History and evolution of the scientific thought (página 2)

Finally it is possible to formulate the following interrogations: 1. What is the impact in the society, in the daily life or in the culture in general and in the entire world, the use and the development of the scientific and technological thought? 2. Which is the intention of the Basic and applied Science, as well as of the Technology in the life of being a human being and in the Society? 3. Which is the advantage of the man of science, on the ordinary person, with regard to the awakening of the conscience? 4. How does the man of science can, to help to promote the cognitive top instruments of man? 5. Will the scientist be able any day, to transform to the ordinary consciences, across the scientific and technological knowledge? 6. Will the scientist be able any day to manage in a future, to discover and to understand the origin of the man, across the scientific and technological knowledge?

Ramon Ruiz.

Culiacan, Sinaloa, Mexico, on September 12, 2006.

Introduction

From the HUMAN BRAIN there comes any feeling, thought, emotion, memory, desire, language or aptitude to learn, to reason and to investigate. From this organ the creativity and the imagination grows, he and the sensory organs are the bridge between the physical world of the objects and the world of the Ideas or Representations of the man; that across the knowledge of the phenomena manages to understand the laws that govern in the Nature and in the Society. And it is like that, that with the help of the science and the technology the man, can transform the resources that are in the environment for the sake of the Humanity.

The human being must be seen and studied as a totality, as everything. Since the human being is not a cosmic accident, but a culminating phase of all the natural order, with the peculiar and important function that to realize. Only he can illuminate to the nature with the light of the understanding and direct consciously his life and his activities inside a voluntary harmony with this order, since only he, of all the visible beings, possesses the faculty of rational comprehension, for weak and fragile that is, of this cosmic harmony.

Historical precedents

On having analyzed the historical origins of a big diversity of scientific, technical, social and artistic disciplines, it is established that these had a rudimentary practice since the man appeared on the Earth.

The same happens with the origin of the SCIENCE, since one affirms that the Acts of thinking are universal and so ancient as the man; and that due to his physical limitations, the prehistoric men had the need to gather together and to cooperate between yes for being able to reach, in a joint way, certain targets with major efficiency and economy of action and resources.

The activities of the prehistoric man took as an essential target satisfying his needs related to the Survival in a way of dangers, tensions, discomfort, etc. Meanwhile a man was devoting himself to achieve his ends for yes same, realized Acts of intuitive thought; when it was acting as a whole, inside the group rudimentary aspects of intuitive thoughts were happening as a whole, we support in the experience of previous activities.

The hunting for animals to make use of his meat as food and the skin as garment performed the principal activities of which during a lot of time the prehistoric men realized and which it serves as undeniable indication of a form of Primitive Organization and of the transmission experiences in the groups. To realize such activity in group needed a Plan of Action to achieve the target with major facility and minor risks for the safety of the individuals, since to hunt wild animals was a dangerous adventure.

At first the Plan of Action was consisting of scaring to the animals throwing stones, expressing screams, etc., to direct them to an abyss or pitfalls previously constructed for the attainment of the target.

The methods were evolving in the measurement in which they were using his Intelligence to invent weapon (mallet, spear, and later the arch and the arrow), like instruments to improve the ways of realizing his activities of fighter, were sustained in the observation and the needs of his environment; but this was achieved thanks to the experience and the human reasoning.

Everything previous needed from the Human Cooperation, where we can identify a common target of group, a rudimentary division of the work, and for logical deduction, to certain persons who were exercising the leadership on others.

1.1.-ORIGINS OF THE KNOWLEDGE From remote times, the man was already worrying for the fundamental questions of the reality that they were affecting in a special way to his existence: the origin, the nature, the history and the purpose of the beings and, between these, of the man himself. As response that was straining for giving to these questions did not perform rational order – as the philosophy will do it later-, but of magic and mythical – religious nature, it constructed one to know previously to the philosophy which the philosophers usually call " to know prephilosophically ".

Knowing prephilosophically understands, then, the deepest and universal expositions of the man, expositions that very much later (properly in the VI th century B.C.) the philosophy recaptures and tries to answer of rational and systematical form.

Since it has distinguished itself, knowing prephilosophically worries, consequently, for knowing and explaining, of magic and mythical – religious form, the origin, the nature, the history and the purpose of the beings.

Of magic form because in epochs of knowing prephilosophically the man it makes use of the magic to know, to dominate and to explain the partial reality or whole of the phenomena that happen in the nature.

With the term magic – of the Greek Magike Tecne: the art of the magic-, it was designated originally "the divinatory art of the priests mazdeos" of the zoroastrismo, in Persia.

He magic is of oriental origin and it spread in Occident during the period Greco-Roman, lasted of more or less secret form along the Middle age to return to the light with the Renaissance, epoch in which he was conceived as part of the philosophy that "allows the man to work the nature and to dominate it". And it was like that, as this way the magicians, a meda tribe or priestly Persian caste, they were devoting themselves to the astronomy and to the astrology; that's why, they were had "as managers of the supernatural forces".

The magic was of that time and it has kept on being a way of knowledge and mastery of the entire reality.

His myth – of the Greek myths: word, public speech, history-, faithful to his sense original, means any history regarding a real fact belonging to the origins, and repeated in the worship or in the history of the world and of the man. The fact becomes present in the words of the narrator since, in other words, "the myth is a history of the time primitive, had for real, which explains and bases the phenomena of the environment, of the history, of the society and of the human life".

Now then, the myth lives and re-lives through his force in the polytheistic religion, which in his religious ceremonies brings the events gone on to the present in the words of the one that he narrates, of that he sings the events spent as explanation of the present reality.

This way, also the myth and the religion are a form of knowledge, since history announces us the finished reality, world, man, and to the same divinity, which they present in the history of both, since it happened in case of Mexico, Mesopotamia, Egypt and Greece.

The myth, then, knows in his level and explains, to his way, the reality that it makes constantly present in the words of the narrator.

1.2.-The Thought and his Factors What means to think? Thinking is an activity that we realize in a natural and spontaneous way, every moment, every day, and all the human beings of the whole world during our ephemeral stay and passenger in this planet earth.

Perhaps some of them wonder: "What is to think?", or: "Why do we think?" he seems to us to know it perfectly; but if we are forced to answer we feel confused, faltering, and finish with confessing our ignorance.

Factors of the thought

> Thinking Subject.

> Psychic Process of thinking.

> Thought-out Object

> Expression of the thought-out thing.

1.3.-The processes of the Human Thought The thought is defined as the mental derivation of mental elements (thought) from the perceptions and as the manipulation and the combination of these thoughts. To the thought in general he is named sometimes cognition. To the processes of the thought there are called they, sometimes, cognitive processes, and to the thoughts it is called them cognitions (of the Latin cogito, that means "fodder "; wherefrom it comes also "cogitar").

he term to "think" includes mental tidy and untied activities, and describes the cognitions that take place during the judgment, the election, the resolution of problems, the originality, the creativity, the fantasy and the sleep.

