Formulation of the problem

The historian can study two kinds of historical possibilities. The first type is a possibility as an assumption about the events of the historical past unknown to us. Reality here does not take into account our conjectures. On the contrary, our conjectures and alternative models for filling in the "blank spots" of history should be consistent with reality. The second type of possibility implies a situation where a reality that has not yet materialized is conceived as the realization of one of the alternatives (from the Latin alter - one or the other of two - the possibility or necessity of something different in relation to the given one), and the possibility is conceived as properties of the existing historical situation, leading to a change in this situation.

Our study is devoted to the second type of possibilities, its study in historical science and its properties as a phenomenon of historical consciousness and as a phenomenon of the historical past. The choice of topic is due to the formulation of the following initial problems: 1) What is the place and role of the idea of ​​alternativeness historical development in domestic historical science? 2) Is the alternative development in the historical past only a useful applied analytical train of thought and is related only to intellectual historical reflection, or does it also have a self-suppressing theoretical meaning and a special concrete historical content? Such a statement of problems causes the presence of two interrelated and complementary components of the work - historiographic and methodological.

The alternativeness of historical development is one of the most functional phenomena of historical consciousness. Awareness or denial of the possibility of a different course of events is often the main reason for turning to the past. When does the realization of alternative historical development arise? Probably, when historians begin to explain the course of events not by the will of the gods, but by the will of man. For example, the already famous book by Niccolò Machiavelli “The Sovereign” (“Prince”) is full of arguments in the subjunctive mood. However, the search for the original historiographic origins of the theme of alternativeness is not included in our tasks. The work is devoted only to the period when the alternativeness of historical development is recognized as a special methodological problem that requires special study.

There are two fundamental opposite approaches in the study of the alternativeness of the past. In the first case, the historian does not go beyond the boundaries of the past, he considers the possibilities actually contained in the past. Moreover, answering the question “could it have been otherwise?”, different historians can give radically opposite answers in relation to the same historical situation. There is a different approach to understanding the alternativeness of historical development, associated with going beyond the boundaries of the past history and counterfactual modeling of events. In this case, the historian may be guided by opposing goals. The first purpose of addressing a failed history is to prove that only what was could be. The second goal is to prove that everything could have been different, and a variant opposite to the actual past could have been realized.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of the above approaches? How can they be applied in the practice of historical research? What problems that cannot be solved with other approaches can be productively solved with the help of a study of alternative historical development? What theoretical directions exist in understanding the multivariance of history in Russian historiography? How have these trends developed? What are the relationships and contradictions between them? What gaps exist in understanding the problem of alternativeness and how can they be filled? These are the main questions to which the dissertation is devoted.

Object and subject of research

The object of the historiographical part of the study is the work of domestic scientists devoted to the problem of alternative historical development. The subject of research here is the historiographic, theoretical, methodological and discursive characteristics of the development of the idea of ​​alternativeness in Russian historical science.

The object of the methodological part of the study is the alternativeness of historical development as a phenomenon of historical consciousness and as a phenomenon of the historical past. The subject of research in this case - metaphysical, logical, socio-psychological foundations and empirical methods for studying the alternativeness of historical development.

Goals and objectives of the study

The study has two main objectives.

The first goal: to trace the development of the study of the problem of alternativeness in Russian historical science and to characterize the experience gained in these studies. Within the framework of this goal, the following tasks are set: 1. To identify the stages of development and theoretical directions in the study of the problem of alternativeness. 2. Summarize and evaluate the contribution of each stage to the study of the problem. 3. Carry out a critical analysis of theoretical directions, using the methods of discursive analysis and system analysis. 4. Identify insufficiently studied aspects of alternative historical development.

The second goal: to conduct a methodological analysis of insufficiently studied aspects in the study of alternative historical development and try to fill in the gaps in this area. Within the framework of the second goal, the following tasks are set: 1. To establish the philosophical and metaphysical foundations of the phenomenon of alternative historical development. 2. To systematize the categorical-terminological and methodological apparatus used in the study of alternativeness. 3. Develop new methods for studying alternative historical situations.

Methodological grounds

Based on the previous experience of studying the problem of alternative historical development, an attempt will be made to develop new approach to understanding this problem. On this path, preference is given not to declaring the final answers to questions, but to setting criteria for the correct formulation of questions and answers. The complexity and multidimensionality of the problems required a comprehensive interdisciplinary consideration, but comprehensiveness should not destroy integrity and give rise to eclecticism. Therefore, the methodological principle of searching for the synthesis of various concepts used in comprehending the alternativeness of historical development will be dominant.

