Оn Human Cognition of the World
Olkhovsky Vladislav Sergeyevich

In the introduction, called as “Is the world perceived? What is the truth (absolute and relative)”, there is briefly considered the question about the cognition of the world and three possible replies on it. Then there is briefly considered the relation of the Christianity to these problems. Further in the main part of the paper there are three known replies on the question “What makes our mind to be able to cognize the Universe?” - 1) Biblical point of view [the creation by the rational (more exactly, superrational) God]; 2) The atheistic (materialistic, naturalistic) point of view [the “creation” by the irrational randomness]; 3) The point of view of cosmic humanism of “New Era” [the universe as a conscience, as the creation of our mind]. Their analysis is given. Then there are given the methods of the test of the knowledge truth and together there are presented the notions of view-world, philosophy and religion. Further the methods of the test of knowledges are given. And at last it is said on the notion of the Truth in the Christianity. Then it is given the detailed presentation of realism and anti-realism in the philosophic notions of the scientific realism, already entered also in the Christianity. Further it is given the inter-relation of knowledge and faith. After that it is presented the mutual complementarity of science and theology, and together it is said on the co-existence of 3 classes of paradigms in different sciences (firstly considered by author) – on the natural paradigm in the natural sciences, on the paradigm of the inclusion of the artificial facts as the creation of the human intelligent design in archeology, criminalistics, medicine and mathematics, cybernetics, informatics and even in humanity history, economics, political sciences and finally in the origin sciences and the Universe and biologic life history, in which there are appeared two cardinally different paradigms - the atheistic (evolutionistic) paradigm and the Christian paradigm on the highest Intelligent Design of the Supernatural Personal God-Creator. In addition, so frequently used by atheists such criteria of the separation of science and pseudo-science as observation, reproducibility, refutability and predictability etc by far not always can be fulfilled in modern real natural sciences. So they are not obligatory. Then it is established that absolutely all methods of the scientific researches are the fruits of the human intelligent design, created in the Divine image and similarity. In conclusion, it is shown the inconsistency of so called “scientific atheism” (firstly proposed by author) because it contains, in particular, such statements: 1) All data of modern science univalently witness that science had not proved and cannot prove principally the absence of God and the transcendent world or that all reality can be explained by physical, chemical, biological etc natural sciences. 2) The belief in that more simple matter forms can product from themselves by self-complication and self perfection more complicated forms. In this case the writer L.N.Tolstoy had said very well: “Materialism is the most mystical in all the studies. It sets as the base of everything the belief in the mythological mater, which creates and originating everything from itself” and also the philosopher A.F.Losev, who had said that science behaviors as the fabulous baron Munchhausen, who pulls himself by his own hairs from the water. But if all the enigmas are solved and all the mysteries are revealed, then for what serves science?”

Full Text: PDF