论强纲领中的因果性模型问题  

The Discussion of Causal Model Problems in Strong Programme

作　　者：文轩 王伯鲁[1] WEN Xuan;WANG Bolu(School of Philosophy,Renmin University of China,Beijing 100872,China)

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学哲学院,北京100872

出　　处：《北京理工大学学报（社会科学版）》2020年第2期161-165,共5页Journal of Beijing Institute of Technology：Social Sciences Edition

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重点项目“现代社会技术化问题研究”(16AZX007);中国人民大学2019年度“中央高校建设世界一流大学(学科)和特色发展引导专项资金”(16AZX007)。

摘　　要：布鲁尔强纲领中所反对的目的论模型来源于巴恩斯提出的目的论模式,他们都拒绝将科学的发展看作真理进化过程,认为作为一种信念的科学知识应当纳入知识社会学的研究领域。布鲁尔进一步提出了与目的论模型相对立的因果性模型,并构建出科学知识社会学应当遵守的四条“强纲领”,力图促使知识社会学成为一门普遍性的学科。布鲁尔声称强纲领的因果性模型与目的论模型是两种相互排斥的形而上学立场,但实际上因果性模型与目的论模型并不完全排斥,甚至还有所交融;同时,他关于因果性模型的论证与辩护也存在诸多问题,是一种不彻底的“强纲领”。The teleological model opposed by Bloor’s "Strong Programme" is derived from the teleological approach proposed by Barry Barnes,they all deny that the development of science can be seen as an evolutionary process of truth. They believe that scientific knowledge is a belief that should be included in the study of knowledge sociology. Bloor further proposed a causal model that is opposite to the teleological model and constructed four "Strong Programme" that Sociology of Scientific Knowledge should follow. He strives to make Sociology of Scientific Knowledge a universal discipline. Bloor claims that the causal model and the teleological model are two mutually exclusive metaphysical views,but in fact,the causal model is not opposed to the teleological model,and they actually have similarities. Meanwhile,he also has many problems in the demonstration and defense of the causal model. This is an incomplete "Strong Programme".

关 键 词：因果性模型 目的论模型 合理性 强纲领 科学知识 

分 类 号：N031[自然科学总论—科学技术哲学]