The reference in the work to the ideas of metaphysics in the works of classical philosophers is justified by the fact that the category of free will has a fundamental role for the concept of alternative historical development. The problem of free will belongs to those fundamental problems that cannot be not only solved but also posed outside of metaphysics. Since history, unlike philosophy, does not study meanings in general, but meanings “documented in time,” special attention will be paid to the conjugation of metaphysical foundations with empirical methods.

Research methods

The problem of alternative historical development was studied from the point of view of its socio-psychological origins, the succession of author's schools, the formation and transformation of new approaches, so the main principle of the study will be historicism.

Since the development of a certain topic and idea is being studied, it was considered necessary to use the method of analyzing discursive practices (M. Foucault).

When studying an alternative situation, the historian deals primarily with information about the system of events. Therefore, methods of system analysis will be applied ( F. I. Peregudov, F. P. Tarasenko, V. N. Kostyuk).

One of the areas of research of historical alternatives is the use of quantitative methods, therefore, in the analysis of these areas, some principles of the methods of higher mathematics will be used. The works of A. N. Kolmogorov, S. A. Aivazyan, N. N. Moiseev are used as a basis for competent specialists.

Scientific significance of the topic

A non-alternative understanding of development at the conceptual level provides the researcher with a convenient support for selecting facts that confirm his theory and ignoring facts that disagree with it. Sometimes this can lead to the disappearance of motives for the search for new facts and new explanations for known facts. There are historical phenomena that, with an uncontested vision of history, do not even fall into the field of view of the historian.

Thus, according to P. Yu. Uvarov, in the French history of the 15th century, along with the winning model of a centralized monarchy and state-of-the-nation, there was a "Burgundian alternative", actually represented by the state of the Dukes of Burgundy. “This trend was not realized - the accidental death of Charles the Bold put an end to this "experiment", and Burgundy fell apart. This result seemed so convincing to supporters of the "linear model" of historical evolution that the history of the lands of the Duke of Burgundy acquired for them the status of a typical "misunderstanding", an instructive zigzag of history, corrected by the laws of historical necessity. From the French "General Histories" the history of the Netherlands in the 15th century. completely disappeared. This could be explained by the peculiarities of French historiography as an element of national identity”, but our historians do not have a word about the political history of the Burgundian state. “There was no such state, because it was “wrong” and had no future.” Thus, insufficient knowledge of the problem of alternative historical development may impede the full development of historical science.

Common phrases that history does not have (does not know, does not tolerate, does not allow, does not love, it does not have) the subjunctive mood, or - historical science excludes (it is not applicable, not permissible in it) the subjunctive mood, literally flooded journalism, and partly the arguments of professional historians. This phenomenon could become an interesting object of study for memetics - a science that describes in terms of genetics the reproduction, distribution, selection, mutation and death of memes - elementary units, quanta of culture. Such informational quanta - memes, can also be formulated ideas, literary clichés and phrases used by the authors of printed works. The life of a meme can be imagined by analogy with the trajectory of the spread of a virus, which can only exist in the cell of an infected carrier. The carriers of the meme "history has no subjunctive mood" in our case are the arguments of historians devoted to historical experience, "the lessons of history", the choice made by the subjects of historical activity in critical situations, unexpected changes in the course of events under the influence of accidents.

Characteristically, following the statement about the inadmissibility of the subjunctive mood in history or before them, arguments very often sound in the subjunctive mood. This, on the one hand, shows the need for this very “subjunctive mood” in the study of the historical past, and on the other hand, indicates the absence, or at least the underdevelopment, of methodological reflection on this problem. For a significant part of Russian historians, the entire methodology on this issue most often comes down to another meme, namely: “to study what could have been should be in order to understand why everything happened this way and not otherwise.” It seems that the problem of alternative historical development, due to its importance and complexity, should not be reduced to the functioning of memes.

The degree of knowledge of the problem

There are still no generalizing historiographical works on the study of the problem of alternativeness in Russian historical science. Some authors are given very short reviews for several jobs. Meanwhile, the critical mass of author's publications on the topic of alternativeness has reached such a limit that a special study in this area is required.

Russian historical science has accumulated a fairly extensive and original experience in studying the problem of alternativeness, which needs to be generalized, creatively comprehended and developed. Here, first of all, it is necessary to consider the contribution of methodologists M. Ya. Gefter, A. Ya. Gurevich, I. D. Kovalchenko, M. A. Barga, E. M. Zhukova, B. G. Mogilnitsky, P. V. Volobueva, Yu. M. Lotman. From latest works distinguished studies of S. A. Ekshtuta and L. I. Borodkin. The works of N. Ya. Eidelman, A. D. Sukhov, V. B. Kobrin, E.A. Nikiforova, E. G. Plimak, I. K. Pantina, I. M. Klyamkina, G. G. Vodolazova, Ya. G. Shemyakina, V. V. Ivanov, I. V. Bestuzhev-Lada A. S. Akhiezer, A.V. Korotaeva, M. S. Kagana, V. B Lukov and V. M. Sergeev, Yu. P. Bokareva, S. F. Grebenichenko, S. B. Pereslegin and many others.

