科学革命是如何发生的
|
摘要
科学概念是科学知识和理论的细胞和重要组成部分，是科学知识产生发展的重要载体。许多科学史学家和哲学家已经强调过了科学革命的重要性，但是对这些变化几乎不存在详细解释。为了深入研究科学革命，萨伽德从概念角度入手，深入研究了概念变化、解释的连贯性及其实现模型等相关理论，认为科学革命实际上发生了一场概念革命。
萨伽德及其合作者把人工智能的研究成果引入科学概念变化的研究之中，深入研究了科学革命中概念变化的规律和机制，并出版了《concept revolution》1992。萨伽德对科学革命的研究沿着这样一个思路：首先，提出了一个科学革命的理论。对于科学革命，他认为科学革命包括概念系统和命题系统的重要变革，其概念系统主要是由类层次和部分层次构成的，其新的理论概念一般是通过概念合并机制产生的，其命题系统主要由解释连贯性关系构成，其新的理论假定通常借助于逆推(abduction)产生，向新的概念和命题系统过渡是由于运用新概念的新命题拥有较大的解释连贯性。其次他分析了理论的概念系统。第三，思考计算机制可能产生的概念系统。第四，分析了概念革命中相竞争的理论的解释连贯性。并运用其理论分析了七场科学革命以及行为主义、认知主义的科学变化的革命性的概念变化问题。本文从其概念和概念变化思想入手，力图探讨其重要的科学革命的思想。
本文分为前言，一、二、三、四章，以及结语等几个部分。
在前言部分，本文阐明了选题的目的和意义、文献综述、国内外研究动态、研究情况和创新之处。
在第一部分，文章对萨伽德科学革命理论中的三个重要的概念——科学革命、概念革命、概念变化及其关系进行了分析和澄清，揭示了三个概念之间的关系。
在第二部分，文章对萨伽德概念及其变化理论进行了研究。首先概括研究了萨伽德概念及其系统和概念变化，然后挖掘了其新概念形成和概念变化的机制。
在第三部分，文章对萨伽德科学革命的动力系统进行了研究。对于科学革命的动力系统，他认为新的概念系统的解释连贯性是概念革命发生的根本原因。文章对其解释连贯性理论及其实现的计算模型和人类认知方式进行了分析和研究。
在第四部分，文章对萨伽德概念革命的思想进行了分析批判。认为他的概念变化的理论，对于深化科学革命的认识提出了一套新的理论和评价标准，为深化科学革命研究开辟了新的方法和研究视野，对科学革命的信仰问题提出了概念变化的新解释，为科学哲学的认知转向提供了范例，同时分析了其理论的局限性。
在结尾部分，本文基于20世纪的科学哲学发生的历史性转向，认为萨伽德对科学革命的研究不仅提出了一套概念革命的评价理论，而且对于深化科学理论更替以及对完成科学哲学的认知转向具有重要的理论意义；同时文章认为萨伽德在其理论的构建中，由于缺少了科学家个人动机、情绪和社会因素的参与，存在一些局限。最后指出概念革命理论的丰富和完善有赖于其他各门学科的发展。
Science concept is a cell and important part of science theory; it is an important carrier of development of science knowledge. Although many historians and philosophers of science have stressed the important science revolution, there has been little detailed explaination to these changes. To deepen studing science revolution, Pual Thagard has studied conceptual changes explanation coherence and computational model of TEC from conceptual angle. He think there have produced conceptual revolution in science revolution.
Thagard and collaborate introduce the research products of AI to the research of conceptual change of science, he had deepened to study the mechanisms and logics of conceptual change of science and published concept revolution in 1992. He had studied science revolution along with such a direction: first, provide a theory of science revolution. To science revolution, he thinked science revolution included the important changes of concept system and proprosition system, concept system mainly included kind and part hieratchies, new theoritical concepts arise by mechanisms of conceptual combination, propositional system are structured by relations of explainatory coherence, new theoretical hypotheses generally arise by abduction, the transition to new conceptual and propositional systems occurs because of the greater explainatory coherence of the new propositions that use the new concept. Second, he studied the conceptual system of science theory. Third, he studied the computational mechanisms which could produce conceptual system. Fourth, he studied the explainatory coherence of competition theory each other in science revolution. He studied seven science revolution and the problem of conceptual change of behaviorism cognitivism, using his theory. This thesis tries to study his important theory of science revolution from his theory of concept and conceptual change.
This article contains six parts: Preface; Chapter one, two, three, four; conclusion.
In preface, this article generally summarize the meaning and aim of selecting this theme, literature, the trends of in-country and overseas, things of research and innovation.t
In chapter one, this article mainly inspect and analyzes three important concept of Thagard' science revolution-----science revolution, concept revolution, conceptual change andtheir relations.
