Idealization as a method of theoretical knowledge

In the methodology of science, it is customary to distinguish two levels of scientific knowledge - empirical and theoretical.

At the empirical level, the object studied by science is cognized from the outside "phenomena" that is, those of him individual properties and connections, which are available for direct registration using the sensory organs of the cognizing subject and various devices that enhance their resolution. The main research methods at this level are observation, experiment and measurement. The results of empirical research take the form of scientific facts and empirical relationships that describe knowable object.

At the theoretical level, the object being studied is cognized by science from its "essences", that is, those internal laws, which control its functioning and development. The main means of research here is logical thinking. , and the main methods are abstraction, idealization, thought experiment, etc. The results of theoretical research appear in the form of hypotheses and theories , which are capable of explaining previously obtained facts and dependencies and predicting new facts previously unknown.

The theoretical level of cognition necessarily involves the use of an idealization procedure. Underidealization is understood as the mental construction of an “idealized” situation (object, phenomenon), to which properties or relationships are attributed that are possible only in the “limiting” case. The results of such construction are idealized objects. These are, for example, a point, a straight line, a plane - in geometry, an ideal gas, an absolutely black body - in physics.

Idealized objects are much simpler than real objects; mathematical methods of description are applicable to them. Thanks to idealization, processes are considered in their purest form, without accidental additions from the outside, which opens the way to identifying the laws according to which these processes occur.

The process of idealization can be illustrated with this example. Suppose that someone walking along a horizontal road with a luggage cart suddenly stops pushing it. The cart will continue to move for a while, covering a short distance, and then stop. There are a number of ways to lengthen the distance a cart travels after pushing, such as lubricating the wheels, creating a smoother road, etc. The easier the wheels turn and the smoother the road, the further the cart will move. Lubricating the wheels and smoothing out uneven paths leads to a reduction in external influences on the moving body. It is established experimentally that the smaller the external influences on a moving body, the longer the path traversed by this body. In other words, an inversely proportional relationship is discovered between external influences on a moving body and the path traversed by this body. We can find more and more new ways to reduce external influences on a moving body and, accordingly, more and more new ways to lengthen the path traversed by a moving body. However, all external influences cannot be eliminated. The pattern we have identified (the relationship between external influences on a moving body and the length of the path traversed by this body) gives us the opportunity to take the decisive step - to admit that if external influences on a moving body are completely eliminated, then it will move endlessly and at the same time uniformly and rectilinearly. This conclusion was made at one time by Galileo and most clearly formulated later by Newton in the form of the law of inertia: every body maintains a state of rest or uniform rectilinear motion, unless it is forced to change it under the influence of acting forces.

Thus, what could not be achieved directly by experiment is achieved through thinking, a process of idealization.

The idealization process can be divided into the following stages:

1. By changing the conditions in which the object under study is located, we reduce their impact (sometimes increase it).

2. At the same time, we discover that some properties of the object being studied also change uniformly.

3. Assuming that the influence of conditions on the subject under study decreases indefinitely, we make mental transition to the limiting case and thereby to some idealized object.

An idealized object, unlike a real one, is characterized not by an infinite, but by a very specific number of properties, and therefore the researcher has the opportunity to have complete intellectual control over it. Idealized objects model the most essential relationships in real objects. Since the provisions of the theory speak about the properties of idealized, rather than real objects, there is a problem of testing and accepting these provisions based on correlation with the real world. Direct correlation, as a rule, produces nothing but errors. Therefore, to take into account the introduced circumstances that influence the deviation of indicators characteristic of the empirical data from the characteristics of an idealized object, rules of concretization, or, as is often said, reduction rules, are formulated. So, for example, to calculate the path of a freely falling body, the well-known formula is used 1 /2 GT² . But the result obtained is purely theoretical in nature and is true for an idealized object. In order to obtain empirically reliable knowledge, it is necessary to fulfill a number of additional specification requirements: to take into account, in particular, the latitude of the crash site and its height above sea level, air resistance, lateral effects of wind and electromagnetic waves, and others.

IDEALIZATION

The process of mental construction of concepts about objects that do not exist and cannot exist in reality, but retain some features of real objects. In the process of identification, on the one hand, we abstract from many properties of real objects and retain only those that interest us in this case; on the other hand, we introduce into the content of the concepts being formed such features that, in principle, cannot belong to real objects. As a result of I., idealized objects arise, for example, “material point”, “straight line”, “ideal gas”, “absolutely black body”, “inertia”, etc. Any science, isolating its aspect from the real world for studying, he uses idealized objects. The latter are much simpler than real objects, which makes it possible to give their exact mathematical description and penetrate deeper into the nature of the phenomena being studied. The fruitfulness of scientific research is tested in experiment and material practice, during which theoretical idealized objects are correlated with real things and processes.

The mental activity of a researcher in the process of scientific knowledge includes a special type of abstraction, which is called idealization. Idealization is the mental introduction of certain changes to the object being studied in accordance with the goals of the research.