Also attracted are the works of foreign authors who addressed the problem of alternativeness in history: M. Blok, D. Milo, R.Koselleck, L. Mises, A. J. Toynbee, R. Vogel, E. Anxel, A. Demanda, K. Maxi, N. Fergusson and others.

Despite a solid history of development, the new direction scientific analysis has not yet been finally formed not only in domestic science, but also abroad. There is not only a verified methodology, but even a generally recognized name. The concepts of “alternative development”, “multi-variant history”, “alternative studies”, “retro-alternative studies”, “retro forecasting”, “virtual history”, “failed history”, “counterfactual modeling” are used. There is no agreement between all these directions. Such concepts as “historical possibility”, “historical probability”, “historical accident”, “freedom of choice” are widely used, but theoretically insufficiently comprehended and methodically not mastered. The dissertation work is an attempt to overcome these shortcomings.

The novelty of the dissertation research

The novelty in the historiographical part of the work, in addition to the first generalized study of the problem, was contained in the application of the method of analyzing discursive practices to the study of the role and place of the ideas of K. Marx and F. Engels in research on the problem of alternative historical development in Soviet historical science. Discursive analysis is also used in characterizing the understanding of alternativeness in history by M. Ya. Gefter and in criticizing the use of the concepts of synergetics in historical knowledge.

The novelty was also contained in the development of a correct definition of historical chance, in some new principles for classifying historical possibilities, in highlighting such an aspect of the problem as the ratio of the choice of the historian and the choice of the subject of historical activity, in posing the problem of the incorrect use of mathematical methods in the study of science from the point of view of mathematics and system analysis. historical alternatives and in the criticism carried out from these positions.

When searching for metaphysical philosophical foundations for the theoretical study of alternatives in history, areas of intersection or complementarity were established, as well as methods of mutual verification or falsification for antinomianism (Kant), dialectics (Hegel), intuitionism (A. Bergson, N.O. Lossky, S.A. Levitsky), existentialism (S. Kierkegaard, M. Heidegger, J.-P. Sart), positivism (P. S. Laplace) and neo-positivism (L. Wittgenstein, K. Hempel). Such a synthesis in relation to the problem of alternativeness in history is also a novelty.

When using probabilistic logic for the theoretical study of the alternativeness of historical development, the complementarity and mutual verifiability of the concepts of probability of Leibniz, A. A. Markov, R. Mises, A. N. Kolmogorov, R. Carnap, J. Keynes, G. Reichenbach, L. Zadeh in the study of historical probability. Based on the concepts of probabilistic logic, an attempt will be made to develop a new method for empirical analysis of the probabilistic picture of the historical situation.

Relevance of the research topic

Scientific significance the problem of alternative historical development is closely related to the actual problems of modern socio-economic and political practice. Failure to understand the multivariance of historical development in the past leads to a misunderstanding of the multivariance of the future in the context of the constant variability of the current situation, which can lead to irreversible errors. Suffice it to recall the declaration that there was no alternative to shock therapy in Russia in the early 1990s. Political levers were thrown to hush up other opinions. Everyone knows the catastrophic result for Russia. It was the logic of no alternative that gave rise to the theory of Russia's permanent “lag” and “catching up” with the West, which does not recognize that this is not a lag, but other forms of development.

Of course, the non-recognition of alternative development is characteristic not only of the historical consciousness of Russians. For example, guided by the concept of no alternative, advisers to the US presidents defeated the economy of Africa and Latin America in the name of their own good, for the sake of progressive development, but development along one path in which there can be no alternatives.

In search of historical sources and historical lessons for the current situation, historical consciousness tends to turn to analogies with the past in the subjunctive mood. So in 1990-1991 the image of Stolypin became very popular. The former "reactionary" and "hangman" turned into a hero. Then, in August 1991, the focus shifted February revolution. Then they started talking about the danger of a "new October".

MN Pokrovsky's thesis that "history is politics overturned into the past" retains its relevance despite all the political and historiographic upheavals. Historical arguments in the subjunctive mood have become another weapon in the “war for the past”. A failed but possible story has become one of the “battlefields” in the information wars of modern propaganda. In this regard, the study of the historiographical and methodological aspects of alternativeness in history, in addition to scientific, can also have social and practical significance, namely: to contribute to the accumulation of a theoretical basis for planning and conducting “attacks” and “counterattacks” in information wars, to stay away from which the historian is unlikely to succeed fully.

