法国科学哲学中的划界问题——以巴什拉、康吉莱姆、拉图尔为例
|
摘要
与英美科学哲学主要将科学划界视为一个逻辑问题进而消解了科学的历史性内涵不同,法国科学哲学家的划界理论带有强烈的历史主义特征。巴什拉基于认识论的断裂,在坚持辉格史观的前提下,将科学的真理性内涵与历史性特征结合起来;康吉莱姆基于对科学概念史的考察,通过科学意识形态概念,弱化了巴什拉在科学与非科学之间的确定性边界;拉图尔则将法国的科学思想史进路改造为了科学实践史,从而在地方性知识的基础之上,将划界问题的讨论范围从认识论扩展到了本体论。巴什拉、康吉莱姆、拉图尔的划界工作充分体现了法国科学哲学的历史认识论和局域认识论传统。
Different from the analytic approach which considers demarcation as a logical issue and then dispels the historical dimension from science,French philosophers construed demarcation problem in a historical way. Employing the notion of epistemological rupture from the perspective of whiggish historiography,Bachelard figured out a justification for science as truth in a historical manner. However,Canguilhem highlighted the concepts in the history of science,proposed a new stance known as scientific ideology,and eventually alleviated the definite distinction between science and non-science,which was cherished by Bachelard. Latour substituted history of practice for history of ideas and,hence,distanced himself far away from epistemology. Consequently,the philosophical recognition of local knowledge leaded Latour to reconceptualize demarcation problem as an ontological issue. What underlay their work on demarcation issue was the French tradition of historical and regional epistemology.
Different from the analytic approach which considers demarcation as a logical issue and then dispels the historical dimension from science,French philosophers construed demarcation problem in a historical way. Employing the notion of epistemological rupture from the perspective of whiggish historiography,Bachelard figured out a justification for science as truth in a historical manner. However,Canguilhem highlighted the concepts in the history of science,proposed a new stance known as scientific ideology,and eventually alleviated the definite distinction between science and non-science,which was cherished by Bachelard. Latour substituted history of practice for history of ideas and,hence,distanced himself far away from epistemology. Consequently,the philosophical recognition of local knowledge leaded Latour to reconceptualize demarcation problem as an ontological issue. What underlay their work on demarcation issue was the French tradition of historical and regional epistemology.
引文
[1]LAUDAN L.The demise of the demarcation problem[C]∥COHEN R S,LAUDAN L.Physics,philosophy and psychoanalysis.Dordrecht:D.Reidel Publishing Company,1983:111.
[2]ALTHUSSER L.Presentation for Georges Canguilhem’s philosophy of science[C]∥MONTAG W.A materialist way.London and New York:Verso,1998:163.
[3]BRENNER A,GAYON J.Introduction[C]∥BRENNER A,GAYON J.French studies in the philosophy of science.Dordrecht:Springer,2009:7.
[4]BACHELARD G.La formation de l’esprit scientifique[M].Paris:J.Vrin,1967.
[5]BACHELARD G.La philosophie du non[M].Paris:Presses Universitaires de France,1966:144.
[6]HACKING I.Historical ontology[M].Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press,2002:93.
[7]BACHELARD G.Le nouvel esprit scientifique[M].Paris:Presses Universitaires de France,1968.
[8]BACHELARD G.L’activitérationaliste de la physique contemporaine[M].Paris:Presses Universitaires de France,1965.
[9]BALIBAR E.From Bachelard to Althusser:the concept of“epistemological break”[J].Economy and society,1978,7(3):215.
[10]DUPONT D.Foucault and the French epistemological tradition[D].Kingston:Queen’s University,2006:119.
[11]BACHELARD G.Le materialisme rationnel[M].Paris:Presses Universitaires de France,1963:86.
[12]GUTTING G.Michel Foucault’s archaeology of scientific reason[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1989:20-21.
[13]CANGUILHEM G.La formation du concept de réflexe aux XVII et XVIII siècles[M].Paris:Presses Universitaires de France,1955.
[14]CANGUILHEM G.Ideology and rationality in the history of the life sciences[M].Cambridge,MA:The MIT Press,1988.
[15]CANGUILHEM G.L’objet de l’histoire des sciences[C]∥CANGUILHEM G.tudes d’histoire et de philosophie des sciences,Paris:J.Vrin,1983:14.
[16]BRAUSTEIN J-F.Bachelard,Canguilhem,Foucault:Le‘style fran9ais’enépistémologie[C]∥WAGNER P.Les philosophes et la science.Paris:Gallimard,2002:920.
[17]LATOUR B.Science in action[M].Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press,1987:4.
[18]LATOUR B.Pandora’s hope[M].Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press,1999.
[19]LATOUR B.Les microbes:guerre et paix,suivi de irréductions[M].Paris:A.M.Métailé,1984:75-104.