They are the cognitive processes those that distinguish in a more clear way the man of the animals; the top thought provides the man of advantages for the survival that they have parallel, since to solve problems with great advance and to save abysses (with the thought) long before coming to them. The French philosopher Blase Pascal came to the conclusion that the cognition was the divine gift of the Creator of that the eternal dignity of the man was basing only on his aptitude to weigh. Pascal wrote that: "The man is only a cane that he thinks, the cane of more fragile nature. He dies of a simple jollification, of a simple drop of water. But although the universe was conspiring to squash it, the man would keep on being nobler than what it makes it fall down, since it is known that he dies and the universe does not know anything about the victory that it obtains on the man".

3.1. The psychologists are interested in the thought for several reasons:

> The rules of the thought "without errors", he allows to understand the perturbations motivacionales and emotional of the cognition.

> The experiments about the thought look for skills for the resolution of problems and, often, they discover better methods.

> The logic clarifies the scientific method.

> The investigations you continue about the thought that they study, this cognitive process that little recognizes so and that bases every important progress of the arts and the sciences. The investigation tries to discover the creative latent talent.

> The thought is accompanied by neurophysiologic phenomena that reveal preeminent properties of the nervous system.

> The human thought is compared with the animal "thought", which allows to extract unsuspected conclusions about the development and the evolution of the man and the animals.

> The computers have simulated to the thought. The investigation of the thought allows to do thin designs of computers.

> The thought is fundamental for the intelligence, and the investigation of the thought favors the improvement of the tests of intelligence.

> The thought and, especially, the fantasy are the foundation of the test projective that evaluate the personality.

> The cognitive deviation distinguishes to the pathological personalities of the normal ones.

It is this material named history and evolution of the scientific thought studies the ideas and the concepts, the affiliation of the elements of the thought, the inductive and deductive logic, the productive thought (the judgment, the comparison and the resolution of problems), the novel thought (the originality and the creativity), the fantastic thought (the fantasy and the sleep), the activity neuromuscular and the cortical that they accompany on the thought, the development of the processes of the thought in the individual, and the apparent cognition of the animals and the machines.

1.3.2. Elements and functioning of the thought Next there will be studied the simple ideas, like units of thought. James Mill wrote that the perceptions that we have by means of the senses, exist only for the presence of the object, and they disappear when it is not present. It is known that it forms of our constitution the fact that, when our perceptions disappear, for the absence of his objects, there is something that remains … We designate to this trace, to this copy of the sensation, which remains after it eliminates the perception (sensopercepción), with the name of idea (mental representation that generates the human brain, in the individual). The word "Idea or representation" does not express anything any more than the simple fact, which is indisputable … This way, we have two classes of mental phenomena: one, which exists when the object of the sense is present; other, which exists after the object of the sense has stopped being present. The first class of phenomena called it "Perceptions "; another "Idea or mental Representation".

In the XIX Th century previous perceptions appeared to the scrutiny. The Ideas can designate to the perceptions of any sense; even the visual ones (think about the white snow with the closed eyes), the auditory ones (think about the noisy thunder while a few stoppers have positions in the ears) and the gustatory ones (think about the herring salted with the empty mouth). For this mental production of ideas, some time ago that the language has assimilated the word ideation and his adjective ideativo, that James Mill proposed.

The ideas can be mental images (almost you copy of the perceptions) or mental symbols (substitutes without images of the perceptions).

The persons possess clearly different faculties to evoke mental images; someone of them can avert lived images or symbols; others, moderate images or symbols, and others cannot avert any image, but only symbols.

This was the surprising discovery of sir Francis Galton, an English anthropologist of last century. Galton, in one of the first statistical psychophysical studies, examined the ideas used by the scientists and the schoolboys.

Galton said to them: "Think about the table of his breakfast, since it was when they sat down to her this morning. Is it the dark or quite clear image? Is it his brightness comparable to the real scene? Are all the objects really defined at the same time, or there is some moment in which the place more clearly definite is more limited than in the real scene? Are there very precise and natural the colours of the china, the toasts, the crust of bread, the mustard, the meat, the parsley or any another thing that has been in the table? To discover the wide scale of the mental imagination, Galton arranged the responses of hundred adult questioned males, and these are the common appointments in descending order:

1. Brilliant, different, never blurry.

2. So brilliant as in the real scene.

3. On having thought about the table of the breakfast of this morning, all the objects of my mental image are as brilliant as in the real scene.

4. With the eye of my mind I can see the table of my breakfast or an equally well-known thing, so well in all his details as l to vein if the reality is before me.

5. Quite clear and with a lighting comparable to that of the real scene, especially when I evoke it for the first time. Devoted to become tenuous when him one does not pay attention specially.

6. The image of the table of my breakfast is quite clear, definite well; also the part where I feel and his surroundings are definite well.

7. I can evoke any alone object or any group of objects, but not the whole table simultaneously. Generally, the things are definite well. Our table is long; in my mind I can walk the look for the table; but not the whole table simultaneously.

8. Dark and indistinct, anyway, I can do a relation of the table of the breakfast of this morning; sliced herrings, roast chickens, bacon, rolls, jam of quite clear colour, plates of green tenuous colour with pink flowers raised, the garments of the girls, etc. Also I can say where all the plates were and where the persons sat down.

Galton spent his life looking individuals who had an extraordinarily vivid imagination; one, for example, was evoking images of combs and was counting his teeth. Nevertheless, the most expensive treasure of Galton was Flinders Petrie, an archaeologist whose technical works about Egypt keep on being classic; Petrie towards mathematical routine calculations with an imaginary rule of calculation, was preparing the rule and was reading the responses mentally.

Therefore, we can say that, the investigations confirm that the cognitive productiveness does not depend necessarily on the mental images; often intellectual eminences use symbols exclusively.

During more than 60 years, the psychologists have studied the children eidetic (of the Greek eidetic, that it means " relatively to the images "), who possess images eidetic as persistent that appear immediately after the visual stimuli and remain great more time than the posimágenes, prints or common denials. The recent investigations reveal that about 8 % of the children is eidetic; this gift disappears after the adolescence begins.

The eidetic describe with extraordinary detail, since it is possible to notice in this taken extract of a typical protocol: "I see the woman with the sunshade in his hand. There is a type that runs in his car, his right foot is in the air … The man of the right hand has lost his cigar, which has fallen down to the soil next to him … " Ralph Norman Heber and his companions inform the following finds in his investigations with children eidetic in North American.

> The children eidetic present themselves with equal frequency in all the ages between the seven and thirteen years (more or less). The eidetic males and women present themselves with equal frequency.

> The imagination eidetic is not related to the intelligence.

> The eidetic preserve his aptitude to have images eidetic as during the whole infancy.

> The undue attention that lends during the scrutiny disturbs to the images eidetic as; for example, the attentive eidetic that verbalizing the content of the picture stimulus during the exhibition, images cannot form eidetic as. This experimental observation is the opposite of what is waited, and it is not understood.

> The eidetic have little control on the images eidetic as. They can neither change the size of the image her nor withdraw of the surface where there appeared the picture stimulus (a child said that "it was falling down).

1.3.3. Concepts (derivative ideas) In the XVIII Th century, Leonhard Euler, Swiss mathematician who was living in Germany, discovered patient and deliberately, a frightening capacity of the human mind; he wrote the following thing: "The senses represent objects that exist externally and all the simple ideas refer to them. But with these simple ideas, the mind forms many other ideas that they already do not represent to the objects that exist really".

