practical, moral consciousness establishes a moral ban on certain forms and the directions of intellectual activity, rejects use by the subject to scientist or the organizer of theoretical reason as «tool» in any field of activity. Our time shows that it can be made in the mercenary and anti-humane purposes, for example, at destruction of ecology of the nature and the person, in experiments in public, development of ways of their destruction, etc.

So, scientific as the carrier of theoretical reason has to have «a moral manner of thoughts in a struggle», possess a critical self-assessment and high call of duty and humanistic belief. Along with important social function of moral consciousness as «intrinsic law of life», Kant put a problem of a methodological role of moral consciousness in knowledge and cognitive activity in general, having made «the moral law in us» a condition of preservation of intellectual honesty. Thus, in the base of cognitive activity the ratio of theoretical and practical reason, or in modern interpretation dialectics of cognitive and valuable things, their interpenetration, organic merge lies dialectic (by Kant’s rules). Having entered concepts of «premised knowledge», regulatory functions, «a maxim of that reason», aprioristic main conditions expressing idea of activity of the subject, and also esthetic ability of judgment, Kant closely approaches a problem of valuable, world outlook prerequisites, the bases, ideals and norms, detection of their fundamental methodological value along with empirical knowledge in formation of the theory.

Today under the values it is understood not only the «the world of due», moral and esthetic ideals, but also any phenomena of consciousness and even objects from «the world of existence», having this or that world outlook, the standard importance for the subject and society in general [see: 2]. Essential expansion and deepening of an axiological perspective in general happened also thanks to recognition of that various cognitive and methodological forms like truth, a method, the theory, the fact, the principles of objectivity, validity, substantiality, etc. which are received not only the cognitive, but also valuable status [9, p. 550-557]. Thus, there was a need to distinguish two groups of the values functioning in scientific knowledge; the first is the social-cultural and world outlook value, caused by the social and cultural and historical nature of science and scientific communities, researchers; the second is the cognitive and methodological value, which is carrying out the regulatory functions defining a choice of theories and methods, the ways of promotion, justification and check of hypotheses estimating the bases of interpretations, the empirical and informative importance of data, etc.

Both groups are in difficult relations; sometimes they are mutually exclusive to each other, for example, in case of the attitude towards to the truth. On the one hand, the content of true knowledge wouldn’t depend from whose that was interests, values and preferences, in particular, social-political or ideological, it has to be objectively neutral; with another the receiving and expression of true knowledge has the cultural and historical, philosophical and world outlook and conceptual prerequisites which are containing valuable and estimated elements. Scientific truth is the actual knowledge, laws of science, for example, physics or economies are both values for science, and for culture, society in general. Therefore the ratio of all these factors has to be presented not in the form of hierarchy of levels from an empirical study to the theory, but as an interlacing of equal components which is an axiology, methodologies and the factual confirmation which are necessary for construction and justification of the theory [7, p. 339]. Discussion about whether can be science free from values, proceeds [see, for example, 6] and is presented by two main approaches: 1) the science must be valuably neutral, autonomous, the liberation from values is a condition of receiving an objective truth, it was admitted by classical science, but today it is more and more realized as simplified and inexact; 2) it is impossible and it isn't necessary to be released from values, it is a necessary condition for formation and growth of scientific knowledge, but it is necessary to find rational forms in which their presence and influence on knowledge and activity are fixed, and also in general their role and features in each of sciences are understood. The second approach based on recognition that values in science express its sociocultural conditionality as the integral characteristics becomes defining in philosophy and methodology of science, especially in social and humanitarian knowledge.

