纯粹主义、不纯主义与阈值问题——兼论共同体纯粹主义  

Purism,Impurism,and The Threshold Problem:On A Communal Purism

作　　者：方红庆 FANG Hongqing

机构地区：[1]上海财经大学人文学院哲学系

出　　处：《哲学分析》2024年第3期114-130,199,共18页Philosophical Analysis

基　　金：上海市哲学社会科学规划项目“知识论与伦理学交叉视域下信任的哲学研究”(项目编号:2021BZX007)阶段性成果。

摘　　要：随着知识论的实用入侵,正统的纯粹主义知识论面临巨大的挑战。实用入侵者认为,纯粹主义蕴含不可信的不可错论,相反,他们自己所倡导的不纯主义不仅与可错论相容,而且解决了其阈值问题。不纯主义解决阈值问题的路径主要有三条:统一性、相关性和共同体路径。然而,三条路径无一例外都失败了,根由在于实用入侵背后的认知决策论。认知决策论盛行于当代科学哲学和知识论,主张把证成视为一种认知决策,因此错置了信念与接受的认识论地位。与之相对,共同体纯粹主义捍卫信念的认识论地位,把信念视为一种探索世界的基本机制,一种跨越目标和语境的承诺状态。总之,共同体纯粹主义吸收了不纯主义和共同体主义的合理要素,兼顾了知识的理论与实践维度。With pragmatic encroachment in epistemology,the orthodox purist epistemology faces enormous challenges.The pragmatic encroachers argue that purism entails implausible infallibilism.On the contrary,impurism is not only compatible with fallibilism,but also solves its threshold problem.There are three main solutions:the unity approach,the relevance approach and the community approach.However,all three fails without exception.The main reason is rooted in the cognitive decision theory.Cognitive decision theory prevails in contemporary philosophy of science and epistemology,advocating that justification should be regarded as a kind of cognitive decision,thus misplaces the epistemological status of belief and acceptance.In contrast,communal purism defends the epistemological status of belief,viewing belief as a basic mechanism for exploring the world,a state of commitment across goals and contexts.In short,communal purism absorbs the reasonable elements of impurism and communalism,and takes into account both the theoretical and practical dimensions of knowledge.

关 键 词：实用入侵 不纯主义 阈值问题 认知决策论 共同体纯粹主义 

分 类 号：B017[哲学宗教—哲学理论]