What was perestroika-era glasnost if not a large-scale information war aimed at discrediting the Soviet regime? And the theme of alternative history (for example, “if the communists did not do what they did in the past, then we would live better now”) was one of the main ones in this war.

In a generalized form, the processes taking place with humanity at the turn of the 20th-21st centuries are usually called the term “globalization”. Globalization involves many development alternatives and opposing tendencies. One of the main trends modern world the decentralization of political power is recognized, due to the avalanche-like course of the scientific and technological revolution, its global nature and the universality of its impact on all aspects of society, the massive development of communications, the transnational nature of economic centers that reduce the need for traditional centers of political power. At the same time, the most efficient and effective subjects of decentralization state power at the current, first, stage of globalization, ethnic and nationalist groups are recognized. This is due to the fact that established state borders, as a rule, do not correspond to real ethnic, linguistic and territorial units. Encouraging influence on such groupings can already in the near future lead to the formation of new small state formations and open up the possibility of their participation in various economic unions.

With regard to the topic of alternativeness, such trends were reflected primarily in PR campaigns aimed at supporting centrifugal and separatist movements in the territory former USSR. In state and ethnic entities that have ever enjoyed independence or belonged to another state, there are very common arguments that life in these regions would be better if they had not been annexed to the USSR or Russia sometime. Or that life in countries that did not become part of the USSR would be worse if they were included in the USSR (for example, Finland, which claims to return Karelia). Such reasoning is especially typical for the Baltic states, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Tatarstan, etc. To make sure of this without raising all the press, it is enough to make a corresponding request on the Internet, for example: subjunctive&&history&&country name.

For Russia, one can see three development options regarding the processes of globalization. The first is the refusal to participate in globalization, that is, a kind of autarky, which means the destruction of Russia as a power. This option has little chance, and if implemented, it will be reversible. The second option is self-elimination from the main roles in globalization and turning into its passive object. That is, Russia is becoming a raw material appendage, "the tenth contractor of third corporations." This option is very beneficial for many small officials and market operators in Russia, and, of course, for the international economic elite. And the third, the only worthy option is active globalization, the creation of some kind of Russian strategy.

Looking at these perspectives from the point of view of using the problem of the alternative historical past in political propaganda, we can assume that the forces striving for the implementation of the second option will try to downplay historical role Russia, to disavow its potential for mobilization in critical historical situations and to overestimate this potential for the West, to construct among Russians disbelief in revival. When choosing the third option, it becomes necessary to respond to such attacks, and there are already examples of such confrontation. Thus, in the article “The Caribbean Crisis: Counterfactual Modeling of a Possible Outcome”, I. A. Kopylov, Head of the Group of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, and S. A. Modestov, Advisor to the Personnel Department of the President of the Russian Federation, Doctor of Political Sciences, criticize the arguments of American historians that the behavior of the administration Khrushchev in the early 60s, from the point of view of the military-strategic potential, was a bluff and an unjustified adventure, and the United States, in the event of tougher retaliatory actions, could defeat the USSR. The authors of the article note that “the increased interest in unrealized historical opportunities is associated among American colleagues with the missed opportunities of the strong, who overestimated the potential of the weak. All the counterfactual versions of the past they consider have in mind the same upsetting circumstance: with the enemy it was possible to resolve the issue earlier, easier and cheaper.

The main thing that a historian should not forget when he finds himself in a situation information war, is that the imposition of political interests on historical science is fraught with distortion of the past and undermining the credibility of historians as servants scientific truth. This should also be taken into account in modern conditions another alternative situation for the development of society.

Timeline of the study

The chronological framework of the study can be determined on two grounds: historiographical and concrete historical.

The first chapter is devoted to Russian historiography since the mid-1960s. until 2001. In the second chapter, works are considered, starting from the end XIX century..

The specific historical framework is determined by the themes and plots that affected domestic and foreign authors in connection with the theme of alternative history. This framework covers fragments of human history from primitive to modern times. For the same reasons, the territorial-spatial historical framework is not limited, although the greatest attention is paid to Russian and European history.

Thesis structure

The structure of the dissertation is subordinated to the goals and objectives of the study. The work consists of an introduction, 2 chapters, a conclusion, a list of sources and references. The first chapter is historiographical with methodological comments. It consists of 8 sections, the information in which is systematized by chronology and authorship of the works. The second chapter is methodological with historiographical comments. It consists of 5 main sections. The information in the second chapter is systematized according to the problematic principle.