In the last decades not only abroad, but also in domestic philosophy essential analytical work was made by identification of valuable forms and components in structure of scientific knowledge, in its prerequisites and the bases is done [see, for example, 8]. Such significant components of science as the bases, norms and ideals of research, a scientific picture of the world and style of scientific thinking (knowledge), philosophical categories and the principles, the general scientific methodological principles, a paradigm and the scientific-research program were concretized and defined, through the aid of what methodological values are realized and “penetrated” in a form of judgments of social and cultural-historical values. Such understanding gives a possibility to the reveal deep levels of valuable conditionality of informative processes, to prove their organic unity with logical structures in the most categorical system of public and individual consciousness. The scientific knowledge and all procedures of its receiving, check and justification find the additional measurement having not only valuable, but also historical parameters. Thereby this or that extent of the mediated presence of the researcher at knowledge and cognitive activity is at the same time fixed, the system of its valuable orientations comes to light.

2. A problem of validity and rationality in the social-humanitarian sciences

One of the most important problems of the philosophy science is an issue about internal (internalism) and external (externalism) factors of the science development. Internalists (they were subsequently called cognitive scientists) make an accent on the analysis of history science as on the accumulation and consistent changing of initial units in scientific knowledge.

Internal science development logic appears as an aspiration for maximum possible communitylogical proportion, principal simplicity. Externalists (they can also be called sociologists, whereas, researches in present direction are made by the scientific sociologists mainly) investigate an influence of external factors in science development.

Valuable, axiological approach to the science is not indisputable phenomenon. A science orients on the objectiveness, consequently it is free from the values at first sight and measuring in the evaluate scale «good-bad». In principle, it is considered that there isn’t forbidden themes and natural science for the science, directed to the revelation of general rules for nature, which are free from values. Compare to it culture and history have their reign of values. If explanation is necessary for the science, so to the value comprehension contributes an understanding. Inclusion values factors permits to divide out natural-mathematical and humanitarian-historical sciences.

Idea sources about science, which is free from values, goes up Galilei and R. Bacon and is connected with acceptance of autonomy, impartiality and a neutrality of science. Integrally with it as the sociocultural phenomenon promotes strengthening of power of human reason and must be directed on growth of his welfare and wellbeing. However how much scientific influence is beneficially impacted to the person and environment and how much its technological appendices are harmful, here the question is extremely sharp. Not all achievements of a first line of science can be acceptable and socially demanded in the modern world. Therefore, there is a difficult question: Is the science for the person or against him, or maybe it is indifferent to the person?

The standard concept of science deprived of it intra scientific values and insisted on a valuable neutrality of science. However many scientists considered differently. M. Born, for example, claimed that the science and equipment destroy the ethical base of a civilization that disintegration and devaluation of ethics is a necessary consequence of growth of science. M. Polani, oppositely, rose against animpersonal-objective ideal of science, declaring that the science is done by people, and therefore, introduces all palettes of the valuable relations [10, p. 90-97]. The famous philosopher of science T. Kuhn also noted a role of the values divided by creative persons, influencing a choice and changing in the course of scientific knowledge [5, p. 278]. The interesting judgment belongs to K. Popper, whose thought is emphasized that the requirement of unconditional freedom from values is paradoxically, as the objective character, validity and «the freedom from values» are values [11, p. 427]. In his opinion, the scientist who is free from values isn't a scientist. The point of view of the modern western philosopher of X. Lacey gives a meaning that «the science and values are only adjoined, but don't condition on each other» [6, p. 39].

During the reigning and long time the demarcation of scientific knowledge and values, the fact and value are opposed to each other and exist independently. The value is eliminated from science. However, the last represents the undoubted value consisting in rational vision of the world. The scientific knowledge is value for practical activities and progressive development of humanity. Value is the knowledge and truth. Situation overcoming of cognitive values ignoring brought to the judgment of interrelations of social and intra-scientific values and were discussed actively in the scientific, sociological and methodological literature.

Discussions affected a circle of the questions about responsibility of scientists for the discoveries made by them and their application, about the interrelation of social institutes and institutes of experts, about the influence ruling the ideologyto the science development in the society, about the role of valuable factors in the process of scientific search and cognitive activity, about science correlation and imperious structures, etc.

