American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences ISSN (E): 2832-8019 Volume 7, | Dec., 2022 P a g e | 89 www.americanjournal.org DEPENDENCE OF SOCIAL KNOWLEDGE AND INNOVATION Berdikulova Gulsarvinoz Aslamovna, Master Student National University of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek, Uzbekistan, Tashkent A B S T R A C T K E Y W O R D S Social knowledge occupies a special place in the system of sciences and has specifics due to the circumstances of its formation, the specifics of the object of research and the properties of the cognizing subject. In this article highlights of dependence of social knowledge and innovation. social knowledge, social sciences, innovation, innovative approach, innovative thinking, society. Social sciences cannot yet compete with natural science knowledge in terms of their practical effectiveness. Natural-scientific knowledge more clearly demonstrates its successes and the possibilities of transforming reality, whereas sociology (and social knowledge in general) has not yet reached the degree of maturity when it will be possible to successfully predict and construct social processes. At the same time, social knowledge today can to some extent construct a new social reality, just as physical and chemical knowledge can create new materials and new objects. But, unfortunately, so far these results cannot be the pride of their creators: social construction is associated primarily with the so-called "dirty technologies", annoying advertising, mass culture of consumption, etc. Attempts to implement social projects in the twentieth century - from building a communist society to various modernization projects of non-Western societies - did not achieve the planned results. Social knowledge today, we have to admit, has not yet gone beyond the descriptive stage. On the other hand, undoubtedly, its problems are becoming more and more relevant and will become even more important in the system of knowledge about the world due to objective circumstances. These circumstances are connected with the stages of the formation of human society and, oddly enough, the successes of natural sciences and the laws of cognition in general. Today, when developing society, culture and education, educational institutions are able to provide qualitative results in the educational process of such concepts as "innovation", "innovation", "renewal", "innovation activity", "innovation culture" in determining the theoretical and practical foundations of improving the taste of educational innovations, improving the quality and effectiveness of educational processes based on innovative technologies. Therefore, the value of the criterion of high efficiency of pedagogical innovation in the course of the activity of a pedagogical person with innovative thinking is to ensure the formation of a harmonious personality. Social knowledge today is simultaneously in two extreme phases of development: the initial formation in the conceptual phase (which is the last for traditional science) and, as a replacement for the missing, intensively developing descriptive research (which in normal science6 are characteristic of the initial American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 7, Dec., 2022 P a g e | 90 www.americanjournal.org phase), with an unformed universal theory. Despite the existence of the scientific discipline "theoretical sociology", there are still no indisputable, objectively verifiable laws in social knowledge. The lack of development of the methodological foundations of social knowledge reduces (if not levels) the prognostic and constructive functions that are fundamental to science. The second circumstance is connected with the fact that social knowledge was formed in European discourse, on the basis of European empirical material and for the needs of European society. Social knowledge as a scientific discipline was formed in the rational cognitive tradition. In itself, this fact is not a negative circumstance: the whole of science exists in a rational discourse. But rational cognition is adequate to simple objects and a mechanistic picture of the world, in which not all objects of the universe can be included. And if other branches of scientific knowledge can develop only in such a cognitive tradition, then the object of social knowledge is not adequate to rational cognition. It cannot be cognized by discrete, analytical thinking, the fundamental characteristics of which were formed in interaction with other objects of reality and for solving other cognitive tasks. At the same time, the object of social knowledge itself has a specificity that determines the methodology of research. Very soon it became clear that socio-cultural systems do not obey universal, objective laws, the truth in which is abstract and independent of the cognizing subject and the frame of reference - for these systems, efficiency, justice, benefit have different contents in different societies. The development of societies does not have a common trajectory of development: if for objects of classical science all processes are directed in one direction, and therefore it is possible to calculate the state of an object at