As a result of such changes, for example, some properties, aspects, or features of objects may be excluded from consideration. Thus, the widespread idealization in mechanics, called a material point, implies a body devoid of any dimensions. Such an abstract object, the dimensions of which are neglected, is convenient when describing the movement of a wide variety of material objects from atoms and molecules to the planets of the solar system.

Changes in an object, achieved in the process of idealization, can also be made by endowing it with some special properties that are not feasible in reality. An example is the abstraction introduced into physics through idealization, known as an absolutely black body (such a body is endowed with the property, which does not exist in nature, of absorbing absolutely all radiant energy falling on it, without reflecting anything or letting anything pass through it). The advisability of using idealization is determined by the following circumstances:

Firstly, “idealization is appropriate when the real objects to be studied are sufficiently complex for the available means of theoretical, in particular mathematical, analysis, and in relation to the idealized case it is possible, by applying these means, to build and develop a theory that is effective in certain conditions and purposes.” , to describe the properties and behavior of these real objects. The latter, in essence, certifies the fruitfulness of idealization and distinguishes it from fruitless fantasy.”

Secondly, it is advisable to use idealization in cases where it is necessary to exclude certain properties and connections of the object under study, without which it cannot exist, but which obscure the essence of the processes occurring in it. A complex object is presented as if in a “purified” form, which makes it easier to study.

Thirdly, the use of idealization is advisable when the properties, aspects, and connections of the object being studied that are excluded from consideration do not affect its essence within the framework of this study. In this case, the correct choice of the admissibility of such idealization plays a very important role.

It should be noted that the nature of idealization can be very different if there are different theoretical approaches to the study of a phenomenon. As an example, we can point to three different concepts of “ideal gas”, formed under the influence of different theoretical and physical concepts: Maxwell-Boltzmann, Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac. However, all three idealization options obtained in this case turned out to be fruitful in the study of gas states of various natures: the Maxwell-Boltzmann ideal gas became the basis for studies of ordinary rarefied molecular gases located at fairly high temperatures; The Bose-Einstein ideal gas was used to study photonic gas, and the Fermi-Dirac ideal gas helped solve a number of electron gas problems.

Being a type of abstraction, idealization allows for an element of sensory clarity (the usual process of abstraction leads to the formation of mental abstractions that do not have any clarity). This feature of idealization is very important for the implementation of such a specific method of theoretical knowledge, which is a thought experiment (it is also called mental, subjective, imaginary, idealized).

A thought experiment involves operating with an idealized object (replacing a real object in abstraction), which consists in the mental selection of certain positions and situations that make it possible to detect some important features of the object under study. This reveals a certain similarity between a mental (idealized) experiment and a real one. Moreover, every real experiment, before being carried out in practice, is first “played out” by the researcher mentally in the process of thinking and planning. In this case, the thought experiment acts as a preliminary ideal plan for a real experiment.

At the same time, thought experiments also play an independent role in science. At the same time, while maintaining similarities with the real experiment, it is at the same time significantly different from it.

In scientific knowledge, there may be cases when, when studying certain phenomena and situations, conducting real experiments turns out to be completely impossible. This gap in knowledge can only be filled by a thought experiment.

The scientific activity of Galileo, Newton, Maxwell, Carnot, Einstein and other scientists who laid the foundations of modern natural science testifies to the significant role of thought experiments in the formation of theoretical ideas. The history of the development of physics is rich in facts about the use of thought experiments. An example is Galileo's thought experiments, which led to the discovery of the law of inertia. “...The law of inertia,” wrote A. Einstein and L. Infeld, “cannot be deduced directly from experiment; it can be deduced speculatively - by thinking associated with observation. This experiment can never be performed in reality, although it leads to a deep understanding of actual experiments."

A thought experiment can have great heuristic value in helping to interpret new knowledge obtained purely mathematically. This is confirmed by many examples from the history of science.

The idealization method, which turns out to be very fruitful in many cases, at the same time has certain limitations. In addition, any idealization is limited to a specific area of ​​phenomena and serves to solve only certain problems. This can be clearly seen from the example of the above-mentioned idealization of the “absolutely black body”.

The main positive significance of idealization as a method of scientific knowledge is that the theoretical constructions obtained on its basis then make it possible to effectively study real objects and phenomena. Simplifications achieved through idealization facilitate the creation of a theory that reveals the laws of the studied area of ​​​​phenomena of the material world. If the theory as a whole correctly describes real phenomena, then the idealizations underlying it are also legitimate.

Formalization.

Formalization refers to a special approach in scientific knowledge, which consists in the use of special symbols, which allows one to escape from the study of real objects, from the content of the theoretical provisions describing them, and to operate instead with a certain set of symbols (signs).

This technique consists in constructing abstract mathematical models that reveal the essence of the processes of reality being studied. When formalizing, reasoning about objects is transferred to the plane of operating with signs (formulas). Relationships of signs replace statements about the properties and relationships of objects. In this way, a generalized sign model of a certain subject area is created, which makes it possible to detect the structure of various phenomena and processes while abstracting from the qualitative characteristics of the latter. The derivation of some formulas from others according to the strict rules of logic and mathematics represents a formal study of the main characteristics of the structure of various, sometimes very distant in nature, phenomena.