In chapter two, this article studies the Thagard'concept and conceptual change theor. Firstly, it Summarize the content of Thagard' concept and conceptual change theory, then it explores the mechanisms of conceptual development and change.
In chapter three, this article studies the Thagard'dynemical system. Firstly, it Summarize the content of Thagard' dynemical system of new conceptual system, he provided explainatory coherence of new conceptual system was essence cause which science revolution arise, then it explores his theory of explainatory coherence and the application of computational model and people' cognitive ways.
In chapter four, this article studies and analyzes Thagard' conceptual revolution theory. it explores the influence and localization of conceptual revolution theory , it think Thagard' theory provide a set of new cognitive theory to deepen science revolutionand and provide a way to the cognitive reverse of Philosopy of Science and think more conceptual change arise than belief reverse in science revolution and provide the localization of conceptual change theory.
In the end, base of 20 century historical reverse direction of philosophy of science, this article think Thagard's theory not only provided a set of evaluation of conceptual revolution, but it is very important meaning to deepen the replacement of scietific theory and cognitive reverse direction of philosophy of science. It think Thagard' theory has localization in his theory' struction, because it lack of participation of scientist' personal motivation and emotion, social factor.
萨伽德及其合作者把人工智能的研究成果引入科学概念变化的研究之中，深入研究了科学革命中概念变化的规律和机制，并出版了《concept revolution》1992。萨伽德对科学革命的研究沿着这样一个思路：首先，提出了一个科学革命的理论。对于科学革命，他认为科学革命包括概念系统和命题系统的重要变革，其概念系统主要是由类层次和部分层次构成的，其新的理论概念一般是通过概念合并机制产生的，其命题系统主要由解释连贯性关系构成，其新的理论假定通常借助于逆推(abduction)产生，向新的概念和命题系统过渡是由于运用新概念的新命题拥有较大的解释连贯性。其次他分析了理论的概念系统。第三，思考计算机制可能产生的概念系统。第四，分析了概念革命中相竞争的理论的解释连贯性。并运用其理论分析了七场科学革命以及行为主义、认知主义的科学变化的革命性的概念变化问题。本文从其概念和概念变化思想入手，力图探讨其重要的科学革命的思想。
本文分为前言，一、二、三、四章，以及结语等几个部分。
在前言部分，本文阐明了选题的目的和意义、文献综述、国内外研究动态、研究情况和创新之处。
在第一部分，文章对萨伽德科学革命理论中的三个重要的概念——科学革命、概念革命、概念变化及其关系进行了分析和澄清，揭示了三个概念之间的关系。
在第二部分，文章对萨伽德概念及其变化理论进行了研究。首先概括研究了萨伽德概念及其系统和概念变化，然后挖掘了其新概念形成和概念变化的机制。
在第三部分，文章对萨伽德科学革命的动力系统进行了研究。对于科学革命的动力系统，他认为新的概念系统的解释连贯性是概念革命发生的根本原因。文章对其解释连贯性理论及其实现的计算模型和人类认知方式进行了分析和研究。
在第四部分，文章对萨伽德概念革命的思想进行了分析批判。认为他的概念变化的理论，对于深化科学革命的认识提出了一套新的理论和评价标准，为深化科学革命研究开辟了新的方法和研究视野，对科学革命的信仰问题提出了概念变化的新解释，为科学哲学的认知转向提供了范例，同时分析了其理论的局限性。
在结尾部分，本文基于20世纪的科学哲学发生的历史性转向，认为萨伽德对科学革命的研究不仅提出了一套概念革命的评价理论，而且对于深化科学理论更替以及对完成科学哲学的认知转向具有重要的理论意义；同时文章认为萨伽德在其理论的构建中，由于缺少了科学家个人动机、情绪和社会因素的参与，存在一些局限。最后指出概念革命理论的丰富和完善有赖于其他各门学科的发展。
Science concept is a cell and important part of science theory; it is an important carrier of development of science knowledge. Although many historians and philosophers of science have stressed the important science revolution, there has been little detailed explaination to these changes. To deepen studing science revolution, Pual Thagard has studied conceptual changes explanation coherence and computational model of TEC from conceptual angle. He think there have produced conceptual revolution in science revolution.
Thagard and collaborate introduce the research products of AI to the research of conceptual change of science, he had deepened to study the mechanisms and logics of conceptual change of science and published concept revolution in 1992. He had studied science revolution along with such a direction: first, provide a theory of science revolution. To science revolution, he thinked science revolution included the important changes of concept system and proprosition system, concept system mainly included kind and part hieratchies, new theoritical concepts arise by mechanisms of conceptual combination, propositional system are structured by relations of explainatory coherence, new theoretical hypotheses generally arise by abduction, the transition to new conceptual and propositional systems occurs because of the greater explainatory coherence of the new propositions that use the new concept. Second, he studied the conceptual system of science theory. Third, he studied the computational mechanisms which could produce conceptual system. Fourth, he studied the explainatory coherence of competition theory each other in science revolution. He studied seven science revolution and the problem of conceptual change of behaviorism cognitivism, using his theory. This thesis tries to study his important theory of science revolution from his theory of concept and conceptual change.