For example, when I look at the Full moon, I form the idea of roundness; but I cannot affirm that the roundness exists for yes same. The Moon is round, but the roundness does not exist separated from the Moon … here the mind exercises a new faculty, which is called a power of abstraction; this happens when the mind gives his attention only to a quality or quantity, as if unit was already not to the object. These ideas that are acquired by abstraction, are named notions, to distinguish them from the simple ideas that they represent to the objects that exist truly … there is a type of additional notions that form equally by means of the abstraction, and that provide to the mind the most important material.

When I think about a pear tree, a cherry tree, an apple tree, an oak, a fir, etc., all these simple ideas are different. Nevertheless, I notice that there are several things that they have in common, as, for example, the trunk, the branches and the roots. To the symbol on which all these qualities concentrate I call it a tree. So that the idea of tree, which I have formed this way, is a generic notion and understands the resemblances of the pear tree, the cherry tree and, in general, of all the trees that exist or they will exist.

The knowledge intellectual

Is the appropriation of the objects that us cannot be presented by the senses, to which they cannot stimulate. These objects are the ways of life of the things and his relations, what sound, what they cost, why and why they are, etc., etc.

The successful knowledge and that can serve us to acquire new knowledge, constitute ours to know, which is, therefore, the possession or incorporation of our life of knowledge ready to be updated. It is usually called to know potential, to separate it from the effective use of this knowledge that name to know current. Also it receives also the name of knowing the completion of the psychic process in which something is known.

The knowledge and, therefore, knowing, is achieved by means of the production of certain experiences, which set receives the name of thinking. East reveals us as a psychic event of peculiar nature: it turns on objects, which it treats of apprehender whole or partially, refers to them, them lie. Let's remember what in us happens, when we hear a word or a phrase that we understand; we give them a sense: this one to give sense and acts of thinking are this sense. They them are also the expression of our words, what we lie as they and our mental. For him we feel especially active, it is one to go towards here and there, one always to strain, with a point of view, one continued pointing, it prays in this direction, prays in other one.

According to Aristotle (384-322 to. of C.), all the alive beings also have the aptitude to feel (they perceive and have emotions) the world of his environment and to move in the nature. But more nevertheless, the human beings have in addition to the aptitude to think or to reason, or, in other words, of to arrange his sensations in several groups and classes. The human being has feelings, emotions, and the aptitude to move as the animals, but also a capacity, which only has the human being, and is that of thinking rationally and emotionally; to be or acquiring a level or state of conscience. Which allows him and helps to understand in a conscious way all the processes to which he turns out to be submitted during his interaction in the society and in the world.

1.4.-Some problems of the Knowledge What is the knowledge? It is a process in which there are linked narrowly the operations and mental, subjective procedures, with the operations and forms of activities objectives, practical, applied to the objects. The knowledge that arises as product of this process, takes the stamp (trace) of the interrelated aspects.

It is the appropriation of present objects to our conscience. This appropriation peculiarìsima allows us to act on the world, to direct our conduct and to give a sense to our life. The possession of the successful knowledge constitutes ours to know, which constantly our effort to acquire new knowledge and it serves as plot in which the new procurement are woven.

The philosophical problems and his characteristics

The philosophy has arisen thanks to the human curiosity, as a beginning of the knowledge to describe, to analyze and to explain the phenomena and puzzlers that appear in the nature, in the individual and in the society.

He tries to look and of exhibit the response to worrying questions about the truth, the being, the existence authenticates, the Absolute one, the transcendence of the spirit, the good and evil, it is to do philosophy. The tendency to investigate, to know the last sense of the things, has existed in the man along the whole history. In the western world, the above mentioned tendency has excelled from the VI Th century B.C., in Greece. The history of the philosophy is the trace that has left this investigative tendency of the man, it is the series of aspects and solutions that the philosophers have discovered, in his investigations about the reality.

The problems regarding the knowledge It is a question of determining the validity of the knowledge. In what conditions is it real? When do we reach really the truth? Up to where they reach and our cognitive faculties limit themselves? The importance of this problem results from the moment in that offer themselves several solutions to the same question. The fact that each one has his own response, and, sometimes, completely opposite to that of others, it does not stop being worrying (the dialectical law of the unit be remembered and it fights of the opposite ones), for that it tries to study in depth the reality.

Why is no the only response to the problems of the soul, the freedom, God, the good and evil? The same History of the Philosophy, with his chain of systems and solutions, is a motive of worry for the philosophical spirit.

There have been five solutions to the problem of the knowledge: the skepticism, the empiricism, the rationalism, the idealism, the realism. The skepticism denies validity to all knowledge; the best thing is doubting. The Empiricism only grants cognitive capacity to the sensitive faculties; or rather, knowledge is valid only when it is supported in some sensitive experience. The rationalism, on the contrary, claims that the senses cheat, and that the need and the universality of the scientific knowledge only are obtained by means of the intellectual faculties. The Idealism, for his{your} part, he denies that we could go so far as to know to the things independent from the subject, finally, it supports that yes we have valid knowledge reached by the senses and the intelligence, and that they reach to the same reality, which is independent from the subject that he knows.

Tendencies in the scientific investigation With the intention of understanding the controversy that as regards the comprehension of the social sciences has been generated; there has adapted herself the taxomonía of Burell and Morgan (in Of Cock 1997). According to these authors, the principal currents of thought in the social sciences can be studied doing a map of any theory or coherent investigation along two dimensions: the dimension Objetive/Subjetic and the Regulatory / revolutionary dimension.

Dimension Objetive/Subjetic For effects of our investigation, we assume that the first dimension refers to the constant opposition between two radical tendencies, the objectivists and subjectivists.

The objectivists, who look for the explanation of the phenomena giving to the information excessive objectivity. His interest centres on the generation of universal laws by means of the search of causes and effects; these tendencies, they have been named positivist tendencies, every time only it costs the positive fact (that one that it is possible to demonstrate). For these, the world does not depend on the subjects, since, on having been governed by laws, it is possible to control the sociocultural phenomenon.

He subjectivists claim a comprehension of the social phenomenon, granting to subjective the principal source of the information; before generating universal laws, there look the description and someone for the comprehension of particular stages.

The social world depends on the subjects and it is them who construct it and the vivencial; therefore, to know it, it is not enough to generate explanations objectives on him; it is not possible to consider that the social world should be governed by universal laws, since the realities are for the subjects meanwhile every group can live through a different reality. In this sense a social reality cannot squared in a Cartesian plane and percentage table, since the society is a dynamic jumble of significant and important that constitutes the above mentioned reality.

The battle that is lived between these two tendencies is expressed by Mardones, on having thought that two traditions in the philosophy of the scientific method are the tradition Aristotelian and the tradition galileana. First, worried by the comprehension; how, and his teleological explanation from the essence of "giving account of the facts". Second, worried for why and why, does it occur of the ideas of Galileo, Plato and Bacon, and does it try the explanation from the causes and consequences of the phenomena. Since his interest is the general law that governs the phenomenon, it returns, according to the author, in mechanism and functionalist.