A striking example of formalization is the mathematical descriptions of various objects and phenomena widely used in science, based on relevant substantive theories. At the same time, the mathematical symbolism used not only helps to consolidate existing knowledge about the objects and phenomena being studied, but also acts as a kind of tool in the process of further knowledge of them.

To build any formal system it is necessary: ​​a) specifying an alphabet, i.e., a certain set of characters; b) setting the rules by which “words” and “formulas” can be obtained from the initial characters of this alphabet; c) setting rules according to which one can move from some words and formulas of a given system to other words and formulas (the so-called rules of inference).

As a result, a formal sign system is created in the form of a certain artificial language. An important advantage of this system is the possibility of carrying out within its framework the study of any object in a purely formal way (operating with signs) without directly addressing this object.

Another advantage of formalization is to ensure the brevity and clarity of recording scientific information, which opens up great opportunities for operating with it.

Of course, formalized artificial languages ​​do not have the flexibility and richness of natural language. But they lack the polysemy of terms characteristic of natural languages. They are characterized by a precisely constructed syntax (establishing the rules of connection between signs regardless of their content) and unambiguous semantics (the semantic rules of a formalized language quite unambiguously determine the correlation of a sign system with a specific subject area). Thus, a formalized language has the property of being monosemic.

The ability to present certain theoretical positions of science in the form of a formalized sign system is of great importance for knowledge. But it should be borne in mind that the formalization of a particular theory is possible only if its substantive side is taken into account. “A bare mathematical equation does not yet represent a physical theory; in order to obtain a physical theory, it is necessary to give specific empirical content to mathematical symbols.”

The expanding use of formalization as a method of theoretical knowledge is associated not only with the development of mathematics. In chemistry, for example, the corresponding chemical symbolism, together with the rules for operating it, was one of the options for a formalized artificial language. The method of formalization occupied an increasingly important place in logic as it developed. Leibniz's works laid the foundation for the creation of the method of logical calculus. The latter led to the formation in the middle of the 19th century. mathematical logic, which in the second half of our century played an important role in the development of cybernetics, in the emergence of electronic computers, in solving production automation problems, etc.

The language of modern science differs significantly from natural human language. It contains many special terms and expressions; it widely uses means of formalization, among which the central place belongs to mathematical formalization. Based on the needs of science, various artificial languages ​​are created to solve certain problems. The entire set of artificial formalized languages ​​created and being created is included in the language of science, forming a powerful means of scientific knowledge.

To idealize means to attach excessive importance to some aspect of life that is important to you. And redundancy manifests itself in the fact that you experience long-term negative experiences when real life does not coincide with your expectations.

For example, idealization occurs when you have in your head some ideal model of how a husband (or wife), child, acquaintance, boss, government official, etc. should behave. You know how he should behave. And he behaves a little (or completely) differently. That is, it does not correspond to the ideal that exists in your imagination. His behavior or actions do not meet your expectations. So you become aggressive and try to force him to do as you see fit. Either you feel sad or despair because he is behaving incorrectly. In both cases, you do not accept this person (and through him the whole world) as he is in reality, because he does not correspond to the ideal that exists in your mind.

You can idealize not only individual people, but also the situations of the surrounding world as a whole. For example, the government behaves incorrectly and leads the country to a dead end. Politicians think only about themselves and do not care about the people. And there are a huge number of such idealizations that so poison our lives. Next we will consider them in more detail.

Idealizations, explicit and hidden

But before that, we propose to distinguish two types of idealizations: manifested and hidden.

Manifest idealization occurs when something in this life causes your long-term irritation (or other negative feeling). It could be anything: work, apartment, TV show, government, boss or employee at work, mother-in-law, wife (husband), car, etc. and so on. If you have an object that causes constant irritation, then this means that you idealize this object (earthly value). Those. you know what it should be. But he is not like that, so you are unhappy with him.

The second form of idealization is hidden. It occurs when you do not have a constant dissatisfaction with respect to some value. Sometimes you don't even suspect that some idea about yourself or other people is very significant to you. But if this idea is somehow violated, then a flash of discontent, aggressiveness will certainly arise in your soul, or you will feel the complete meaninglessness of your existence. For example, you may find out that you can’t imagine life without your favorite job or family.

To identify hidden idealization, you can imagine life by sequentially removing various values ​​from it - which ones specifically, we will consider in detail a little later. If the absence of this value does not cause any reaction, you are not “hooked” on it. If you cannot imagine life without this value (work, family, sex, money, power, etc.), then you probably value it too highly.

The term “excessively” means that you value your model of how the world works (for example, that people should be honest, children should take care of their parents, people should not insult each other, etc.) too highly and believe that Life cannot exist differently, in a different version. You know how the world should be, and you cannot imagine that it could be different.

This means that sooner or later this value must be destroyed or taken away from you, so that you do not forget that only God gives everything and takes everything from us. And he will take this value from you because you are dissatisfied with something in this world. But God created this world. This means that you are dissatisfied with him, that is, you fall into sin. But more on this a little later.

So, if a person idealizes something, then he falls under karmic “education.” This “education” works through the forced destruction of the earthly value he idealizes.

