关于自然种类的本质主义与HPC  

Two Ways of Defining Natural Kinds:Essentialism and HPC

作　　者：张存建[1] 

机构地区：[1]江苏师范大学法政学院,江苏徐州221116

出　　处：《东北师大学报（哲学社会科学版）》2014年第4期66-70,共5页Journal of Northeast Normal University(Philosophy and Social Science Edition)

基　　金：国家哲学社会科学基金项目(11BZX062);江苏省教育厅高校哲学社会科学项目(2013SJB720002);江苏师范大学科研基金项目(12XWR011)

摘　　要：经典名称语义理论没有专门讨论自然种类的划分与存在,而自然科学研究不断得出结论质疑语言哲学家对自然种类的解释。在对语义问题的反思中,逐渐形成一个依托性质界定自然种类的研究传统,并形成关于自然种类的两个解释:"类本质主义"和HPC。二者对性质之间的关联有不同把握。HPC避开了揭示本质性质探究的困难,因为纳入较多认识论思考而能够相对充分地解释自然种类的稳定存在。While classical semantic theories of names talk little about the division and existence of natural kinds, scientific researches give increasingly conclusions refuting the traditional semantic interpretations of natural kinds. Based on reflections of semantic issues, there has been a study tradition in which philosophers generally define a natural kind on basis of some properties. Then two new interpretations of natural kinds appeared. They are so called ＂kind-essentialism＂ and HPC. They take the relations among properties differently. HPC differs from ＂kind-essentialism＂. It avoids the difficulty of finding essential properties. Because of taking more epistemic considerations, HPC can serve a better interpretation of the stable existence of natural kinds.

关 键 词：自然种类 本质主义 性质 

分 类 号：B087[哲学宗教—哲学理论]