In the most general sense, value is understood as a reflection of the attitude of the activity subject towards to the result of the activity. It is important to emphasize that values aren't reduced only to moral and ethical imperatives. Substantiality, harmony, simplicity and so forth can become values of science. Value promotes motivation of acts and actions of the person. Valuable installations, orientations and characteristics leave the mark on search process of scientific creativity. They are connected with deep experiences of the importance of the activity. It is important to emphasize that values can play both a positive, and a negative role. They can contribute to the increase of a scientist sensitivity threshold during scientific researches, they can influence to a free selection of problems, to the process of making decision or condition to the degree of compromises between science and the power.Scientists show the semantic relationship of such concepts, as value, cost and price. At the same time, value should be distinguished from that, because it brings momentary benefit and it is connected only with an advantage. Valuable is not only profitable, but also that must be correlated to the category of the purpose.

Axiology studies the researches of value. The problem of intra-scientific values is connected with a reflection of theoretical-methodological, world outlook and practical consequences, which are followed from heavy development of science. These problems were directed to awareness of necessity in the organic, intellectual expansion of science to the world of the human relations in general, to the understanding of that fact, that the scientific cognition isn't a sphere of human existence monopoly and can't dominate in the complicated life-purpose orientations. In diverse contexts of the human relationsthe paramount concept has these understandings: good–evil, fine–ugly, fairly–unfairly, useful–harmful. Modern methodologists made a conclusion about the nonremovaility from the sphere of scientific knowledge in the valuable and estimated aspects. The scientific cognitionis regulated not only by mechanisms of intellectual activity, but also by the influences going out from the world of values.About that the cognition is the value and the benefit, both the era of antiquity, and the Education era testified. I. Kant recognized a role of valuable orientations in knowledge like that, but considered necessary to eliminate this factor in individual knowledge. It was showed originally in it that it was the contradiction of theoretical and practical reason. The pure cognition must be torn off from all influences of direct practical activities.

However, intra-scientific values set not only theoretical, but first of all complete, practical and spiritual relation of the person to the world. Therefore, they are mediatestructure of cognitive process. Intra-scientific values carry out the orientation and regulative functions. These are taken to them: methodological norms and procedures of scientific search; method of carrying out experiments; valuations of scientific activity results and ideals of scientific research; ethical imperatives of scientific community. Intra-scientific values are sometimes called cognitive. Models of cognitive values are shown in the persuasion system of the scientist. The value for it is an explanatory, evidential and predictive potential of science, and also a primacy of the facts and фpossibility of a consistent withdrawal. A support to tradition or an authority is sometimes referred to the cognitive value. Cognitive values act as the basis of consolidation of scientists in scientific community. However, there are disputes concerning their hierarchysometimes, their various systems, and a variety of their carriers. Value system has a great significance for the definition of science criteria.

Intra-scientific values need to be distinguished from subjective values, which reflect separate personal and especially individual preferences. The valuable system dominating in this or that society has a great influence on intra-scientific values. The internal value of science is considered the adequate description, a consistent explanation, a reasoned proof, a justification, also an accurate, logically ordered system of construction or the organization of scientific knowledge. All these characteristics are connected and correlated with style of scientific thinking of an era and are in many respects socially caused. It is absolutely obvious that norms and ideals of scientific search in antiquity are better than such events in modern times and extremely unlike with the situation of the modern step of post-nonclassical science. The value of a classical world picture was a procedure of subject isolation from the object learned by it and from learning tools. The science of Modern times tried to exclude any cultural set, world outlook factors of knowledge. Transformation in intra-scientific values in a non-classical picture of the world went through the preservation of isolation in the cognitive subject and subjective stratifications went from it, united and considered communication between means and object of knowledge. The post-nonclassical picture of the world considered subject result of scientific activity in unity with learning tools, intra scientific values and the subject observer and showed that it is actually difficult to tear off knowledge from process of its receiving. For example, objects of microphysics are compound parts of observation situation, which was proved by W. Heisenberg. Consequently, essential transformations are appearedin the interpretation of theobjectivity principle.The principle of objectivity was always considered as the major cognitive value. Firstlyit was thought as the procedure fixing coincidence of knowledge to the object; secondly, as procedure of elimination from knowledge of everything that is connected with the subject and means of its cognitive activity. This second sense of objectivity as V. Porus notes, in the context of the European Christian culture was connected with the idea about the sinful, «spoiled» human nature, which hangs over its informative aspirations. Such understanding of the principle of objectivity draws to itself attention: the world is completely defined, if its completeness developed with the person, but irrespective of thinking.The equivocation in understanding of objectivity is fixed in the modern science. Sometimes it is connected with the general-magnitude and inter-subjectivity. Something invariant and invariableis often meant under the objectivity. Idea of it as a combination and coincidence of a set of conditions is most widespread: logical, methodological, philosophical, etc. Independence of the subject thus remains important and fundamental line of objectivity. However, the identification of an inter-subjectivity and objectivity is insolvent as the inter-subjectivity, applying for that knowledge, was the general for all subjects (or as E. Agazzi speaks, in «a public discourse»[1]) there is an obvious conventional context. She assumes the convention, consent and the arrangement as an ineradicable element of such public discourse. It is necessary that there was “an obvious consent in a concept direction of use, and without it the scientific reasoning loses meaning”. Therefore, the strict scientific discourse is so necessary cognitive value.

