Abstract

The purpose of this paper is an attempt to outline the main directions of differentiation and correlation of scientific and nonscientific humanities. Humanities in general terms can be defined as knowledge about the inner world of man, in terms of material and ideal cultural entities, endowed with human values, values and senses. In this case, outside the humanities there is knowledge of nature, including human nature, of technology, of the social relationships and regularities. In the humanities it is needed to distinguish between the three spheres. The first one corresponds to the strict scientific standards. It practically does not differ from the natural sciences. Here mathematical models, rigorous methods are applied, verifiable theories are created. They limit the knowledge with a conjunction of at least such attributes: validity, explicitness, validity referentiality, valence, reflexivity. These include many sections of linguistics, some areas of literary criticism and psychology, sociology and quantitative history, etc. The second area uses more blurred scientific standards, soft criteria of rationality, not rigorous methods, narrative explanations, philosophical concepts. But it strives to comply with many of the principles of classical science: evidence, validity, hatchability, corroboration. These include most of the literary criticism, some areas of psychology, qualitative, non-quantitative history, sociology, microhistory, pedagogy. The third major area, the humanitaristics itself is extra-scientific, in the sense that knowingly waives certain requirements of science: from objectivity as literary criticism, from naturalness in explanation, resorting to the recognition of a higher power as theology, from experiment as the philosophy. Coexistence of so many different disciplines under one roof «extra-scientific» emphasizes only one thing: deliberate mismatch some generally accepted standards of science. This does not diminish their merits, in contrast, makes them more free and less bound by restrictions. The second sphere is partially inclined to the first one and also lays claim to scientific status, but it is achievable only in the case of revision or mitigate scientific standards. The third area is the opposite the science and is complementary to it.