The sources of historiographic research are the works of domestic authors who studied the theoretical or concrete historical aspects of the problem of alternative historical development, including the materials of round tables devoted to this topic. When analyzing the methodological aspects of the problem of alternativeness, the works of foreign historians on this topic were used, as well as the philosophical works of representatives of German classical philosophy, positivism, Marxism, existentialism, intuitionism, neopositivism, and postmodernism. Works of domestic and foreign mathematicians were used as auxiliary material in applying the concepts and methods of higher mathematics.

Research Methodology

Introduction:

Description of the subject of research - description of the subject as a functional - identification of a problem for the object

Formation of the ultimate goal through the subject

Finding ways to improve the item (usually by increasing efficiency)

Antecedent Analysis

Problem formulation

Justification of the relevance of the task

Research boundaries

Boundary from the object (list of objects)

Border from subject

About space and time

Brief summary of the main parts of the study.

Brief information about the approbation of the study (reports, speeches at conferences).

Brief information about the implementation.

New scientific results and provisions submitted for defense.

Chapter 1. Background (initial level). Essence of the task.

1.1. Analysis of factors external to the object, internal to the subject, influencing the object and subject of research.

1.2. Analysis of the subject and object for interdependence.

Assessment of the degree of compliance of the existing state of the object with the requirements of the object.

Chapter 2 Selection and justification of research methods.

Selection and development of the elements of the subject research method.

Selection or development of a methodology for researching an object through a subject.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of the object through the subject.

Chapter 3 Substantiation of practical recommendations for improving the object through the subject.

Improvement of the subject of study in the object.

Improving the methods of research of the object and subject.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of an object through an object in an improved state.

Conclusion:

Enumeration of scientific results with emphasis on novelty.

contributions to science.

Contributions to practice.

What failed to be done? Suggestions for further improvement.

The total number of publications.

Conclusions on solving the problem posed in the introduction.

1. Description of the scientific research problem (essence, genesis and main aspects of the scientific problem)

2. The relevance of the scientific research problem (the importance of the proposed research on this problem in terms of the formation of new and development of existing areas in this subject area and expanding the possibility of practical application of scientific results)

3. A specific task within the framework of the problem that the study is aimed at solving

4. Scientific novelty of the research (novelty and originality of the proposed statement of the problem and / or methodology of its research)

5. Analysis state of the art research on the scientific problem of the project (main directions, trends and priorities for the development of research in domestic and world science)

6. Methodological principles applied in the study

7. Proposed methods, techniques, tools and their justification (the possibilities of the methodological tools proposed for use to provide the necessary depth of study of the main aspects of the task)

8. Expected results of scientific research (the presentation form should allow for an examination of the results)

9. The form of presentation of the results of the project (expected specific results are indicated, for example: monograph, series of articles)

10. Potential possibilities of using the research results in solving applied problems (the possible contribution of the planned scientific results to the solution of applied problems is substantiated)

11. The team’s scientific background on the project (the results obtained earlier, developed programs and methods are indicated)

12. Publications most closely related to the proposed project (a list of major publications most closely related to the proposed project over the past five years is provided)

13. The general work plan for the entire duration of the project (the presentation form should make it possible to assess the degree of implementation of the work plan stated in the project; the general work plan is given by year)

PROJECT EXPERTISE

I. EVALUATION OF THE SCIENTIFIC LEVEL OF THE PROJECT

Scientific significance of the expected results of the study

The relevance of the scientific research problem

Complexity of the study

Scientific novelty of the research

The current state of research on the problem of the project - the main areas of research in world science

Correspondence of the project name with the scientific research problem

It must be clearly understood that in this case significance acts as a separate characteristic of the study and refers to its results. This means that it is possible to give a final answer about the significance, if I may say so, to fill in the appropriate rubric only after the scientific work is completed. However, this does not mean that the researcher remembers the significance only at the end of the path and does not think about it at the beginning. On the contrary, the entire course of research is subordinated to the need to obtain new knowledge; all other methodological characteristics are oriented towards it. Actually, in a broad sense, this is the purpose and meaning of scientific work - in obtaining such knowledge. In the first approximation, the question of significance arose even at the stage of substantiating the relevance and defining the subject. Then it was necessary to designate what new knowledge was to be obtained. New knowledge in the form of assumptions was put forward in a hypothesis and in protected positions. But now the work is done. Now, when comprehending and evaluating its results, it is necessary to give a specific answer to the question of its significance: what has been done from what others have not done, what results have been obtained for the first time? If there is no convincing answer to this question, there may be serious doubt about the meaning and value of the whole work.

At this stage, the correlation of the main methodological characteristics is manifested: the more specifically the problem is formulated and the subject of research is singled out, the practical and scientific relevance of the topic is shown, the clearer it is for the researcher himself what exactly he did for the first time, what is his concrete contribution to the research. In the case when each of the characteristics included in the system mutually reinforces and complements the other, this system acts as an integral indicator of the quality of the study. It is clear that such an indicator is not the only and final criterion for evaluating scientific work.