Social values are embodied in social institutes and implanted in structure of society. They are shown in programs, resolutions, government documents, laws and with the definite manner it is expressed in practice of the real relations. Freedom, property rights, equality, and alsosociety stabilityand its dynamics are important social values, which need certain social conditions for their embodiment and the certain public order necessary for their maintenance. Social institutes provide for the support to those kinds of activity, which are based on the values accepted for this structure. Social values can act as the basis for criticism of scientific researches, can act as a criteria for a choice of behavior standards. They are interlaced with public life, pretended to that in order to be common-mean.The important aspect of values is their articulation. Thus, there was fixed some discrepancy between values, which are articulated and expressed in words and values, also expressed in practice, real relations, behavior and action. Important social value is a well-being. There are values connected with the social recognition and respect. The system of social values is fixed in the rights, traditions, hostel norms and the business behavior. Social values are directedto such things, in order they can assist in asking principles of society stable existence, provide for the efficiency of its vital functions. The crossing of social and intra-scientific values is shown well by K. Popper. The well-known demarcation idea, which is divided into science and non-science, conducted by them into the epistemology, had an effect, which is getting off far over the limits of purely scientific cognition. There was a need for carrying out a line of demarcation between two types of society: opened and closed, understanding thus, that they make up a material of united world historical process of the development.The falsification central idea of Popper's epistemology, acting in the role of scientific character criterion (it is scientifically, that thing which can be refutable in principle, and that thing which cannot be is a dogma), demanded a self-correction from a public organism. The falsification idea acting the main role in all modern science philosophy sets very significant landmarks of whole, society self-correction to the public analysis in the enclosure. From the falsification point of view, only political figures must speed in order their projects can be more analyzed in detail and presented to the critical disproof. The unseal mistakes and errors will cause more viable and adequate with objective conditions, and social-political decisions.A criticism crossfire, which accompanies the scientist aspiration to scientific truth, must take place in a social life towards to the real events and processes. All ideas obtaining popularity in a society must be subjected to the rational-critical discussion. Uncritical assumption of global social ideas can lead to the catastrophic consequences. The discussion of popular ideas is critical, when all reasons will be kept, and non-reasons are rejected, it can allow offering the other social strategy, including in itself all values of small organizational transformations. Thus, the social development forces can be considered as a result of Popper-epistemologist’s influence to Popper-social philosopher, in the criticism value comprehension which is extremely influential, if it isn’t said like movable. The criticism serves as an effective instrument of changes to the side of more rational and effective activity.The knowledgesociology particularly accentuates the connection of all knowledgeforms with social existence. The scienceparadox is consisted of such thing, that it declares itself about the real foundation of social progress, contributing to the mankind prosperity, at the same time to the science development and technics, which was led to the consequences being a threat to its existence. Not only environmental pollution leads to the negative consequences, and the expansion of technical development does too. The avalanche-like growth of scientific information is pathogenic for human psyche with a factor. He brings to the obviously entropic consequences.