any point in time and space, then for complex objects, such as social systems, the forecast becomes impossible, since social systems have unique development intentions. As already mentioned above, socio-humanitarian knowledge is distinguished as an independent sphere of knowledge by the latter, after classical science has been formed as a whole. This is not only due to the socio-cultural determination of cognition. The order of the constitution of branches of knowledge is determined by the complexity of the object of research. The object of social knowledge is society, its structures and their interaction. The complexity of this object lies not only in the multilevel structure of the social system, it is determined by the fact that the functioning of the social system is determined by both natural elements of the system (resources, environment), artificial, having material content (technical and technological), and mental-ideational (traditions, customs, knowledge, goals, ideals). This means that social reality, which has such a complex content, cannot be known within the limits of disciplinary knowledge. At a minimum, the methodology of cognition of social reality should be based on an integrated approach. As an objective necessity, specific methodological programs based on the principle of integrity should be built for the study of social reality, taking into account both the specifics of cognition of natural objects and spiritual phenomena. Summing up the review of the specifics of the social sciences, it should be said that the peculiarities of the constitution of social knowledge determined its limitations and possibilities. Social knowledge has passed an unconventional path of development: it stood out from philosophy, which had significant epistemological consequences. Firstly, social knowledge bears the imprint of origin - conceptuality and paradigmality (fixing the products of knowledge not in the form of theories and strict laws, but in the form of concepts and paradigms), subjectivity (dependence of theoretical constructions on a priori principled position), lack of strict empirical verification. Secondly, the unconventional path of development meant the absence of a descriptive period, therefore, by the time of its formation into an independent branch of knowledge, social cognition had not yet accumulated sufficient empirical American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 7, Dec., 2022 P a g e | 91 www.americanjournal.org material to build an adequate social theory - social knowledge was originally formed on the basis of the history of European society, therefore it had (and to a large extent has) pronounced Eurocentric character. In addition to the lack of independence of institutionalization, the circumstance that determined the nature of social knowledge was the lack of a system of related sciences that could provide the necessary empirical base. The inevitable limitation of social cognition of the initial period is the mechanistic approach to the study of social reality. The formation of sociology as a science and the entire system of social knowledge took place during the heyday of classical scientific knowledge. Classical rational discourse turned out to be inadequate to the object and subject of social knowledge, since the basic principles of classical science - the principles of objectivity, universalism, essentialism, linearity do not allow us to explore large complex systems, which are all objects of social disciplines. The priority of education, the content and structure of education are changing. Conditions are being created for our children to be stronger and more educated and certainly happier than we are. This sets ourselves the task of forming a spiritually harmonious personality with thoughtful thinking. Unfortunately, in modern educational practice, we have heard the concepts of "innovation in education", "pedagogical innovation" - it is, but we cannot or do not want to realize its fundamental essence. The council of science, familiar with the history and theory of scientific and thought research, does not hesitate to ask this question, the pursuit of novelty answers that open recognition refers to the XXI century. Scientific technical discoveries of key centuries have added something to these ideas, namely, innovative development - a global reality, it is the influence of globalization. Yes globalization has aroused interest in scientific and technical research, turning their introduction into guarantors of progress. It is difficult to deny this scientific and technical and social philosophical view, when every innovation and modernization is considered today as innovation, it would be an inconsistent approach to progress. The XX - XXI century aroused interest in scientific and technical discoveries, so its results showed that it was possible to lead to various crises. It must be admitted that the influence of these crises is tragic, humanity has not been able to understand what point, what it has reached. The second is that we are focusing on the result of globalization crises, we are seeing, but we are unable to find scientific technical results to change them. Since the state and