Hammersley and Atkinson, admit likewise, that two paradigms have existed in conflict in the social sciences, on the one hand the positivism (dimension Objetivista) that privileges the quantitative proper methods of the natural science; and on the other hand the naturalism (dimension Subjectivist), which defends the description objective from the phenomenon from a natural way.

Referring to the same controversy, Taylor and Bogdan, they admit two theoretical principal perspectives in the social sciences: the positivism, which affirms that the social scientist must consider the facts or social phenomena to be things that they influence day pupil the persons; and the Phenomenology, which wants to understand the social phenomena from another perspective of the actor. Likewise, Of the Slope, it assumes this controversy from the consideration of qualitative and quantitative methods of social investigation.

This battle between the objectivism and the subjectivism has been based from the paradigmatic considerations of the philosophy considered by Briones, as empiricism, rationalism, idealism, materialism and existentialism. The empiricism, which he considers to be the knowledge as product of the sensitive experiences and has his consolidation in the experiment. The contemporary expression of the empiricism is in the logical positivism.

The rationalism, for whom the knowledge is a product of the reason, inferring consequently the deduction from the discovery of the causes of the phenomena. Any effect, it has his cause; therefore, on having found her, it is possible to dominate his effect. The deductive expression of the rationalism is in the search of laws and his generalization, and is assumed by the positivism, as a contemporary expression.

The idealism, which defines all knowledge as a product of the ideas; for his drives, the world does not exist out of the mind, since what exists is a subjective representation of him. This paradigm has evolved from the most orthodox positions as the idealistic subjectivism, up to the positions that recognize the existence of the world expressed across subjective categories, which, they are independent to all sensory experience, case of the transcendental idealism. It is considered that the maximum contemporary expression of the idealism is the Phenomenology.

The materialism, for this paradigm, everything what exists belongs or depends on the matter, the ideas, for example, is only a consequence of the organization of the matter. His expressions have been achieved from the tendencies functionalists and structuralisms.

For the functionalists, the knowledge does not have to be faced to the facts or consequences, but to the organic function that implies being indivisible in his units, and must be studied by means of methods targets and procedures probabilísticos. A cause cannot turn independently from the consequence, since it corresponds to a structure of function; the stimulus, for example, cannot turn independently from the response, was saying Dewey (quoted by Abbagnano).

The tendencies structuralisms, they rest on the theories of the gestalt or theories configuracionistas of the form. These tendencies, they arise as a response to the atomism of the theories associationism, assuming that the reality does not consist for the sum of the parts, but for the entire or structural form. Before speaking about facts, his drives speak about configuration, forms and fields taken as entire structure. Koler and Koffka were his founders.

The expressions of the materialism are diverse; between them, the historical materialism is considered to be the dialectical materialism, in scientific materialism and the physical materialism and fisicalismo.

The realism, he thinks the existence of the world and the phenomena independent from the mind. According to his drives the world exists this way it has not been thought. In this paradigm different tendencies have appeared; from those that assume the knowledge as an exact representation of the exterior world (ingenuous realism), up to those who think that this reality is necessary to submit it to review (critical Realism).

The second dimension, regulatory / revolutionary, express the constant tension between the entire radicalism of the tendencies objectives and subjective and the possibility of the same tendencies of being achieving more flexible positions.

Tendency Objectivist: A constant tension between the radical thing and the regulatory thing The classic positivism In this dimension, recognized like positivist for all the consulted authors, there are located those investigations that present the following characteristics: (To see Hammersley and Atkinson, Mardones and Briones).

1. The natural science is conceited in terms of the logic of the experiment. It has been constituted in base of the natural sciences and rests fundamentally on the empiricism.

2. The search of universal laws rested on the deductive method and the use of the polls as instruments to generalize, from the rationalist vision of the world.

3. It uses the language of the neutral observation, where he looks for the standardization of skills of observation, to grant the validity of the information, according to perspectives assumed from the realism.

4. Since his characteristic is to be subject to the cross-check and falsación of hypothesis, his target is to verify the theory with the empirical facts. For the previous thing, the used instruments are pre-established and rigid, validated by means of actions previous, which guarantee his universal use.

5. It uses the causal explanation or "Erklaren" as characteristic of the scientific rationalist explanation.

6. His interest centres on the mastery of the positivist knowledge, which from A. Comte, places the emphasis on the prophecy of the phenomena.

The positivism, it has been recognized for big theoretical, achieving his biggest developments from the XVI Th century until the first decades of the XX Th. Between the first drives it is possible to consider Copérnico, Francisco Bacon in 1600, August Comte in 1840, who introduces the term of positivism and Emile Durkheim in 1938, those who were his first representatives. The positivists look for the facts or causes of the social phenomena with independence of the subjective states of the individuals (To see Taylor and Bogdan and Mardones).

The positivism, from a social point of view, was assumed, according to Sandoval, Taylor and Bogdan, and Restrepo, for Emile Durkheim on having proposed, in his book on the rules of the sociological method that: The social scientist must consider the facts or social phenomena to be things that they influence day pupil the persons, and claim with it to introduce the requests of the technical rationalism and the sensitive experience of the empiricism to the social studies. Therefore, Durkheim introduced the experimental method used in the natural sciences, which search to find the causes of the problems to exercise his domain over the phenomenon. This approach rests basically on the translation of the behaviour of a phenomenon or object on Cartesian quadrants and mathematical scales.

Since the classic positivism is the expression of the paradigms empiricist, rationalists and realists of the philosophy, he does not know the influence of the idealism in the knowledge, since he considers it to be a speculation.

The regulatory dimension of the objectivism In the XX Th century, the interventions of the logic introduced to the positivism, they generated the so-called logical positivism, like one of the forms of declaration of the neopositivism. It is a new version of the positivism, Schlick was impelled by Russel, Wittgestein I, y, Carnal, Neurath, Frank, between different, as big representatives of the circle of Vienna (to see Mardones, 1991, 33; Rosental, 1997, 371, and Briones, 1996b, 39).

The authentic existence of the man At present there has taken heyday the Existentialism (Sören Kierkergaard), whose central topic is the elucidation of the characteristics of the authentic existence of the man. It is a question of the most human problem that could affect each one; on his resolution there depends the keynote of the life continuing.

Is the freedom the essential thing in the human life? Are they, perhaps, the moral values (ethics) the most important thing? Of what does the authenticity consist? How must the interrelation and human communication be carried out? How does the human level of authentic existence degrade itself? Such are the principal questions that are tried to solve in the above mentioned philosophical current, and this is alone a sample of a plot of the scientific knowledge. Which has his base in the humanism, since across the scientific knowledge, he tries to find a solution, and of put it at the disposal of the humanity, for the best benefit of the emotional and intellectual development of the individual and of the society.

The problem of the constitution and evolution of the Universe The problem of the time and of the space, of the evolution and of the essence of the matter, they constitute one of the central topics in the works and investigations of the physicist modern. Generally they are the scientists those who have devoted himself to penetrate philosophically in the above mentioned matters. The important thing is to clarify that, at the moment when a person tries to base the knowledge as soon as you fell, in your own branch, in this moment it is doing Philosophy. The Cosmology is the philosophical branch that treats the above mentioned matters, and she was one of the first ones that were cultivated between the Greeks.

