论文部分内容阅读
卡尔.波普尔的科学哲学为众多知名科学家所推崇,甚至在美国司法体系中扮演了重要角色。但要评估波普尔对我们理解科学所起到的真正作用却并非易事,因为在毫不妥协的证伪主义者波普尔之外,还有一位理论更加温和更加合理的“影子”波普尔。波普尔本尊所原创的对科学富于个人色彩的论断难以得到辩护;而“影子”波普尔较为可辩护的观点却并非原创。笔者运用在《理性地捍卫科学》一书中所提出的批判常识主义路向化解了波普尔逻辑否定主义遇到的困难,并对科学事业给出了更加合理的解释。
Karl Popper’s philosophy of science is respected by many well-known scientists and even plays an important role in the American judicial system. But evaluating Popper’s true role in our understanding of science is not an easy task, as there is a more gentle and rational “shadow” wave outside of the uncompromising Falsifier Popper Poole. The original assertion of Popper’s deference to science’s personal character is difficult to justify; and Popper’s more defensible point of view is not original. The author tries to resolve the difficulties encountered by populist logical negation by applying the critical common-sense approach proposed in his book “Rationally Defending Science,” and gives a more reasonable explanation of the scientific undertaking.