[20]索卡尔.曝光:一个物理学家的文化研究实验[C]∥索卡尔,德里达,等.“索卡尔事件”与科学大战.蔡仲,等译.南京:南京大学出版社,2002:58.
[21]DAWKINS R.River out of Eden[M].New York:Basic Books,1995:31-32.
[22]刘鹏.三万英尺高空的相对主义者[J].科学技术哲学研究,2010(10):50-54.
[23]CANGUILHEM G.L’histoire des sciences dans l’uvrepistémologique de Gaston Bachelard[C]∥CANGUIL-HEM G.tudes d’histoire et de philosophie des sciences,Paris:J.Vrin,1983:178.
[24]拉图尔.我们从未现代过[M].刘鹏,安涅思,译.苏州:苏州大学出版社,2010.
(1)实际上,拉图尔的经验哲学立场和“非还原性”(irréductibilité)原则要求他质疑一切划界,不管这种划界是科学与非科学、事实与价值,还是自然与社会、客体与主体。拉图尔的基本立场是,所有一切边界都是实践活动的结果,而非实践展开的前提。在此,我们的主题是科学划界,因此不讨论拉图尔对其他划界的分析。拉图尔对“非还原性”原则的讨论[19]243。
(1)对道金斯这一批评所引发的争论及其相关分析[22]。
[2]ALTHUSSER L.Presentation for Georges Canguilhem’s philosophy of science[C]∥MONTAG W.A materialist way.London and New York:Verso,1998:163.
[3]BRENNER A,GAYON J.Introduction[C]∥BRENNER A,GAYON J.French studies in the philosophy of science.Dordrecht:Springer,2009:7.
[4]BACHELARD G.La formation de l’esprit scientifique[M].Paris:J.Vrin,1967.
[5]BACHELARD G.La philosophie du non[M].Paris:Presses Universitaires de France,1966:144.
[6]HACKING I.Historical ontology[M].Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press,2002:93.
[7]BACHELARD G.Le nouvel esprit scientifique[M].Paris:Presses Universitaires de France,1968.
[8]BACHELARD G.L’activitérationaliste de la physique contemporaine[M].Paris:Presses Universitaires de France,1965.
[9]BALIBAR E.From Bachelard to Althusser:the concept of“epistemological break”[J].Economy and society,1978,7(3):215.
[10]DUPONT D.Foucault and the French epistemological tradition[D].Kingston:Queen’s University,2006:119.
[11]BACHELARD G.Le materialisme rationnel[M].Paris:Presses Universitaires de France,1963:86.
[12]GUTTING G.Michel Foucault’s archaeology of scientific reason[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1989:20-21.
[13]CANGUILHEM G.La formation du concept de réflexe aux XVII et XVIII siècles[M].Paris:Presses Universitaires de France,1955.
[14]CANGUILHEM G.Ideology and rationality in the history of the life sciences[M].Cambridge,MA:The MIT Press,1988.
[15]CANGUILHEM G.L’objet de l’histoire des sciences[C]∥CANGUILHEM G.tudes d’histoire et de philosophie des sciences,Paris:J.Vrin,1983:14.
[16]BRAUSTEIN J-F.Bachelard,Canguilhem,Foucault:Le‘style fran9ais’enépistémologie[C]∥WAGNER P.Les philosophes et la science.Paris:Gallimard,2002:920.
[17]LATOUR B.Science in action[M].Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press,1987:4.
[18]LATOUR B.Pandora’s hope[M].Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press,1999.
[19]LATOUR B.Les microbes:guerre et paix,suivi de irréductions[M].Paris:A.M.Métailé,1984:75-104.
[20]索卡尔.曝光:一个物理学家的文化研究实验[C]∥索卡尔,德里达,等.“索卡尔事件”与科学大战.蔡仲,等译.南京:南京大学出版社,2002:58.
[21]DAWKINS R.River out of Eden[M].New York:Basic Books,1995:31-32.
[22]刘鹏.三万英尺高空的相对主义者[J].科学技术哲学研究,2010(10):50-54.
[23]CANGUILHEM G.L’histoire des sciences dans l’uvrepistémologique de Gaston Bachelard[C]∥CANGUIL-HEM G.tudes d’histoire et de philosophie des sciences,Paris:J.Vrin,1983:178.
[24]拉图尔.我们从未现代过[M].刘鹏,安涅思,译.苏州:苏州大学出版社,2010.
(1)实际上,拉图尔的经验哲学立场和“非还原性”(irréductibilité)原则要求他质疑一切划界,不管这种划界是科学与非科学、事实与价值,还是自然与社会、客体与主体。拉图尔的基本立场是,所有一切边界都是实践活动的结果,而非实践展开的前提。在此,我们的主题是科学划界,因此不讨论拉图尔对其他划界的分析。拉图尔对“非还原性”原则的讨论[19]243。
(1)对道金斯这一批评所引发的争论及其相关分析[22]。