The problems of the Logic, the Ethics and the Aesthetics The typical topic of the Logic is the order of the concepts. It is up to her to pass about the mental structures, the correct processes in the reason, and the laws of any structured well thought, as that of the definitions, the divisions, the categorizations, the conversion of intentions, etc.

To the Ethics it corresponds to treat the questions about the good and the evil. His importance derives from the role governing that the above mentioned science acquires in the mind of the one who investigates and comes it to based solutions. Together with this problem they connect that of the obligation in harmony with the freedom, that of the categories of values, that of the virtues, that of the autonomy in interrelation with the heteronomy, etc.

The philosophy is one to know fully humanly, to the effect that it penetrates exactly in the topics and questions that affect intimately the personal life of every man. This way for example, the Philosophy is the one that treats the existential, such topics as the freedom, the love, the interpersonal relations, the loyalty, the obligation, the good, the evil, the supreme end and the happiness. This way, at the same time that it fills the requisites of a science as for the rigor and order that of her is demanded, this way also it fills the proper topics of a properly humanistic study. The philosophy is, since, a balanced synthesis of knowing human being.

Characteristics of the philosophical problems, as for his resolution: a) The Philosophy, as for the resolution of his problems, it continues an eminently rational method. Which does not mean that the empirical information is rejected, so, on the contrary, these constitute, precisely, the material on which the intelligence deepens and finds his cause or reason. The philosophical method is, since, a balanced use of sensitive experience and reason, it is experimental – rational.

b) And finally, the Philosophy is disinterested, as soon as that the proper knowledge of his dissertation, problems and solutions provide, for yes same, a full satisfaction to the intellect that contemplates them. The Philosophy constitutes, for yes same, a valuable object, to which it stretches the intelligence as full purpose. To obtain it, to contemplate it and to satiate itself in her is the same thing. Which is not an obstacle so that, later, in a practical attitude, it is possible to obtain applications, uses and derivations, is to base other sciences, is to apply and to arrange the proper life.

Differences between phylosophy and sciences

With the concept of Philosophy already explained previously, we can give now a clearer idea of her if we compare it with knowing scientist as at present it is understood, that is to say with the experimental or particular sciences. As soon as the Philosophy was distinguished with regard to the experimental sciences, we will do a comparison of the solutions that give both levels of knowing opposite to the same topic to elucidate, for example, opposite to the man, to the world, to the number, to the human conduct, or opposite to the beauty or the happiness.

Difference between next causes and last causes The philosophy studies the last causes (or supreme), whereas the experimental sciences study next causes. For example, on having studied the movement, the Physics receives the topic by means of the forces, rubbings, weight and balances, which they affect to the bodies. These are the next causes, and they differ because they always remain in the plane of the sensitive thing and of the experimentable. On the other hand, the Philosophy examines two beginning that explain everything to occur into his essential form, to know, the act and the potency. These are supreme causes, and they do not remain already in the sensitive level; only they are received in the intelligible level.

In other words, the philosopher tries to come up to the essence of the studied object, and his explanation is in vertical sense, since it leaves the sensitive and experimental level. On the other hand, the scientist prepares explanations in horizontal sense, inside an experimental level. The fundamental difference of both types of knowing resides, since in his different formal object.

The totality and the bias of the material object Only the Philosophy tries to include the totality of the things; his material object is wider that it could happen. On the other hand, other sciences are particular, that is to say, they study a part or certain sector, between all the entities.

Experimental method and Rational Method The experimental sciences underline the need of the sensitive experience, and this way it is in effect, so the laws of the nature are not deduced of certain beginning, but they have to be observed in a sensitive way, even using the experimentation.

On his part the Philosophy, even if it could not do without the sensitive experience, insists on the Rational Method and in the use of the understanding, thanks to which it is possible to receive the essences, the first beginning and the supreme causes that they base to the Universe.

Difference between Epísteme and Sofia Another way of receiving the difference between two types of knowing, is in what Aristotle called Epísteme and Sofia.

Epísteme is the science, but understood, not as a set of truths, but as an intellectual demonstrative habit. The subject that possesses this quality has facility to demonstrate with rigor and accuracy his asserts, can base his dissertation, or, gives the causes of those that it supports.

For his {your} part, Sofia is the knowledge that there loves the philosopher (knife-edges: that it loves; Sofia: knowledge), and it consists of a conjunction of episteme and nous. The Philosophy, therefore, includes also the epísteme or demonstrative habit, but he adds something more: the nous.

Nous is the intuitive habit of the first beginning; it is the mental quality (intellectual virtue, there says Aristotle) as which a subject has facility to go back in an intuitive way until the first beginning that serve as base to any demonstration.

Therefore, Sofia, as soon as it contains epísteme, takes part of the scientific rigor, and as soon as it contains nous, enters until the beginning. Is here the resemblance and the difference between science and Philosophy. The philosopher is, since, a scientist who enters until the causes and the first beginning.

The grades of abstraction Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) and Saint Thomas of Equinox (1224-1274) they explained the triple graduation of the formal abstraction.

In the first grade, which corresponds to the Physicist, one does without the individual matter, and is studied to the mobile entity.

In the second grade one does without the sensitive matter, and there is studied to the entity quantum (the quantity). In this level the Mathematics is.

Finally, in the third grade one does without any matter, and is studied to the entity as soon as such, in the widest possible horizon, which is called transcendental, and which includes to everything all that exists. This third grade of formal abstraction is the one that corresponds to the Metaphysics, nucleus of the whole Philosophy.

Consequently the particular sciences belong at a level categorial (distinguished), and only now to sit that the Philosophy, from the moment in which it goes until the first beginning, is a governing science; this for two reasons:

The Philosophy applies to all other sciences, because it bases the beginning of them. At the moment when a scientist analyzes the beginning of his own science, ipso facto is doing philosophical work.

For example: the Mathematics deal with the relations between quantities; but at the moment when a mathematician checks and criticizes the bases of his certainty and the beginning that serve him to base his reasons, it penetrates the limit of his field and touches that of the Logic or of the Theory of the Knowledge, that are typical branches of the Philosophy. Exactly this is what has happened in the XIX Th and XX Th centuries, when the mathematicians managed to clarify dissertations that now contain in the branch so-called mathematical Logic, and that must understand each other as an enlargement of the Logic Aristotelian.

On the other hand, the Philosophy also is a governing science, because it gives norms that govern the human conduct, basing on the analysis of the nature of the man and of his requirements, with which it derives the general lines of an authentically human existence.

Other parallel sciences Finally, it is possible to mention other branches of the Philosophy that have his corresponding parallelism in some experimental science. For example: the Philosophy of the Mathematics studies the essence of the quantities, the essentials of his certainty, etc., whereas the Mathematician studies the relations between quantities.

The Rational psychology and the Experimental Psychology The first one is a philosophical science, and the person studies the topic of the soul, of his faculties (intelligence and will), the immortality, the spirituality, the freedom. On the other hand, the experimental Psychology studies preferably the observable phenomena and his explanations, in horizontal sense; for example, the stimulus and the corresponding reaction. It uses "test", statistics, experiments done in big number of persons. This way it is as there have arisen laws, like that of Weber (that it relates the sensation and the stimulus), and also the interesting study on the unconscious one, from the theory of the psychoanalysis of Freud.

