论文部分内容阅读
本文是对劳丹的《一种科学的伪科学?》的回应。作者首先以实例论证了对科学的社会特征特别强调的合理性,进而从三个方面回答了劳丹的批评:作者重申,他并不反对哲学家从未持有的论题,但反对让逻辑、合理性和真理就是它们自己的解释的方法;作者批评劳丹转换了对合理性的定义,而他所提出的对称性的反例,仅在把它解释成要求对明显不同的行为作出同一的因果说明时(但这并非作者的意思)才成立。解释理性行为之社会根源的模型已经有了,只不过哲学家们对传统著作缺乏清醒的认识,这就是他们的失败所在。
This article responds to Laudan’s “a science of pseudo-science?” The author first demonstrates the rationality of emphasizing the social characteristics of science by examples, and then answers the criticism of Laudan from three aspects: the author reiterates that he does not oppose the philosophers never hold the thesis, but opposes the logical, The rationality and truth are their own ways of interpretation; the author criticizes Laudan’s conversion of the definition of rationality, and his counterexample of symmetry merely interprets it as requiring the same causal account for apparently different conduct When (but this is not the author’s meaning) was established. There is already a model for explaining the social roots of rational behavior, except that philosophers lack a clear understanding of traditional writings and this is where their failures lie.