For example, if you are too passionately in love and idealize your partner, most likely he will soon leave you (or fall in love with someone else). If you idealize some aspects of family life, then most likely your spouse will not share these particular views of yours on family life. And so on for any other issue.

List of idealizations of earthly values

Excessive attachment of a person to:

• Your body and physical health. This means that you worry excessively when ailments arise or when physical perfection is impaired. Either God gave you health and physical strength, and on the basis of this you began to despise other, weaker people.
• Beauty and external attractiveness. This kind of idealization occurs when you are constantly worried about whether you are beautiful enough, whether you are well dressed and combed, etc. And vice versa, if you were awarded beauty and on the basis of this you began to despise other, “ugly” people, this is also very bad.
• Sex in its most varied manifestations. Sex is a part of our lives, and no one can stop us from enjoying it. But if you are dissatisfied with your sexual partner (you judge him for imperfection) or condemn yourself for insufficient sexual capabilities (which you think should be more outstanding), then this is already a sin.
• Money and other material assets. Almost everyone lacks money and material goods, no matter how much you have. But idealization occurs only when you consider your life to be a failure, if you don’t have enough money, don’t have a car or a country house. Or when you have a lot of money, and on the basis of this you begin to despise other people who do not have that much money.
• Work. Many people devote most of their lives to work and cannot imagine life without what they love, without implementing their plans and ideas, growing their career or achieving a high level of material well-being. Therefore, from time to time they receive “clicks” in the form of business failures, career failures or loss of money.
• Family, children. Every person from his youth draws up a model for his future family life, attaching special importance to certain aspects of it (loyalty, love of order, appearance, smooth relationships, etc.). Therefore, to destroy ideals, he is given a partner who has the opposite value system.
• Moral standards, public opinion. Such idealization is characteristic mainly of older people who were raised in accordance with the norms of communist morality. Accordingly, they are greatly irritated by the “immoral” behavior of young people, changes in the system of life values, etc. For military officers and officials, the opinions of neighbors and acquaintances are often very important, so their children sometimes have to destroy this idealization.
• Perfection. A person can extol his own or others’ perfection and despise “imperfect” people. Moreover, everyone usually has their own model of a “perfect” person. For example, nationalism and fascism arise from the exaltation of the excellence of some people and the humiliation of others.
• Development, education, intelligence. The idealization of these qualities is typical for scientists, artists, and intellectuals. It breeds contempt for uneducated or undeveloped people. Or they cannot imagine their child without a career in science. Accordingly, in order to destroy the ideals of parents, their child will be completely indifferent to science.
• Creativity, creation. The idealization of creative abilities is typical for artists, musicians, painters, writers and other people engaged in creating something new. Having received the ability to create at birth, they often forget who gave them these abilities, who organizes the “inspiration,” etc. One's own successes generate contempt for other, uncreative human beings. Or to those who are undeveloped and do not understand your creative expression.
• Faith in something, trust. A lot of people gave their lives trying to realize the ideas invented by someone - communism, a bright future, a good ruler, etc. Many living people believe in such ideals and are annoyed when real life develops according to completely different laws. This also includes excessive trust in other people - they will be forced to destroy your ideal. “Trust, but verify,” so as not to be offended later, especially in financial matters, popular experience teaches us.
• Capabilities. This is the idealization of achieving success in any field in this world. If success is not achieved, then people with such “clues” believe that their life was in vain. Conversely, if people have achieved great success due to their abilities, they may begin to despise other people, which is a sin and is punished.
• Career, future. Such idealizations are typical of those people who plan their future successes and become aggressive or despondent when their plans are disrupted.
• Target. Every person sets some goals in life and strives to achieve them, which is not bad at all. But when the goal is not achieved, a person may become sad, depressed, irritable or angry. This is already punishable. A person can strive and achieve any earthly goals, but he should not make them the goal of his life. Earthly goals are achievable in the position of a player who strives to win, but accepts the possibility of losing at the next stage.
• Fame, glory, honor, worship. These human joys are loved equally by both men and women. Fame is not a bad thing, but when famous people begin to despise the rest of the “gray” mass of people, this is punished. Such idealization is known as “star fever.” It led to the collapse of the careers of many famous personalities.
• Power. Many people love power, but not everyone has the opportunity to try it. Men try to gain power in society or at work, women use it in family life. Power itself is not harmful; the thirst for power and the pleasure of using it in case of humiliation of other people, or attempts to force the entire world around you to be as you imagine, are punished.
• Relationship between people. Such idealization occurs, for example, among people who were raised in a family with good relationships. Once in an environment where people behave more rudely, a person begins to get irritated or become aggressive, trying to impose his model of sensitive or delicate relationships.
• Spirituality, religiosity. Spirituality itself is a good thing. But if a person boasts that he is spiritual or always performs religious rituals, and despises other, “unspiritual” people, then this is already punishable. The idealization of spirituality often gives rise to inner contempt for the material world; as a result, such people are left without money and other benefits.

Above we have given the most common types of earthly values, the importance of which people tend to exaggerate. Other types of idealization of earthly values ​​are also possible, but they are somewhat less common.

