“在不同的世界”还是“至多一个世界”?——反思戴维森对库恩概念相对主义的批判  

“In Different Worlds” or “at Most One World”?:Reflection on Davidson’s Critique of Kuhn’s Conceptual Relativism

作　　者：张巧 Zhang Qiao(School of Literature,Research Center for Aesthetic Culture and Critical Theory,South China Normal University,Guangzhou,China)

机构地区：[1]华南师范大学文学院/审美文化与批判理论研究中心,广东广州510006

出　　处：《社会科学论坛》2023年第1期223-231,共9页Tribune of Social Sciences

基　　金：国家社会科学基金青年项目《当代英美“后分析”文论研究》阶段性成果,项目编号:21CZW004。

摘　　要：库恩关于科学家使用不同的范式导致在不同世界中工作的观点,被戴维森归结为某种概念相对主义。戴维森认为,既然至多一个世界,那么“不同的世界”的宣称就是想象或隐喻。然而,库恩和戴维森对于世界的论断最终都落入到戴维森自己所说的概念图式的批判中。库恩和戴维森分别代表了极端的地方主义和极端的全体主义。最后,维特根斯坦的“家族相似”提供了更灵活和温和的进路,克服二者论断中的缺陷。Kuhn’s idea that scientists use different paradigms leading to work in different worlds is attributed by Davidson to some sort of conceptual relativism. Davidson believes that since there is “at most one world”, the claim of being “a different world” is imagination or metaphor. However, both Kuhn and Davidson’s assertion of the world eventually fell into a critique of what Davidson himself calls a conceptual schema. Kuhn and Davidson represented extreme localism and extreme universalism, respectively. Finally, Wittgenstein’s “family resemblance” provides a more flexible and gentle approach to overcome the flaws in both assertions.

关 键 词：库恩 戴维森 概念图式 家族相似 

分 类 号：B151[哲学宗教—世界哲学]