必然性、分析性与先验性:一种彻底的区分--从2018年国际千克原器退役谈起  

A Rigorous Distinction of Necessity, Analyticity, and Apriority: From the Retirement of the IPK in 2018

作　　者：雒自新 孙蓓蓓 LUO Zi-xin;SUN Bei-bei(School of Marxism,Xian Jiaotong University,Xi'an 710049,Shaanxi)

机构地区：[1]西安交通大学马克思主义学院,陕西西安710049

出　　处：《海南大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2022年第6期159-166,共8页Journal of Hainan University （Humanities & Social Sciences）

基　　金：国家社会科学基金一般项目(21BZX104)。

摘　　要：哲学传统中存在对真理概念的三对二分法,而且它们分别是共外延的。在《命名与必然性》和《同一性与必然性》当中,索尔·克里普克论证了存在后验必然真理和先验偶然真理,力图打破这三对二分法分别是共外延的格局。他试图严格区分必然性、分析性与先验性,以及分别对应的偶然性、综合性与后验性。然而,克里普克并没有将自己所做的区分进行彻底,他承认康德的观点:所有分析真理都是先验真理。实际上,可以沿着克里普克的路线,进一步严格区分认识论概念和语义学概念,从而论证存在分析的偶然真理。进而基于逻辑行动主义方法论,对必然性、分析性与先验性做出一种彻底的区分。There are three dichotomies about the concept of truth in the philosophical tradition, and they are respectively coextensive. In Name and Necessity and“identity and necessity”, Saul A. Kripke argues that there can be both necessary truths known a posteriori and contingent truths known a priori, trying to break the pattern of the three dichotomies that are coextensive. While trying to strictly distinguish between necessity,analyticity and apriority, and their corresponding contingency, syntheticity and posteriority, Kripke fails to make a thorough distinction. He acknowledges Kant’s point of view that all analytical truths are a priori. In fact, it is possible to follow Kripke’s line to further distinguish epistemological concepts from semantic concepts strictly, so as to demonstrate the accidental truth of existential analysis. Furthermore, the methodology of logical activism can be adopted to make a thorough distinction between necessity, analyticity and apriority.

关 键 词：分析性 偶然性 逻辑行动主义 

分 类 号：B81[哲学宗教—逻辑学]