الظاهرة العلمية في فلسفة ايمري لاكاتوس

الملخص EN

This study aims to highlight on the analysis given by Emre Lakatos to the scientific phenomenon, because his theory changed the foundations of the science philosophy, he treated the problematic of the growth of scientific knowledge from a new epistemological angle leding to a new image of science and its history.

He belongs to this tendency which takes historical awareness seriously, as he focused his analyzes on placing science between his philosophy and history.

The concept of "research programs" was a basic concept in his theory.

He believes that the major scientific achievements are only research programs that can be evaluated according to the degrees of progress and regression, as scientific revolutions result in more advanced research programs that replace obsolete programs that have exhausted their Contents.

The progress of science is only through open competition between different programs Lakatos emphasizes that the growth of science is subject to slow and quiet rationality and not to urgent rationality as is the case with Popper.

The methodological tool that has been adopted combines as many as possible four methods: The analytical method in dealing with the lakatos texts.

The comparative method by comparing lakatos with other philosophers.

And the historical method, to return to the history of science and use scientific examples in order to justify its views.

The
critical method as a method protects us from falling into prejudices, it plays an essential role in showing flaws (Defects) and the merits(virtues )of his theory.

The diversity of these methods is imposed by the nature of the topics.

There is no doubt that there is a link between these approaches in the performance of meaning This study concluded that Lakatos has established a new trend that is concerned with the logic of science surrounding the real mechanism for producing scientific knowledge.

He gave an explanation of the various components of science.

He approached the nature of science more than any other philosopher of science before him.

We found in his approach to originality, innovation and novelty what we did not find in other approaches.

It opened up new methodological perspectives and insights into the study of the scientific phenomenon.

All we aspire to is to raise the interest of Arab researchers to these new topics.

Despite his great importance, he did not take his share of the study and research that he deserves in the field of Arab culture.