强纲领自然主义立场的再审视——在相对主义和科学主义边缘的徘徊  

Reflections on the Naturalism of Strong Programme

作　　者：刘崇俊 周程[2] LIU Chong - jun;ZHOU Cheng(School of Marxism, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China;Center for Social Studies of Science, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China)

机构地区：[1]南京理工大学马克思主义学院,南京210094 [2]北京大学哲学系,北京100871

出　　处：《科学技术哲学研究》2017年第6期36-41,共6页Studies in Philosophy of Science and Technology

摘　　要：大卫·布鲁尔所提出的自然主义立场,本意是要在元科学研究中摒弃绝对主义视角下的规范性分析方式和目的论说明模式,从而经验性地反思科学的可信用性。然而,由于社会还原论和社会决定论的误导,强纲领并未能够彻底贯彻自然主义立场,从而一方面使得作为方法论策略的相对主义沦落为认识论层面的相对主义;另一方面方法论科学主义则使得强纲领误用其竞争对手逻辑实证主义的修辞——实证的研究方法和因果的分析方法,从而也并未能"深描"和"再现"活生生的科学实践流本身。最终,强纲领自然主义立场贯彻的不彻底性,使得其"反思科学"的初衷具有"反对科学"的现实效果。In order to abandon the normative analysis and the teleological explanation pattern in the light of absolutism,David Bloor advocated to make a empirical study of science from the point of view of naturalism. However,the naturalism was not completely implemented in the empirical study of science because of the ＂scholastic fallacy＂of social reductionism and social determinism. As a result,the methodological relativism adopted by Strong Programme was reduced to epistemological relativism in the practice of social study of science. At the same time,methodological scientism adopted by Strong Programme could not provide the living dynamic prospect about scientific practice in consideration of misusing the empirical case studies and causal analysis model. In brief,owing to naturalism which was not implemented completely,Strong Programme is with the trend of anti-science,despite the original intention of reflections on science.

关 键 词：强纲领 自然主义 相对主义 科学主义 反思科学 反科学 

分 类 号：G301[文化科学]