False Beliefs

The most common beliefs include:

• Pride, vanity, inflated self-esteem. A similar attitude towards the world occurs when a person believes that the whole world revolves around his navel. And no matter what happens in the world, everything is directed either against or for him. Accordingly, a person considers only his own opinion, needs and interests, and despises everyone else. Or the person is very powerful and internally confident that any goals are achievable for him. This idealization leads to the complete destruction of all plans and affairs of a generally strong and self-confident person.
• An attempt to bring the world around us under control, power. This attitude to life is typical for people holding any leadership positions. By nature of their work, they plan how events should unfold and get irritated when their plans collapse. The same idealization often occurs in families with domineering wives. To destroy idealization, they are given weak husbands who do not know how to earn money, drink or are sick.
• Jealousy. This feeling occurs when one person treats another as his property. And my property should belong only to me, and no one dares to touch it (or look at it). In the order of upbringing, a jealous person usually gets a freedom-loving and internally independent half.
• Condemnation and contempt of people. A similar attitude towards people arises among those who have achieved real success in our world - achieved money, fame or power. Or a person has some kind of ability that allows him to look down on other people. But no less sin is judging oneself, for example, one’s weak abilities, inability to achieve goals, past actions, etc.
• Resentment towards life. This attitude towards life can develop in any person, regardless of the level of his abilities, wealth or success. A person believes that his life has failed. Or that he doesn't get what he seems to be owed. Or he receives excessive punishment for nothing. In fact, his condition is a consequence of his attitude towards life.
• Dissatisfaction with oneself or fate. Such beliefs are usually created as a result of excessive idealization of one's abilities. The discrepancy between reality and one’s own beliefs causes irritation, aggressiveness, resentment or condemnation.

The list of erroneous beliefs can be expanded many times over, including political, national, religious and other views. Examples of erroneous beliefs are internal settings such as “life is not a success”, “I am the most unhappy”, “nobody loves me”, “I will never get married” and the like. People with similar beliefs are often not interested in money, fame, or other material or spiritual values. They just like to feel themselves in such an unhappy state, often they find a certain pleasure in it. More precisely, this state is as comfortable as possible for their uncontrollable “word mixer,” which thus draws on all the person’s vital forces and puts him into a state of depression or constant doubt.

People with erroneous beliefs are usually at odds with the world around them and are the favorite clients of the “unhappy life” egregor.

If we consider more deeply, erroneous beliefs are most often the result of the idealization of some earthly value. But the objects of idealization are sometimes quite difficult to determine, and erroneous beliefs usually lie on the surface and are declared by the person himself. That is why we have separated them into a separate source of liquid that fills the “vessel of karma.”

Alexander Sviyash

We all tend to idealize to one degree or another. In the minds of young children, ideal traits are endowed by their parents, teenagers often see perfection in some famous person, and in adulthood, idealization often accompanies romantic relationships. In general, this is a very broad concept that relates to various areas of knowledge.

Approaches to definition

As we mentioned, idealization is an interdisciplinary term, therefore, when defining it, it is necessary to clarify what science we mean. In the most general sense, idealization is the assignment to an object of perfect qualities that in reality this object does not possess.

In addition, idealization is spoken of as a method of scientific knowledge, in which a scientist mentally makes changes to the object of study, starting from the goals of the study. The determination of these changes must be carried out taking into account two mandatory conditions.

• Within the framework of this study, they do not distort the essence of the object.
• They allow us to highlight the most significant properties of the phenomenon being studied for the researcher.

Typically, the method is used when the real objects of interest to the observer are too complex and therefore inaccessible to the arsenal of cognition tools available in science. Typical cases of idealization include, for example, an absolutely black body, an absolutely straight surface, and so on.

In psychology there is also more than one definition of this term. Idealization is considered as, firstly, a defense mechanism, and secondly, a way to overcome conflict, and it can be directed both at another person and at the individual himself.

Self-idealization is dangerous because it creates in a person an illusory belief that he has no internal conflicts, gives him a feeling of superiority over others, and clouds the true ideals and needs of the individual. In fact, there is only one need left: to constantly prove to yourself and the world your own perfection.

In psychology

The definition of idealization as a defense mechanism goes back to the works of the Hungarian psychoanalyst Sándor Ferenczi. According to his concept, the newborn feels his own omnipotence: he perceives all events as coming from within.

That is, for example, a child screams from hunger - and his mother feeds him, but for him it looks as if he got the food himself. This phenomenon is called infantile omnipotence. As the child grows up, it gives way to the omnipotence of those who care for him, that is, idealization.

At first, idealization extends only to parents, because a child isolated from the external environment sees them as beings capable of protecting him from any troubles, real or imagined. Later, when more and more people appear in the child’s environment, perfect traits are gradually transferred to others.

Next to idealization there is always its reverse side - devaluation. As a rule, the more perfect an idealized object seems, the more it depreciates later. The more power the illusion had, the more terrible its collapse; the higher you fly, the more painful it is to fall. At the same time, devaluation of parents is an integral attribute of growing up, an important component of the process of individualization.

