Analysis of the philosophical reasons of the argumentation of the parties in scientific disputes

The article analyzes the situation when the philosophical ideas, the bases of which a scientist adheres, influence his position in the scientific disputes and the argumentation of the scientific discussion as a whole. The author postulates that scientists may not accept this or that concept on the philosophical level and therefore criticize its philosophical reasons, and not the concept itself. The material is illustrated by historical examples. The paper analyses the philosophical reasons for the argumentation of the parties in scientific disputes and reveals the features of scientific and philosophical argumentation. Both the scientific and philosophical reasoning are aimed at substantiating the truth, but the ways of establishing facts and their verification in science are more universal than in philosophy. Some terminology problems appear. The correlation of the concepts "rational argumentation", "scientific argumentation" and "philosophical argumentation" is determined. The author considers the discussion as a kind of a scientific dispute. The way of communication depends on the choice of scientists. If the chosen way is positive and constructive, this is the way of discussion, and if it is negative and destructive, this is the way of violence or conflict. Proposing ideas and perfecting human mind, philosophy solves the problems which are necessary for the functioning of science and social life. Philosophy gives a perspective, a strategic reference point for scientific knowledge and practice. While science, in its turn, concretizes the problems before the subject of consideration, operating and exploring the subject with its own methods. The specificity of philosophical argumentation is largely determined by the specificity of philosophy.