At the modern stage of science development, considerable changes are happening in the keeping region and getting information, functioning of instrument complexes and difficult self-developing man-sized systems are becoming complicated. Thereby, strategy of scientific search must be made taking into account imperatives of human existence. Against the background the widespread recognition ofmodern science dehumanization, the peculiar meaning and value obtain an axiological - deductive system of the occurrence theoreticaldescription and processes, in which the human existence of interests and parameters are presented at and considered.

An axiological approach to science shows, that it must be understood as an integral constituent part of modern social development. The scientific cognition axiology is admitted as its integral line. The science mustn’t be subordinated to narrow-pragmatic interests, and monopoly of military-industrial complex.The valuesystem prospering in the industrial society is exposed to shattering criticism. The mankind is in front of the realization of its helplessness in the control of overall-growing up technical power of modern civilization. The industrial society creates the atmosphere of mega-risks; it is focused on the consumption ideals that lead mankind to the blind alley. However, theneglect with spiritual values for the sake of the material doesn't promote harmonious development of the person. This problem wasset in the production of the American philosopher, sociologist and psychoanalyst Erich Fromm «To have or be?». Together with it, there are researches of Gabriel Marcel «To be and have» and Baltazar Shtemin «The possession and an existence» which names are symptomatic and aims for the comparison of two and incommensurable value worlds in principle: the values of existence connected with the absolute value of life, and the consumer value, which is leading away into bad eternity.At first sight, the alternative, which is called life or possession, contradict the sensiblemeaning. Really, in order to live it is necessary to eat, drink, and possess things and to satisfy your elementary requirements. But, does it meanthat the main value and life meaning is in the possession? Philosophers warn: as your life is more insignificant and the less manifestations are found by your real life, than the largest meaning is acquired by the stranger property andestranged life, and the human purpose is not to possess much, it is to be much. From Luka it was told in the Gospel: «What is the advantage of getting the whole world, and to ruin itself, or to damage itself?» Erich Fromm as a doctor-psychoanalyst supervising on the sick world is obliged to make a decision: «The possession and existence are main two methods of human life, the prevalence of one from where, it determines the differences in the individual human characters and social character types» [12, p. 45]. The consumption values bring with itself an orientation to the maximum profitachievement. In a counterbalance of this valuable system, there are other values of civic community in the social life, directed to the assertion of speechfreedom, of a principled criticism, justice, rights for the education, professional recognition, and scientific rationalityvalues.

Conclusions

1. The human subject is usually included into the subject of social perception. Therefore, the main problem of this perception form is to understand stranger «I» not in the role of certain objet, but in the role of another subject as a subject-activity beginning.

2. The social-humanitarian accent of the single, individual and unique things are on the basis of common and regular thing. This is what, that Weber in a civilized manner called a significant, individual reality.

3. The social-humanitarian perception is always a valuable-semantic assimilation and reproduction of human existence. The categories of «meaning» and «value» are keys for understanding of social perception specific. The humanitarian perception is appealed to reveal and prove the meaning and values of existence.

4. The indissoluble and permanent connection is a social perception with values and world outlook components. If these components are as outward in relation to erudition maintenance in the natural science, so they are included into the erudition self-maintenance in humanitarian science.

5. The valuable orientations confine the significant, essential thing from insignificant, inessential things for this human. These orientations act as an important factor, regulative motivation of the personality.

6. The profound development and perfection of the social perception methods and new typical tendencies formations of world and native social-knowledge must be in the center of attention of as social philosophers and so science philosophers.

7. There is an indissoluble and constantconnection of social perception with values, and with world outlook components. In the social-humanitarian sciences, they are included in the knowledge self-maintenance.

8. The valuable orientations confines the significant, essential thing from insignificant, inessential things for this human.The humanitarian cognition cooperates on the revelation, system substantiation, and existence values in great measure.