The residual tendency to idealize people on whom we feel emotionally dependent persists throughout life - moreover, it is a natural element of love in a mature personality. However, if the infant need remains more or less unchanged, this is fraught with the emergence of psychological problems.

Such people become extremely dependent on those around them; they are unable to confront problems and difficulties on their own and believe that only a connection with an all-powerful object of idealization will help them cope with adversity and protect them from a hostile world. In this vein, religious beliefs are seen as a natural extension of the process of idealization. At the same time, a person’s own shortcomings in comparison with the ideal are seen as exaggerated and make him constantly ashamed of himself.

Romantic relationships almost never exist without idealization, especially when the feeling is just beginning. Moreover, the idealization process includes the actions of both partners.

One endows the other with exaggerated virtues, and the other, in turn, strives to show only those qualities of his that correspond to the ideal image, which facilitates idealization on the part of the first person. The significance of this process is assessed in two ways:

• As a positive thing: it becomes an incentive for self-improvement, because a person strives to become what his loved one sees.
• As a negative: it creates high expectations and then leads to disappointment in the partner and in the relationship as a whole.

There is another definition of idealization. The so-called practical idealization involves working on one’s internal and external transformation and is aimed at emancipation in communication – primarily with the opposite sex. Author: Evgenia Bessonova

Idealization - the process of mental construction of ideas and concepts about objects that do not exist and cannot exist in reality, but retain some features of real objects. In the process of idealization, on the one hand, we abstract from many properties of real objects and retain only those that interest us in this case; on the other hand, we introduce into the content of the concepts being formed such features that, in principle, cannot belong to real objects. As a result of idealization, ideal or idealized objects arise, for example, “material point”, “straight line”, “ideal gas”, “absolutely black body”, “inertia”, etc.

Idealization and abstraction. Idealization is a type of abstraction, serving as a specific form of cognition, which involves the mental reconstruction of an object by abstracting from some of its properties or supplementing them. Being generalized images, abstractions are performed on a system of models. If there are no such systems, the abstractions are semantically empty. Non-empty, meaningful abstractions are divided into two groups. Some are performed on material models, they are called material. Others are implemented on ideal models, they are called ideal. The latter record directly objective features that do not exist in reality, but have certain analogues in it. This stage of abstractions, in fact, forms a set of idealizations; they introduce ideal elements into thought and, through creative definitions, endow them with mental existence.

An example of constructing an idealized object. Consider the following group of objects: a watermelon, a balloon, a soccer ball, a globe, and a ball bearing. On what basis can we combine them into one class of things? They all have different mass, color, chemical composition, and functional purpose. The only thing that can unite them is that they are similar in “shape”. Obviously, they are all “spherical”. We can translate our intuitive conviction of the similarity of these things in form, which we draw from the evidence of our senses, into the language of rational reasoning. We will say: the specified class of things has the shape of a sphere. The study of geometric shapes and their relationships is the subject of the special science of geometry. How does geometry single out the objects of its research and what is the relationship between these theoretical objects and their empirical prototypes? This question has occupied philosophical thought since the times of Plato and Aristotle. What is the difference between an object of geometry - a point, a straight line, a plane, a circle, a ball, a cone, etc. and its corresponding empirical correlate?

Firstly, a geometric object, for example, a ball, differs from a ball, globe, etc. in that it does not imply the presence of physical, chemical and other properties, with the exception of geometric ones. In practice, objects with such strange features are not known to occur. Due to this fact, it is customary to say that the object of a mathematical theory is a theoretical object, and not an empirical one, that it is a construct, and not a real thing.

Secondly, a theoretical object differs from its empirical prototype in that even those properties of a thing that we retain in a theoretical object after the process of modifying the image (in this case, geometric properties) cannot be thought of as we encounter them in experience. In fact, having measured the radius and circumference of a watermelon, we notice that the relationship between the obtained values ​​differs to a greater or lesser extent from the relationship that follows from geometric reasoning. We can, however, make a wooden or metal ball whose spatial properties will be much closer to the corresponding properties of an “ideal” ball. Will the progress of technology and measurement procedures lead to the fact that a person will be able to physically reproduce this or that geometric construct? The nature of things is such that such a possibility is in principle unrealizable. It is impossible to grow a watermelon whose shape would be as “correct” as a bearing; the laws of living things prevent this. It is impossible to create a bearing that would correspond absolutely exactly to a geometric ball; this is prevented by the molecular nature of the substance. It follows that although in practice we can create things that, in their geometric properties, come closer and closer to the ideal structures of mathematics, we must still remember that at any stage of such an approximation, infinity lies between the real object and the theoretical construct.

From the above it follows that the accuracy and perfection of mathematical constructions is something empirically unattainable. Therefore, in order to create a construct, we must make another modification to our mental image of the thing. Not only must we transform the object by mentally highlighting some properties and discarding others, we must also subject the selected properties to such a transformation that the theoretical object will acquire properties that are not found in empirical experience. The considered transformation of the image is called idealization. Unlike ordinary abstraction, idealization does not emphasize operations distractions, and on the mechanism replenishment .