As in practice scientific research the significance of the results is indicated? IN Lately there were fewer purely formal “replies” about this, when the “new” actually turned out to be not new, and sometimes not even “well-forgotten old”, but simply old.

The description (mention) of the significance turns out to be insufficient because it is difficult to judge from it whether the work has really been done and what its results are in essence. For a reasonable quality assessment research work a meaningful presentation of significant results is required. You need to have a clear idea of ​​what they are. It would be unreasonable to expect from each author a complete presentation of the results of the study within the framework of this methodological characteristic. There are other forms of presentation and other sections of the work for this.

The description of the significance seems justified in those cases when the full presentation of the results is given in another section of the scientific text. And yet, do not deviate from general rule- if possible, specify all the provisions developed by the researcher. Compliance with this rule will facilitate the assessment and self-assessment of the student's activities and to some extent guarantee that nothing essential in the work will be missed. Why is new knowledge needed? This is not a rhetorical question. The new knowledge obtained as a result of the study is most likely really needed. But where and why can it be useful? With regard to a specific, individual study, the question is formulated as follows: what is the significance of its results for science and practice?

The two remaining characteristics of research - its significance for theory (science) and for practice - have to be addressed at least twice, at the beginning and at the end of the journey. At the first stage of research in general view the significance for science and practice of its intended results is determined, and this is done not on purpose, not separately, but in connection with the distinction between a practical task and a problem in determining the topic and purpose of the work.

At this stage, it is illogical to single out such preliminary representations explicitly as separate characteristics and allocate special headings for them. This should be done at the final stage, when new results have already been obtained and it is necessary to think about how they can now be disposed of. Here the definition should be clear, meaningful and specific. It is necessary to show for which area of ​​science and practice the result obtained is important, and in what respect new knowledge improves this area.

The significance of the results obtained for the theory is determined by the problems, concepts, branches of knowledge that are subject to changes aimed at the development of science, replenishing its content. It is important to keep in mind one significant difference between the two methodological characteristics: on the one hand, novelty, on the other hand, the significance for science of the results obtained. Characterizing the novelty of the results, the researcher remains within the framework of the tasks set by him and shows what new knowledge he received by solving them. The value of the new knowledge obtained is revealed in relation to other areas of knowledge, to scientific work, which is yet to come.

Determining the scientific relevance of a study is critical to its evaluation. Let's imagine that our work has no significance for science. Then it cannot be called scientific. Meanwhile, just this very important area of ​​methodological reflection is often approached formally, they do not distinguish between methodological characteristics that determine different directions of thought: on the one hand, novelty, on the other, significance for science. We will have to dwell specifically on this topical problem.

The problem is relevant because the authors of many works, not thinking about the fact that the new is not necessarily the best and most useful, believe that the novelty of the results and their significance for science are one and the same. The author needs results and roads. Of course, they are, as they say, personally significant for him. But what significance they have for science in general and for solving specific scientific problems in particular they can be useful - the authors do not always think about this. Often they combine multidirectional characteristics, as if they are one and the same: novelty and significance for science of the results obtained. Naturally, the meaningful definition of scientific significance corresponds to the same definition of the value of work for practice.

The listed characteristics make up a system, all elements of which should ideally correspond to each other, complement each other mutually. By the degree of their consistency, one can judge the quality of the scientific work itself. In this case, the system of methodological characteristics will act as a generalized indicator of its quality. However, one should not forget that the presence of all the listed features and characteristics does not give an absolute guarantee of the quality and effectiveness of the research work. A lot depends on attitude. If the parameters set out here for determining the quality of a study by its methodological characteristics do not become personally significant for the researcher, and the requirements are perceived by him as formal, they will bring him little benefit. But for opponents, their formality will be an indicator in itself, useful for assessing quality.

Thus, in the subsection of the introduction “Theoretical and practical significance of the study”, it is noted that the author managed to achieve something new in comparison with the known in theory and practice in the course of his research activities. This section teaches the student to see and highlight what he managed to get a new research activities compared to previously known.

Given that we are talking about the scientific work of a student, the requirements for novelty are not high compared, for example, with a dissertation work. When disclosing this section, the following wording is used: in the scientific work (in the process of research) ______ is specified, supplemented ..., the influence (manifestation) of _________ is revealed, __________ is described, etc.

Thus, the scientific and practical significance of the problem under study shows how important the results obtained by the student in the course of the study can be and where they may be applied or are already being used in practice. In other words, it shows who needs what the student has done and for what.