The philosophical Aesthetics treat of the topic of the essence of the art and of the beauty. His method is rational. On the other hand, a scientific – experimental Aesthetics would treat the same topics, but in the plane of the experimentable; his methods would be done by means of " tests ", statistics, remarks in the history and in the current civilization.

Heráclito, the philosopher of occurring, and of the tension of the opposite ones inside the unit. " Everything changes " (panta laughed), it is the phrase that assumes to him, as symbol of his dissertation, according to which there is nothing in rest. Nobody gets two times in the same river. What he wants to say is that quite this in constant change or movement it continued, from the quantity to the quality, everything dies and is renewed, everything is a cause and effect, and later everything what is an effect happens to be a cause, all the forms of movement of the matter are in constant change. Therefore, in the nature and in the society dynamic processes are realized.

The movement of the matter and the sensory organs

But does the movement of the matter exist or is it only an illusion of the senses? Parmenides criticizes Heráclito, and it is opposed radically to his dissertation on occurring. And he affirms that, the movement is qualified as an illusion of the senses.

Xenon of Elea is a disciple of Parménides and it has become famous for his abstractions or arguments against the movement. The most famous of his abstractions is that of Achilles and the Turtle:

The two compete in a career, and Achilles transfers an advantage in distance to the turtle; from certain moment, the two start running, and when Achilles comes to the place A, where the turtle was, this one already advanced other little, up to the point B; when, again, Achilles comes to the point B, the turtle advanced, in the same space of time, another distance, for small that is, and came to the point C; and this way successively, the turtle would never be reached by Achilles; then the movement does not exist.

Xenon"s intention, with argumentations of this style, is to make to see that, rationally, the movement cannot be explained, but he drives to paradoxical conclusions. This way he adheres to the dissertation of the immobile being, of his teacher Parménides.

Nevertheless, even in the rational plane, the shortcoming of such argumentation consists of dividing the spaces, both in distance and in time, in accordance with a decreasing proportion. If the considered spaces of time were equal, there would no be place for this so absurd conclusion.

Nowadays, we know that, the movement is the way of existence of the matter. The English and French materialists were already exhibiting this idea, considering the movement to be an internal property of the matter. But the materialists of the past were lacking a dialectical finished conception of the movement which qualitative diversity they were reducing often to mechanical processes (theory mechanicist). For Hegel (1770-1831), who was recognizing the universal movement in the world, the substance in movement turns out to be, in end of accounts, the absolute, ideal beginning, and not the proper matter? The founders of the dialectical materialism (K. Marx and F. Engels), basing on the advances of the science of his time, showed that the matter is active and that the source of his activity, of his movement, is in her same. They showed that the matter and the movement are inseparable, that no type of matter can exist without being in movement. Therefore, the movement is the way of existence of the matter. The matter is the base of the whole plurality of phenomena of the nature and of the society because it is linked organically to the movement.

Therefore, without the movement, the world might not exist in general.

The materialist mechanicist were considering the movement to be a simple displacement of the bodies in the space and the time, which was leading to comprising the matter as a mechanical sum of particles of substance – atoms, etc.,-identical, of the same quality and indivisible. For them, the variety of forms and classes of the movement of the matter was coming down to the mechanical displacement of the physical bodies.

In contrast to the materialist mechanicist, Marx and Engels revealed the variety of forms of movement of the matter. The movement is not only a change of place; it is also the caloric – molecular movement and the light, the electrical and magnetic tension, the disintegration and the chemical combination, the biological and, life finally, the most complex and varied form of the movement: the social life.

Therefore, the concept of movement, from the point of view of the dialectical materialism, understands all the changes that take place in the nature and in the society. "The movement applied to the matter, is a change in general".

The movement includes all the changes that produce to them in the world target. His concept is universal in the dialectical materialism and it has, for it, big importance of beginning.

The concept of change is wider than that of development. The change understands, in addition to the progressive development, the regressive movement and the simple displacement in the space, in which there cannot be progress I do not even return.

The knowledge presents two aspects: 1. That of the activity in exercises (knowing).

2. That of result of this activity, which forms the content of ours to know (knowledge). A few times it takes place as soon as the object is present; others it demands a more or less long and complicated work and the position of acts of very diverse character: I have here why one can speak about functions or facts of knowledge.

Classes of knowledge Traditionally have distinguished in the study of the knowledge two spheres: that of the sensitive knowledge and that of the intellectual knowledge. The knowledge sensible Is characterized by his aspect purely apprehensive, by the concrete individuality of his objects and by his physiological necessary manner of acting. The objects can be present to the conscience for yes same (immediate apprehension) or by means of representative (mediate apprehension).

On the other hand, the objects, placed they all in the way in which we live, can belong to the physical way or to the psychic (social) way constituting his apprehension our external experience, or can be the same events of our life (subjective way), our experiences, which appropriation forms the internal experience.

Forms of the Sensitive Knowledge The principal forms of the sensitive knowledge are: the sensation, the perception, this way own like of the sensitive objects and of the neighbour, the imagination and the memory. In all of them it is necessary to distinguish the aspects of function and content.

The perception. – Is the immediate apprehension of something, in whose reality we believe.

For the way of making to him the objects present to the conscience and for the diversity of these, the perception can be sensitive, interns and of the neighbour.

The perception sensible. – Is the form of cognitive conscience of the objects to her presents with intervention of the senses. It is an extremely complex function, with which we answer to the performance on our body of the beings of the physical way. Nevertheless, into the analysis of the perceptive function, as explanation of his complexity, a more elementary act is already admitted and irreducible to simpler other: the sensation, which content serves as base on having perceived.

What is the sensation? It is the pure and simple conscience of something, produced in us on having worked on our body the physical beings. It forms the base of all our sensitive perceptions, and it is accompanied and as wrapped or penetrated by multiple acts.

His aspects. – The aspects of the sensation are two: that of being an act of conscience and that of content of this act. In the sensation of sound, a thing is feeling the sound and other one the felt sound.

The typical of the first aspect (sensatio) the being is elementary, pure and simple conscience: the pure apprehension of the subject opposite to the pure colour, the pure sound that stimulates him.

The second aspect (sensatum) differs for being: a) The effect corresponding to the performance of the object that it causes and the response of the subject to the performance; b) Something elementary, concrete, relatively independent, intuitive and consistent. That is to say, that the "green" contained of my sensation, is not anything of mine not of the object that it has caused, but the resultant one of both factors; it neither is joined inseparably with such a my act nor has to go necessarily accompanied of certain contents; it is, precisely, this "green" that now I feel, which cannot make a mistake with no other; it presents certain plastic, alive way of life, and such a consistency that allows the one that could reappear before the conscience in different conclusions, as in the representation.

The conditions of the sensation. – A being of the physical world (a house, a clock, a caramel) it acts on a part of the human body. Such a performance produces an excitement in the sensitive nerves, which gone over to a nervous center (certain region of the brain), causes the conscious fact of the sensation, like response of the subject.

Being, since, three the elements that in the sensation intervene (a physical being, the organism of the subject and his complex psychic life), the sensation is submitted to a triple conditioned reactions; physical, physiological and psychic. As the sensation arises at the end of the physiological process and favor to him, the conditions determined by the first two elements are conditions previous.