Stages of idealization:

• 1) highlighting in a natural situation a set of parameters that are fundamental from the standpoint of analysis (relations of property, power, etc.) against the background of neglect of other characteristics of objects;
• 2) the constitution of the selected features as invariant, representative for a certain class of phenomena (i.e. the entire class of objects has these characteristics- relations of property, power, etc. as structure-forming factors connecting society into a single whole);
• 3) operation of passage to the limit. By discarding the “disturbing influence” of conditions on the selected relations, a transition is made to the limiting case, that is, to the idealized object itself: such an object that we have constructed does not exist in reality.

The Meaning of Idealization . Any science, isolating its aspect from the real world for study, uses idealization and idealized objects. The latter are much simpler than real objects, which makes it possible to give their exact mathematical description and penetrate deeper into the nature of the phenomena being studied. The presence of idealization in cognition serves as an indicator of the development of branches of knowledge and corresponds to the theoretical stage of the functioning of thought.

Conditions for the adequacy of idealizations . The most important condition is adequacy of reality. The answer to the boundaries and limits of idealization is given by experience; Only practical testing of abstract constructions and comparison of them with actual data allows one to judge the legality or illegality of idealization. The demarcation of scientific (meaningful) and non-scientific (empty) abstraction passes along the line of experimental feasibility: in the case of science, it is potential, complex, indirect, but there should be a projection of idealization onto empiricism (ideally); in the case of non-science, the presence of such a projection is not necessary. Let us stipulate that the requirement of empirical justification is very strict, and we must admit: in real knowledge, not all idealizations meet it. The absence of empirical equivalents in itself is not enough to unambiguously reject an idealization; For some period, the entry into the theory of empirically unverifiable idealizations will be tolerated. But this does not cause much satisfaction.

An example of incorrect idealization :ideal design “communist formation”. Problems of its reification:

• 1. The idea of ​​communism, as such, is qualitative: neither in the period of its promotion, nor even more so in modern times, can it be coordinated with the concept of planetary possibilities, biosphere geoconditions for humanity. At the moment it is clear: the image of the full flow of wealth consumed by free (associated) producers is fictitious, because it has no explication in terms of global studies. Simple calculations show: if the standard of living of people is raised to a level comparable to the standard of living of citizens of developed countries, it will be necessary to double the processing of all natural resources within 50 years, increasing energy production by 500 times. The latter (from the standpoint of existing ideas) is impossible. Moreover, even maintaining the existing standard of living in developed countries, which implies increasing growth rates, is becoming more and more difficult every year. The growth rate in the current state of civilization (emphasizing this deprives the thesis of universality, but fills it with realism: the statements of science must be consistent with reality) are not unlimited, since planetary reserves are exhaustible. In this regard, colossal problems of redistribution and readiness for life with zero or even negative growth arise, for which humanity does not (yet) know a satisfactory solution.
• 2. The nature of public property. In theory, it is a big problem to clarify the category of public property as economic, because experience fully reveals its uneconomical nature. In our history, public property was realized in the system powerful , and not actual economic relations: in reality it represented the power of some people over others through things, moving away from free productive activity. Attempts to implement the idea of ​​public ownership under socialism culminated in nationalization, which disintegrated the economic system of productive forces that had developed over centuries. Nowadays our return to civilization is associated with denationalization, decollectivization. But then what does theory teach? And most importantly: is economically viable public ownership even possible? In what case and under what circumstances is collectivity combined with efficiency? Is socialism possible as a real, and not fiscal, formation on the basis of public property that does not lead to a dead end?
• 3. The issue of mechanisms for stimulating and regulating social labor. The goal of socialist social production is declared not to make a profit, but to improve the people's well-being and the all-round development of the individual. The mechanism for connecting people in such production cannot be the market. Leaving aside the forceful pressure of administration, the theory relies on the consciousness and enthusiasm of people. Meanwhile, until now, practice has demonstrated the unrealizability of such hopes. To stimulate and regulate joint productive activity through consciousness, internally motivated, and not disciplinary enthusiasm, it is first necessary to observe a great many conventions: abolish political institutions, implement self-government, move to creative work designed for high self-realization, etc. A circle arises: a new type of productive labor, regulated by consciousness, rests on the preliminary materialization of productive labor activity of a new type. The theory does not explain how to break this circle.
• 4. The task is to combine communist “practical humanism” with collectivism. Communist practical humanism, or the recognition of man as the highest value, a goal, and not a means of social life, an emancipated subject of social action, is in practice supported not by collectivism, but by healthy individualism. The latter is served by the mechanism developed by civilization for the protection of rights and freedoms, the dignity of a self-sufficient citizen in full agreement with the interpretation of freedom as the autonomy of the individual in society. An autonomous free being has corresponding guarantees of self-realization. The dissolution of the individual in the social whole, placing it in the environment of socialist collectivism, turns the pressing question of human freedom from the perspective of “the relationship between personal autonomy and social paternalism” to the perspective of “cognition and adherence to necessity,” which in itself (and even more so against the backdrop of history) is fraught the collapse of the preconditions of both freedom and humanism.