Successful defense of a master's thesis is the basis for awarding an academic master's degree, indicating the level of education of a graduate educational institution. The master's thesis differs from the final qualification work of the bachelor by the most thorough theoretical and practical analysis research questions, as well as the scientific novelty of the study.

The significance of novelty can hardly be overestimated - in his project, the undergraduate not only analyzes the current practice and the development of the issue under study, but also brings up for discussion the existing theoretical and practical problems of the current state of the topic under study

However, in order for the undergraduate project to receive a positive assessment, it is necessary to distinguish the elements of the scientific novelty of the research.

What is the scientific novelty of research

The definition of the novelty of the research results is formulated by scientists on the basis of certain features that should be characteristic of the final qualifying work written in the form of a master's thesis.

The undergraduate project should be innovative in the subject under study, the author analyzes and summarizes the existing phenomena and trends in the issue under consideration, puts forward reasonable hypotheses, provisions, justifies the need to apply new or modify existing methods of management, forecasting, planning, puts forward new definitions for discussion

Scientists have also identified levels of novelty, which consist of three definitions - concretization, addition, transformation.

When choosing a topic, it must be remembered that in order to write a work, the purpose of which is to formulate innovative provisions, it is necessary to study theoretical and practical issues of research interest, insufficiently covered in science or having problems of application in practice. Also, one should not forget about the relevance of the chosen topic.

Thus, in a global sense, the goal of almost any WRC is to find new ways to solve socio-economic problems, which consist in the application of new or existing optimized methods and methodologies for achieving goals in production and non-production areas of activity that are important for the successful development of society. .

These are the necessary elements of the scientific novelty of the master's thesis, which the master's dissertation project should have.

Scientific novelty of the master's thesis. Peculiarities. Examples

The author will be able to prove the scientific novelty of the results of his research, if he convincingly and consistently discloses the scientific value of his project in theory, as well as the real need to apply the research findings in practice during the defense of the WRC.

Important! It should be noted that the most weighty argument in favor of the research value presented to defend the hypotheses of the undergraduate is a patent or copyright certificate for novels in the issues under consideration, which the author received on the basis of his personal research.

Such evidence of novelty is considered a priori indisputable and has a certain significance in terms of the need for a successful dissertation defense.

But even in the absence of such a serious help in the work, it is possible to confine ourselves to a clear and serious argumentation of the novelty of the results and their practical significance.

As a rule, in master's theses, the number of signs of scientific novelty should be at least two. These include:

• previously unexplored object of study; what is the novelty;
• application of previously used methods to a new object of study;
• application of a new method to a previously studied object of study;
• formulation of already studied problems or tasks in new conditions;
• new consequences from previously studied facts in new conditions;
• new or improved methodologies, solution methods, techniques, tools.

An example of the rationale for scientific novelty is given in the following table.

Table 1.

Research methods in the master's thesis

The choice of survey methods should be written separately. Often, the wrong choice of survey methods leads to a low assessment of the quality of the results obtained. It must be remembered that research methods can be general scientific, characteristic of any branch of science (analysis, synthesis, deduction, etc.) or special, used in specific areas (for example, in economics - modeling).

An example qualitative research The chosen topic is the application of several methods in combination. Various forms of receiving data are also welcome.

For example, in psychology or economics, a combination of testing and modeling is practiced. The results of such forms, applied within the same study, must be studied and investigated in conjunction. The received data should not contradict each other. The author in the course of research receives intermediate results, which should complement and connect each other in a logical sequence, confirm the author's hypothesis and lead to the final result. overall result undergraduate work.

A kind of "insurance" against a low assessment of the quality of work is a visual presentation of the results obtained in the form of a slide show, mounted videos, built on interactive whiteboards graphs and charts.

Advice!Such demonstrations should be colorful, as well as the clarity of the conclusions of the final qualifying work.

Advice!For ease of understanding, do not write a large number of text on a slide or edited frames of a video.

Remember that the presentation is only an addition to the scientifically based formulations and definitions disclosed in the work.

Scientific significance and scientific novelty of the problem under study

The scientific significance of the work means that the opinion of the undergraduate on the subject under study concerns issues that have not been previously considered, or have not been studied enough. To analyze the degree of knowledge, the author should refer to the works of scientists and specialists. In practice, if a candidate for a master's degree limited himself to studying only a single point of view on a problem (for example, the one that the majority of scientists adhere to), but did not write about alternative opinions, this is the basis for recognizing the quality of the research as low.

The chosen topic, if possible, should be covered from different points of view by recognized authorities in the field of science, however, the author should give new arguments, which consist of research data obtained, as well as in the conditions of modern realities (for example, in the economy - the introduction of economic sanctions against Russia)

To justify the significance of the project, the undergraduate can cite definitions that are first formulated and scientifically proven; methods and methodologies, when applied, new, improved results can be achieved.

