自然主义视阈下的规范性问题——解读工具主义的认知规范  

The Issue about Normativity under the Naturalism Horizon——Interpretation of cognitive normativity of instrumentalism

作　　者：殷杰[1] 蒋鹏慧 YIN Jie JIANG Penghui(Research Center for Philosophy of Science and Technology, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, Chin)

机构地区：[1]山西大学科技与社会研究所,山西太原030006

出　　处：《山西高等学校社会科学学报》2017年第3期49-52,66,共5页Social Sciences Journal of Universities in Shanxi

摘　　要：奎因自然化认识论提出之后,认识论的研究发生了自然主义转向,以自然主义认识论为代表的自然主义思潮迭出。围绕规范性问题,哲学界的争论经历了两个不同阶段:自然主义认识论是否具有规范性;自然主义认识论具有何种规范性。文章主要探讨争论的后一阶段,即自然主义认识论的不同认知规范,而其中着重分析工具主义的认知规范。工具主义追求的是实现目标的最有效方式,即使是以求真为认识的最终目的,也存在方法论的自身缺陷。显然,工具主义不是自然主义最终的实现途径。自然主义要求对认知规范作出更加宽泛的理解,不仅要考察证据与理论之间认知关系,还要考察科学实践中对具体的认识论规范的建立。自然主义认识论要做的是对认识过程进行深入的经验研究,而形成具有实在关系的认知规范。Since Quine puts forward naturalized epistemology, there is a ＂ turn of naturalism ＂ in epistemology and the trend of naturalism occurs represented by naturalistic epistemology. Around the issue of normativity, a debate in the field of philosophy has experienced two different stages： whether naturalistic epistemology is normative or not, and with what kind of normativity. This thesis mainly discusses the latter stage when naturalistic epistemology has different cognitive normativity, focusing on the analysis of cognitive normativity of instrumentalism. The pursuit of instrumentalism is the most effective way to achieve their goals, which has defects in methodology, though the ultimate goal of epistemology is to seek truth. Obviously, instrumentalism cannot lead to naturalism. Naturalism requires to make a broader understanding of cognitive normativity that not only needs to investigate cognitive relationship between theory and evidence, hut also needs to explore the building of epistemological norms in scientific practice. What naturalistic epistemology should do is to have more in - depth empirical research in the cognitive process and form a cognitive normativity with realistic relationship.

关 键 词：自然主义认识论 认知规范 工具主义 实在关系 

分 类 号：B017[哲学宗教—哲学理论]