The author raises the question of the existence of scientific research in philosophy, as well as what research in philosophy and science is in general. The scientific status of philosophy is denied, while the interaction of philosophy and science in modern culture is emphasized. The author notes that the studies, as we understand them today, took shape quite late, not earlier than in the first half of the 20th century. Although in philosophy, there was something similar to research, perceived as dialectic (Plato) and thinking (Aristotle), which originated in ancient culture; in science, research develops later in the Hellenistic period (Archimedes is already a real scientist, not a philosopher). It is proposed to reconstruct the study, in which the problems and tasks are defined, as well as the construction of schemes and ideal objects, objective and subjective aspects are considered. A subjective aspect means self-actualization of the personality of a philosopher or a scientist in the process of research. The author discusses and characterizes the already mentioned distinctions on the material of two cases (Plato's “Pir” and Galileo’s work “Conversations and Mathematical Proofs Concerning Two New Branches of Science Relating to Mechanics and Local Motion with the Appendix about the Centers of Gravity of Different Bodies”). At the same time, they are compared with each other in order to clarify their features for philosophy and science. The author considers two cases of the formation and use of research methodology: first, when the methods have already been formed and determine the entire study, the second, formation of the methodology during the study itself. At the end of the article, the author discusses some features of the research, which are determined by its belonging to the institute of modern science.