The physical conditions: the stimulus. – The beings of the physical way, as soon as they are causes of the sensation, are called stimuli, and can be defined as "those facts that produce in the organism a nervous excitement that will be accompanied of conscience".

In relation to the organism the stimuli can split into day pupils or interns, according to whom they are exterior or interior to him. Nevertheless, the external stimulus must transform in intern, so that it could cause the sensation.

The external stimuli can be chemical (in the olfactory sensations) and physicists; these, in turn, mechanics (movements), optical, acoustic, thermal and electrical. The interns are or peripheral or central.

The conditions physiological. – Apart from the dispositions momentary and individual, due to the entire corporal economy, influence powerfully and decisively in the sensation not only the structure of the organic parts put in game, but also his functional changes. The organism intervenes in the sensation with the senses, the nerves and the nervous centers.

How or from where is it decided what the individual feels and thinks? According to Hume, it is not the reason the one that he decides what we say or what do; they are our feelings. The rationalist thought had thought that it is inherent in the reason of the man being able to distinguish between the good and evil.

For example, if someone decides to help someone needed from help, they are his feelings (desire, interest, intention, condescension, compassion, altruism, etc.), and it is not the reason, which it starts. Since if it does not give him desire to help (this is the action – will, the final force that impels to the individual to achieve his goal or target, which turns into a process).

Also in this case they are his feelings those that they decide. It is neither sensible nor senseless not to help anybody who needs help, but it can be vile.

Hume adds that, the whole world has certain feeling towards the good of the others. We have the aptitude to show compassion. But all this has not anything in common with the human reason.

Therefore, we cannot prove with the reason how we must act. To act responsibly is not equivalent to sharpen the reason, but to sharpen the feelings that one has towards the others. It does not go against the reason preferring the destruction of the entire world to having a scrape in a finger, said Hume.

The senses or sensory organs are determined part of our body, on which they operate the stimuli. Some of them (the eye, the ear) usually present a particular structure; and they all lodge elements of a peculiar impressive textile; the nervous textile.

The nervous – The nervous system has, as last element, the neuron, real anatomical unit. This is a cell that is known of a nucleus, of several branched extensions that they radiate of that one, calls dendrites, and of a long ramification, which is the so-called axòn or cylinder – axis. The union of the axons of several cells that form the nervous fibbers that, crossing the whole body, meet in the marrow and in the brain, forming bunches and bundles. A nervous route consists of ordinary of many contiguous neurons that happen. The produced excitement, either in the periphery of the organism, either in a nervous center, it is transmitted of neuron in neuron, causing the nervous current, which or there causes a sensation (current nervous afferent) or produces a muscular contraction in the members (current nervous efferent).

The centers nervous – The elements that they gather in certain interior regions of the organism, forming the nervous centers. His purpose is to be a term and beginning of nervous currents and place of his transformation. They are constituìdos for affiliation of innumerable neurons.

Who wants to know? How can acquaintance be? What can be an acquaintance? There turns out to be quite strange that the majority of the persons, even those who have never heard speaking about the Scientific Method (or if they have heard it, little might for them matter) want to understand the world that they makes a detour. Really, this need for knowing is present also in the animals; a monkey, or even a rat, sometimes they will happen for multiple problems only to explore a part of his around.

In the persons, the need is strong, even if highly diversified. He studies some to the birds; others enjoy the reading of obituary news. And in addition to other interests, most of the persons likes understanding to other persons (fell like to yes same).

Therefore, the scientific study of the man can seem related to the obvious thing, while he says to us what any world already knows, or that it offers us extreme or erroneous ideas. But we must recognize and remember that not all the valuable knowledge about the people is obvious and that, affectionately, a lot of "obvious" knowledge often is false or trivial. But two preliminary problems must be established first, to knowing: the questions of the existence of the universe and the acquisition of the knowledge.

Types of problems of the Knowledge Before examining the forms in which we acquire the knowledge and his sources, it is perhaps useful to determine if it is reasonable to accept that we obtain some class of knowledge somehow, and which might be the value of such knowledge, in case it was accepted that such knowledge can be achieved.

The ontological or metaphysical problem, or: "What exists? The basic assumption known about Rene Descartes (1596-1650): " I think, and then I exist" one caused of a long problem time stressed by the theology of the Christian Church. How does the "mind" can know the "matter"? Or in other words: How can we go so far as to know anything about the world? Perhaps it is only a fiction of our imagination! The response of Descartes was ingenious and persuasive; it keeps on worrying the philosophers and scientists of nowadays. It be allowed to suppose me, he said Descartes, that nothing there exists in the absolute thing about the universe, except, the indisputable fact about which I am thinking, here and now, and which, because I am thinking, there must exist an entity that realizes thinking, this is, I. Even more, there must be a part of me that knows and a part (more basic) that it is like everything else, an object of knowledge. But immediately, Discard it was seen before a subsequent problem What happens if only I exist, and does the rest of the universe exist only in the processes of my thought? Descartes worried deeply with this possibility (that later was called solipsism), because for a religious philosopher who could not doubt the God's existence, doubt the existence of the universe was implying that God might be playing a dirty trick of false representation. It is important to realize that the step of "I think, and then I exist" to "the universe exists" does not happen logically, happens only if the additional premises are accepted: " God exists and is infinitely good and honest" and "God gives me the perceptions of the world". The sophist Gorgias solved the quandary some 2500 years ago: "Nothing exists. If something existed he might not be an acquaintance. If something should be known it might not be communicated". He was been interested in particularly the logical and theological quandaries, and the worry of the man for the spiritual thing relegated the problem until the XVII Th century.

Then, the logical final conclusion that anything exists, except the mind of the one that it perceives, was still avoided by Discarding, Leibnitz and Berkeley. For them, God comes to the rescue: if it seems that the world is there, this way it must be; paraphrasing to Discarding: God is not a liar of confidence On having denied the existence of the universe, the solipsism is therefore an atheist and on the contrary; the traditional theism needs from the consideration that the universe is real. (It might argue that the solipsism is a form of theism that we might call an "autotheism ", which it means "I am the God of my own universe". But this variant hardly might be considered to be "traditional"). Nowadays, the exact sciences you have exorcized in high grade the last doubt about the existence of the world as a metaphysical insoluble problem. No response can be passed or pushed back.

The problem epistemological: "How do we obtain the knowledge?" A more permanent objection, really of enough actuality, arises from the second and third affirmations of Gorgias: how, of being possible, can it ago be known and communicated? The first one of these two problems constitutes the base of the system of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804). We can know, he argued, only the impressions of the things, but do not sew themselves, even more, these impressions they are perceived only virtually on having been arranged to categorizations in accordance with certain innate criteria of the mind preceptor. For using empirical methods in order beyond the "simple" appearances, to the "things themselves", any attempt will only be able to end in a speculation without end and esoteric: Although Kant wanted to provide rigorous guidelines for the acquisition of knowledge, really it provided an option for the scientist and an excuse for the metaphysician. The scientist had to leave his effort to know the world or to restate his doubts to admit that it might never but to know more than appearances.