Many experts distinguish the identification of new trends, patterns of development of various branches of science as signs of the novelty of a scientific result.

Also, if the researcher in his work wrote and, accordingly, proved that the study of the chosen topic is based on theoretical formulations and definitions that deepen the understanding of the essence of phenomena and processes, mechanisms of interaction, then he may well claim scientific and practical novelty.

When defending a work, it must be remembered that the formulation of novelty elements is best carried out using the example of the following scheme:

The relevance of the master's thesis and practical significance

The relevance and practical significance of the work are related to the definition of the research topic, which is not just the title of the work, but precisely the result-oriented choice of the segment of the scientific field that should be written about in the project. The author must receive, explore and connect the data obtained, as well as have a vision of the situation as a whole - an awareness of the final result of the work.

The formulation of the relevance of the project is the result of the research of the undergraduate, aimed at solving the problem in the field of social activities or relations in society in modern conditions.

Important! It should be noted that it is necessary to write not only about the positive data obtained as a result of the research, but also include in the work and negative experience, which is no less valuable practical material. The scientific novelty and practical significance of the project directly depends on the availability of a set of new data obtained.

What is the difference between scientific novelty and provisions submitted for defense

The scientific novelty of the dissertation is, rather, a characterizing component of the study, which determines the innovative nature of the data obtained in the course of writing the work.

The provisions submitted for defense are, in fact, those new, reliably established facts or knowledge obtained in the course of a study conducted as part of a dissertation that were not previously known to science.

The master's thesis is the first step of the student into the world of discoveries in the field of science, the next most important work is the candidate's thesis.

Everything that is undertaken in the study for the first time characterizes its novelty. . This may be, for example, the application of an already known research technique (method) to a new object (not yet studied by other authors) or, conversely, the development of a new method for studying an already well-studied object. Scientific novelty fundamental research means a contribution to science that opens up new research perspectives.

It may be the discovery of new scientific facts the regularities behind them, the discovery of a new psychological phenomenon, etc. At the same time, it is necessary to specifically formulate what exactly expresses the novelty of the study. For example, when studying self-relationship among gamers, what is new is not just the study of self-relationship as such, but the disclosure of its features among gamers, and not the entire system of self-relationship, but its individual aspects, such as self-respect, self-guidance, self-confidence.

Thus, the student describes everything that he first brought to psychological science(theoretical, methodical, empirical, practical plans for the novelty of the research can be presented - all at the same time or several of them). So, new for science can be the introduction and justification of a certain concept, the systematization of theoretical ideas about the phenomenon under study, the development and testing of a new methodology designed to study a specific psychological phenomenon, the psychometric justification of a methodology (newly developed or already known), the development and testing of a corrective (training ) programs, etc.

The theoretical significance of the study requires an indication that this study expands and / or refines psychological theory, theoretical ideas already established in psychology on this issue.

The practical significance of both fundamental and applied research is related to the specific, tangible benefits that its results can bring, help someone in practical activities. At the same time, it is important not only to declare the “universal” usefulness of the results obtained, but to indicate what exactly they can be used. In other words, it describes how the results of the undertaken research can be applied in the practical activities of a psychologist and / or other specialists.

Example #9

1. “We see the practical significance of our study in the fact that the study of the characteristics of group identity will allow us to properly organize interpersonal interaction in different small groups, offer psychological recommendations for resolving the difficulties that arise in them, for optimizing their life as group subjects. In addition, the set of techniques used in the work can be used in socio-psychological diagnostics, in the activities of various psychological services in order to study the characteristics of communication, relationships, social cognition entities in different areas vital activity. The materials and conclusions of our study can be used in the educational work of psychologists, as well as in educational process- in the course of professional training not only for psychologists, but also for other specialists in the sphere of "human - human". In this we also see practical output our work." 2. “The complex of psychodiagnostic methods tested in the work can be used in the study of the characteristics of personal self-determination of the elderly (it can be used in the work of psychological services operating in industrial organizations, and individual practical psychologists).” 3. "The developed program of psychocorrection can be useful in the work of a school psychologist in solving the problems of school maladjustment." 4. “An effective psychodiagnostic technique has been developed (method, technology, correctional program), which has a wide range of applications in sports psychology (providing the effectiveness of psychological impact, training, training, rehabilitation, psychological counseling athletes). 5. “Evidence-based psychological and pedagogical (socio-psychological) recommendations are proposed to optimize professional activity employees of the internal affairs bodies in the direction of creating a favorable socio-psychological climate in the relevant units. 6. "Materials and conclusions of the study can be used in the process of professional training of psychologists in universities, as well as in the educational work of psychologists in the youth environment, with teachers and parents of adolescents and young men."