society are different to the development of innovation, it is necessary that they take on the main responsibility, to instill the strategy of innovative development in the minds of the population, people. The conclusions drawn from the above are that innovative thinking is a need for social progress, an objective necessity. Rational understanding of this need as a product of human perception requires social philosophical knowledge of the development of society. This knowledge is the perception of the leprosy of renewal in accordance with the requirements of the period, but this gnoseological research means not to forget about the contradictory course. Our society is encouraged to popularize scientific thought, innovative ideas and developments. Was the media able to adequately understand this task? Thousand unfortunately, it is difficult to give a confirmation answer to this. The point is not in the fact that they do not adequately state or illuminate the derivatives of innovative thinking, but in the insufficient perception of it as an objective necessity. Innovative thinking, modern approach appears as an imitation of scientific technical discoveries. The media, in the literature, highlight its image, and not the fundamental essence of innovative thinking. As a result, simple research is also cited as an American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 7, Dec., 2022 P a g e | 92 www.americanjournal.org innovative development. In our opinion, innovative thinking is the search for consciousness, mental perception, in which a radical renewal is aimed at making a change. The activity of society is defined in culture. Culture is a product of society's activity and an object of study by humanities disciplines, which have their own methodology determined by the specifics of the object itself. This specificity has become the basis not only for the demarcation of sciences, but also for the ever-increasing split of scientific knowledge into two unrelated fields. But to investigate both (society and culture) in a gap, in isolation, as the previous stage of the development of cognition showed, it turned out to be ineffective for solving modern problems. The insufficiency and limitations of social knowledge outside of knowledge about culture intensified cultural studies. In turn, the specificity of spiritual phenomena, on the one hand, which constituted the formation of humanitarian knowledge, determined the research methodologies specific to these objects. On the other hand, the absolutization of this specificity, which is natural for the discrete perception of reality in classical rationality, and the humanitarization of social cognition have led to a deep gap between the natural- scientific foundations of cognitive activity and socio-humanitarian knowledge. With the overcoming of the mechanistic approach in social knowledge, it seemed that a breakthrough in social research should have come and, as a result, their effectiveness should have increased, but the blurring of verification criteria, polyconceptuality and fundamental interpretativeness did not allow socio-humanitarian knowledge to become on a par with natural knowledge in terms of applied achievements (and theoretical and methodological).- scientific disciplines. This situation in the social sciences and humanities has made us skeptical not only about socio-humanitarian knowledge, but also about activities in the humanitarian field in general. References: 1. Berdikulova S. A. SOCIAL NORMS AS A MECHANISM FOR REGULATING SOCIAL CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE CONTEXT OF GLOBALIZATION //Theoretical & Applied Science. – 2020. – №. 1. – С. 744-746. 2. Berdikulova S. A., Jamalova N. U. PATRIOTIC EDUCATION OF MODERN YOUTH //Экономика и социум. – 2020. – №. 3. – С. 15-17. 3. Aslamovna B. S. et al. SOCIAL NORMS AND THEIR ROLE IN SOCIETY //EPRA International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research (IJMR). – 2021. – Т. 7. – №. 4. – С. 1-1. 4. Khudayberdievich K. S., Aslamovna B. S. Public consciousness and public mood //ACADEMICIA: An International Multidisciplinary Research Journal. – 2021. – Т. 11. – №. 9. – С. 1004-1008 5. Худайназаров С. Х. МАЪНАВИЯТ-ЭЛЛАРНИ БИРЛАШТИРАДИ //Uzbek Scholar Journal. – 2022. – Т. 5. – С. 244-250. 6. Xudayberdiyevich X. S. et al. The importance of social norm in the society and human life in the condition of globalization //Journal of Critical Reviews. – 2020. – Т. 7. – №. 2. – С. 234-237. 7. Xudaynazarov S. X. DEVELOPMENT AND SPIRITUALITY: LITERATURE IN THE SYSTEM OF FACTORS THAT ENHANCE THE SPIRITUALITY OF A PERSON //Theoretical & Applied Science. – 2019. – №. 9. – С. 22-27. 8. Aslamovna B. S. The social norm in the condition of globalization //ACADEMICIA: An International Multidisciplinary Research Journal. – 2021. – Т. 11. – №. 3. – С. 2046-2051. American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 7, Dec., 2022 P a g e | 93 www.americanjournal.org 9. Бердикулова С. А. Место социальных норм в развитии общества (напримере Республики Узбекистан) //Credo new. – 2012. – №. 3. – С. 6-6. 10. Бердикулова С. А. О взаимосвязи социальных норм и социального контроля //Социосфера. – 2014. – №. 1. – С. 27-30.