Consequently, the idealizing premises, the idealizations of the “communist formation” are not consistent with the real state of affairs, are not reduced to the objects of others, and are not empirically interpreted. From what has been said, it follows that if not fictitiousness (such a qualification would be excessive against the backdrop of a tolerant attitude towards “quarks”, “tachyons”, etc., which are empirically unadapted but accepted into scientific circulation), then the insufficient validity of the ideal model of communism.

An example of correct idealization: Max Weber's theory of ideal types. An ideal type is any intellectual construct that generalizes social reality; the ideal type can be compared with a “concept”, “representation” (but formalized, constructed). It is much easier to analyze specific social formations by comparing them with ideal types as a kind of standards. Therefore, the ideal type is an important tool of sociological analysis. What is a sociological ideal type? If history, according to Weber, should strive to analyze individual phenomena, that is, phenomena localized in time and space, then the task of sociology is to establish general rules of events regardless of the spatio-temporal definition of these events. In this sense, ideal types as tools of sociological research, apparently, should be more general and, in contrast to genetic ideal types, can be called “pure ideal types.” Thus, the sociologist constructs pure ideal models of domination (charismatic, rational and patriarchal), found in all historical eras anywhere on the globe. “Pure types” are more suitable for research the more “purer” they are, that is, the further they are from actual, empirically existing phenomena.

Ideal types are limiting concepts used in cognition as a scale for correlating and comparing elements of social reality with them.

An example of an ideal type : types of domination. Definition: dominance means the chance to be met with obedience to a specific order. Dominance thus presupposes a mutual expectation: of the one who commands that his order will be obeyed; those who obey - that the order will have the character that they, the obeying, expect, i.e., recognize. In full accordance with his methodology, Weber begins the analysis of legitimate types of domination by considering possible (typical) “motives for obedience.” Weber finds three such motives and, in accordance with them, distinguishes three pure types of domination.

Dominance can be determined by interests, that is, by the purposive rational considerations of the obeyed regarding advantages or disadvantages; it can be determined, further, simply by “mores,” by the habit of certain behavior; finally, it can be based on the simple personal inclination of the subjects, i.e., have an affective base.

First type domination (Weber calls it "legal" ) as a “motive for compliance” has considerations of interest; it is based on purposeful action. Weber refers to this type of modern bourgeois states: England, France, the United States of America, etc. In such a state, Weber emphasizes, it is not individuals who obey, but established laws: not only the governed, but also the managers (officials) are subject to them. The management apparatus consists of specially trained officials; they are required to act “regardless of persons,” that is, according to strictly formal and rational rules. The formal legal principle is the principle underlying “legal domination”; It was precisely this principle that turned out to be, according to Weber, one of the necessary prerequisites for the development of modern capitalism as a system of formal rationality.

Another type of legitimate domination , conditioned by “mores, the habit of certain behavior, Weber calls traditional . Traditional domination is based on faith not only in the legality, but even in the sacredness of ancient orders and authorities; it is therefore based on traditional action. The purest type of such domination is, according to Weber, patriarchal domination. The union of the dominant is a community, the type of boss is “master”, the management headquarters is “servants”, the subordinates are “subjects”, who are obedient to the master due to reverence. Weber emphasizes that the patriarchal type of domination in its structure is in many ways similar to the structure of the family (it is this circumstance that makes the type of legitimacy that is characteristic of this type of domination especially strong and stable).

The management apparatus here consists of household servants, relatives, personal friends or personally loyal vassals who are personally dependent on the master. In all cases, it is not official discipline or business competence, as in the type of domination already discussed, but personal loyalty that serves as the basis for appointment to a position and for promotion up the hierarchical ladder. Since nothing sets a limit to the arbitrariness of the master, hierarchical division is often violated by privileges.

Common types of traditional domination are characterized by the absence of formal law and, accordingly, the requirement to act “regardless of persons”; the nature of relationships in any area is purely personal; however, with some freedom from this purely personal principle in all types of traditional societies, as Weber emphasizes. enjoys the sphere of trade, but this freedom is relative: along with free trade, there is always its traditional form.

Third The pure type of domination is, according to Weber, the so-called charismatic dominance . The concept of charisma plays an important role in Weber's sociology; charisma, at least in accordance with the etymological meaning of this word, is a certain extraordinary ability that distinguishes an individual from others and, most importantly, is not so much acquired by him as given to him by nature. God, fate. Weber includes magical abilities, prophetic gifts, outstanding strength of spirit and words as charismatic qualities; charisma, according to Weber, is possessed by heroes, great generals, magicians, prophets and seers, brilliant artists, outstanding politicians, the founders of world religions - Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, the founders of states - Solon and Lycurgus, the great conquerors - Alexander the Great, Caesar, Napoleon.

The charismatic type of legitimate domination is the direct opposite of the traditional one: if the traditional type of domination is maintained by habit, attachment to the ordinary, established once and for all, then the charismatic type, on the contrary, is based on something extraordinary, never previously recognized; It is no coincidence that the prophet, according to Weber, is characterized by the following phrase: “It is said... and I tell you...” The affective type of social action is the main basis of charismatic domination. Weber views charisma as a “great revolutionary force” that existed in traditional types of society and was capable of bringing changes to the structure of these societies lacking dynamism.