后实证主义的结构性与批判性——兼评托马斯·库恩《科学革命的结构》  

The Structure and Criticalness of Post-positivism:Comment on the Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn

作　　者：贺伟 曹忍忍 HE Wei;CAO Ren-ren(Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences,Beijing 102488,China;School of Public Administration of Yunnan University,Kunming 650504,China)

机构地区：[1]中国社会科学院大学研究生院,北京102488 [2]云南大学公共管理学院,昆明650504

出　　处：《北京科技大学学报（社会科学版）》2019年第4期70-76,共7页Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing(Social Sciences Edition)

摘　　要：1962年库恩以《科学革命的结构》力证科学进步是一场颠覆和重构的革命史。方法论上,库恩批判了传统的实证主义但也继承了逻辑经验主义诸原则,进而建构了后实证主义;知识论上,库恩运用后实证主义整体性地诠释了科学革命的思想。通过辨析后实证主义的相关术语和援引自1965年伦敦科学哲学国际讨论会以来的"科学之争",研究表明波普尔学派和历史主义的文本批判使库恩范式受锢于"文本主义",而马克思主义式的解读则让后实证主义重新回归历史实践,并揭示出库恩"科学革命"的价值实际上在于从哲学上为人们思考知识发展和科学进步构建了一个"革命"的框架。In 1962, Thomas Kuhn strongly demonstrated that scientific progress is a revolutionary history of subversion and reconstruction with The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. In methodology, Kuhn criticized traditional positivism but inherited the principles of logical empiricism, and then constructed post-positivism. In epistemology, Kuhn interpreted the thought of Scientific Revolutions on the whole through post-positivist approach. By distinguishing the relevant terms of post-positivism and citing the Scientific Dispute since the London International Symposium on Philosophy of Science in 1965, the study shows that the textual criticism of the Popper School and Historicism has caused the Kuhn paradigm to be subject to textualism, while the interpretation of Marxist style makes post-positivism return to historical practice, and reveals that the value of Kuhn's Scientific Revolution lies in the philosophical construction of a revolutionary framework for people to think about knowledge development and scientific progress.

关 键 词：后实证主义 结构性 批判性 科学革命 

分 类 号：C3[社会学]