On the other hand, the metaphysician and the theologian could ignore comfortably the relations established empirically on having accepted that these relations really say nothing about the things themselves, only of his projections. Even without doubting the existence of the world, it is possible to see how the distinction of Kant of the perceived phenomena opposite to the "real" things had to lead to the following logical step: the perceptions and the remarks are intimate personal events, which by definition cannot be shared directly. (The perception of someone more, therefore, turns into a projection that can be known by me, only as a projection of "the second order"). Certain logical problems, for example, where the proper mind of one is observant or observed, or both, it must not worry us here.

We will examine on the other hand, the argument, since we cannot know anything of what is "there", of that everything what we can know is learned on having observed and to analyze our own perceptions or those innate ideas that can exist in us.

Supposing that we know nothing about the "real" world, only what we observe inside us, it is nevertheless indisputable that the majority of us, most of the time, we act as if we were hoping that these perceptions and remarks should happen in a quite tidy form, or even more, to use the worrying but precise terms, as if our perceptions were giving in the end the illusion of causality and determinism. When we are wrong on having derived the consequences of this "allusion", a very disagreeable perception can turn out to be like the one that is caused by the perception of an assumption and not necessarily existing, truck that happens on us. Certainly that the fact that the perceptions happen in this tidy form does not prove the "real" existence of the truck. Also we can in exceptional situations, choose cultivating the perceptions independently of his arranging, since it happens in a frenzy or under the influence of a psychedelic drug.

But the difference between the above mentioned is precisely experiences and those who happen arranged in our life in wake what leads us to taking a decision. We can never know if our private perceptions are entirely the product of a deceitful and supernatural conspirator or if it is that some consistent relation exists between what it is out and what is in our brain. Our alternatives consist of acting as if it was possible to know, or to resign ourselves what is, in effect, solipsism. If we accept the last thing, the following obvious step would be to impose our election on our perceptions and to perceive our universe made by us ourselves, in accordance with our desires. Very few of us we are capable of making it like that, and those that do it are not seen by the others with equanimity. They have to be seen as if they were experiencing illusions.

Nevertheless, without doing a very rash jump, it might be reasonable, or at least suitably, to accept that the universe exists, that it has, at least in certain grade, order, and that he can, in certain grade, be at least an acquaintance.

Sources of the Knowledge It is possible to say that, the behaviour faced to the search of the knowledge, is a characteristic of the primitive native so much like of the refined citizen (in fact, of no form it is limited for the man). The motives for the search of the knowledge, they do not need to be the same; they can change from the physical basic needs up to the satisfaction sensation of the domain.

Some of the forms in which the knowledge has been looked by the man seem to us entertaining nowadays; the entrails of the animals are already not a method generally accepted to predict the future (nevertheless, the reading of the coffee and of the tarot is still very popular).

But the magic, like a way of acquiring the knowledge, always neither needs to be spectacular in his procedures, nor can say to him with certainty that such knowledge should always be necessarily erroneous.

The characteristic that defines it, and that distinguishes it from the scientific procedures, consists of the fact that accepts the existence of a relation between the events, which is purely speculative and does not hold to the critical cross-check. Also the form in which it accepts that an event affects other has no base in the natural laws; it forms in that we say, it is supposed that the stars affect to the human destination, does not specify.

We must not fall down in the error of ridiculing the attempts of any cultures in his early stages of development to acquire the mastery of his ambience by means of the occasional use of the magic. Some aspects of the same science developed from the magic, and anyone that are the differences, he shares with the magic the need to know the physical world (in opposition to the metaphysics) and the credence of which the man can be more than a passive thing, disabled to understand, that it is a part of such a world. A more pernicious enough influence is the exercised one by those that they proclaim that they have come to know the nature of the universe on having started thinking about him intensely, or across the inspiration of a supernatural agent. The scientist not necessarily supports that the only valuable knowledge is the empirical one; she can be often a deeply worried person for the spiritual values. But when it thinks about how to discover the functioning of the real, tangible world, it has to, especially, be ready to observe this world, and his inferences must be consistent with the above mentioned observation.

Finally, the arguments appear sometimes saying to us that it is absurd or sinful to study the nature of the man. There are only two possible refutations to these two points of view. The scientist has to, first of all show that his methods increase our knowledge of the man and it must demonstrate that the knowledge is preferable to the ignorance.

The act of the perception

What is the perception? The perception is, simply an act. In accordance with an old and ingenuous concept, the nerves lead the images or properties of the object to the brain where different machines register the stimuli proceeding from the exterior.

The perception is the physical act of receiving impressions or sensory (across the organs of the senses), that is to say, of registering the reflection of the light or, to be more exact, the luminous waves, of registering the sonorous waves, of answering with a sensation when there touch the keys that mark " cold ", " heat " or " pain ".

Therefore, the perception is influenced by emotional factors and desires (affiliation of emotional and sentimental factors), and such psychological external determinants as the suggestion or the influence of group (a process of individual stabilization and of social adaptation).

The basic beginning of the perception: 1. Factors of proximity.

2. Factors of Resemblance.

3. Factors of direction and inclusion.

A perception is a result of the interpretation of two stimuli: the figure and the fund, this is in accordance with the theory of the Gestal.

Then we must understand that, the perception is not an outlying phenomenon, but it is determined by external and internal stimuli. Since, the act of perceiving is an act of integration and of synthesis. The perception is directed by the attention, the interest, the integration and other psychic factors.

The system perceptual and the sensitive world

What are the faculties of the mind? What is the constructive sense of the need and the sense that it has BEING KNOWN in the human life? How does he acquire and across that mechanism HUMAN UNDERSTANDING? So that it serves the individual the UNDERSTANDING? How does the human being know and perceives the information of the exterior and of the interior? The potential possibilities of every person are the most fascinating and interesting of the whole creation.

Ray L. Wilbur What is the human brain? "The ancient Greeks were thinking that the mind was in the heart and not in the human brain. They were thinking that since the mind was essential for the human being, it is it should be in the most vital organ of all the organs".

The brain has approximately the size of two placed hands one along with other one or that of a coconut. It weighs about 1.5 kg, it is of soft consistency, of white – greyish colour, composed basically of water in his cells, so-called neurons.

The individual has two minds, one that thinks and reasons (voluntary or rational acts), and other one who feels involuntary or instinctive acts) is a set of impulsive and powerful knowledge.

There are three brains in one, according to Dr. MacLean (1987), and it was demonstrated that the emotions and the stress affect learning and how learning registers in the brain.

The human brain is the big biological center in which the matter transforms in conscience. The brain is the big center in which there take root two forces of conscience and the mind. Two sides of the human brain, the right side where there develops the imagination and the creativity and the left side that corresponds to the logical analysis and other intelligence. Therefore, the essence of our person or being is our unit of conscience. Inside our brain there happens the biggest miracle of the life that is the power to realize that "I think and exist …" Inside every human being a universe shuts itself up. Perhaps still much more vast and grand than of out formed by million human beings, biological creatures, planets, stars and galaxies.

The personal universe, that of the conscience. There they lie in accordance with Paul MacLein. The whole evolutionary file of the tripartite brain, the reptile, the mammal and the cerebral neocorteza.