论社会本体论的多元知识来源  

On the Pluralistic Sources of Knowledge in Social Ontology

作　　者：殷杰[1] 李思楠 YIN Jie;LI Si-nan

机构地区：[1]山西大学科学技术哲学研究中心

出　　处：《河北学刊》2025年第3期133-142,共10页Hebei Academic Journal

基　　金：2020年度国家社会科学基金重点项目“当代社会本体论问题研究”(20AZX005)。

摘　　要：如果将关于社会本体论的理论视为一种知识,那么在建构社会本体论时必须处理相关的方法论问题。对此,目前存在两种主要方法:从社会科学实践中改良社会科学理论的本体论假设;对日常语言进行分析来建构更为一般性的本体论图景。其中,第一种方法代表了社会本体论研究的实用主义进路,第二种方法则代表了社会本体论研究的语言分析进路。前者试图为知识一元论进行辩护并对后者发起批判,以此论证社会本体论作为知识的合法性只能通过注重实证调查的社会科学知识生产程序来确立。但这种一元论立场设定了经验知识与先验知识的对立,而社会本体论必然受到无涉经验的逻辑约束,因此作为哲学与社会科学交叉领域的社会本体论研究,多元的知识来源更加符合其研究进程。两种进路的融合可以更完整地认识社会本质,并建构系统的社会本体论理论。If the theory of social ontology is regarded as a form of knowledge,then constructing social ontology necessitates should address related methodological issues.Currently,there are two main approaches:one involves improving the ontological assumptions of social science theories based on social science practices,and the other involves analyzing everyday language to construct a more general ontological framework.The pragmatic approach,which supports the monism of knowledge and criticizes the language analysis approach.It attempts to argue that the legitimacy of social ontology as knowledge can only be established through the empirical investigation processes inherent in the production of social science knowledge.However,this monistic stance presupposes a dichotomy between empirical knowledge and a priori knowledge,while social ontology is inevitably subject to non-empirical logical constraints.Therefore,as a research field at the intersection of philosophy and social sciences,social ontology research is better aligned with a pluralistic knowledge source.The integration of both approaches can lead to a more comprehensive understanding of the essence of society and the construction of a systematic social ontology theory.

关 键 词：社会本体论 实用主义 语言分析 一元论 多元论 

分 类 号：B016[哲学宗教—哲学理论] C0[社会学]