This article contains six parts: Preface; Chapter one, two, three, four; conclusion.
In preface, this article generally summarize the meaning and aim of selecting this theme, literature, the trends of in-country and overseas, things of research and innovation.t
In chapter one, this article mainly inspect and analyzes three important concept of Thagard' science revolution-----science revolution, concept revolution, conceptual change andtheir relations.
In chapter two, this article studies the Thagard'concept and conceptual change theor. Firstly, it Summarize the content of Thagard' concept and conceptual change theory, then it explores the mechanisms of conceptual development and change.
In chapter three, this article studies the Thagard'dynemical system. Firstly, it Summarize the content of Thagard' dynemical system of new conceptual system, he provided explainatory coherence of new conceptual system was essence cause which science revolution arise, then it explores his theory of explainatory coherence and the application of computational model and people' cognitive ways.
In chapter four, this article studies and analyzes Thagard' conceptual revolution theory. it explores the influence and localization of conceptual revolution theory , it think Thagard' theory provide a set of new cognitive theory to deepen science revolutionand and provide a way to the cognitive reverse of Philosopy of Science and think more conceptual change arise than belief reverse in science revolution and provide the localization of conceptual change theory.
In the end, base of 20 century historical reverse direction of philosophy of science, this article think Thagard's theory not only provided a set of evaluation of conceptual revolution, but it is very important meaning to deepen the replacement of scietific theory and cognitive reverse direction of philosophy of science. It think Thagard' theory has localization in his theory' struction, because it lack of participation of scientist' personal motivation and emotion, social factor.
引文
①张 帆，从科学革命看科学思维方式的变革，系统科学学报，vol．14 No．3，July，2006
②郭贵春．后现代科学实在论[M]．北京：知识出版社。1995．2—3．
①魏屹东．认知转向：科学哲学发展史上一次新的战略性转移[A]．见李平等编．科学、认知、意识——哲学与认知科学国际研讨会文集(1)[C]．南昌：江西人民出版社，2004．4．
②Concept Revolution,Paul Thagard,Princeton,Princeton University Press,28
[1].P．萨伽德，认知科学导论．朱菁译[M]．合肥．中国科学技术大学出版社．1999．8．
[2].萨伽德．病因何在——科学家解释疾病[M]．刘学礼译．上海科技出版社．2001．
[3].熊哲宏．认知科学导论．华中师范大学出版社．2002．
[4]．章士嵘．认知科学导论．人民出版社．1992．
[5].郭贵春．科学实在论教程[M]．北京：高等教育出版社，2001．
[6].魏屹东．广义语境中的科学．科学出版社．2004．
[7].魏屹东．认知转向：科学哲学发展史上一次新的战略性转移．江西人民出版社．2004．3．
[8].魏屹东．认知科学对科学哲学的影响及意义．科学技术与辩证法．2005．6．
[9].魏屹东．20世纪西方科学哲学关于科学划界的四种标准．洛阳师范学院学报．2001．4．
[10].魏屹东．论哲学对认知科学的作用．科学技术与辩证法．2003．6．
[11].魏屹东．科学理论中心概念变化的语境分析．科学技术与辩证法．2004．6．
[12].魏屹东．概念变化、科学革命与语境化．科学技术与辩证法．2003．2．．
[13].魏屹东．从系统观看历史主义科学哲学的中心概念．系统辩证法学报．2003．2．
[14].刘放桐．现代西方哲学，北京：人民出版社[M]．1998．6．
[15].费耶阿本德．反对方法：无政府主义认识论纲领[M]．1975英文版．23．
[16].拉卡托斯．证伪与科学研究纲领方法论[M]．1978．
[17].(美)拉瑞·劳丹．进步及其问题[M]．刘新民译．华夏出版社．1999．125．
[18].任定成．科学哲学认知转向的出色范例．哲学研究．2000．9．
[19].(英)卡尔·波普尔．猜测与反驳[M]．傅季重等译．上海译文出版社，1986．
[20].(美)托马斯·库恩．科学革命的结构[M]．金吾伦．胡新和译．北京大学出版．2003．
[21].科恩，科学中的革命[M]．北京：商务印书馆，1998．
[1].Paul Thagard.Coherence in Thought and Action.MIT Press Cambridge,Massachusetts London,England 2000
[2].Thagard,P(1990) Concept and conceptual change,synthese 82,255-274.
[3] .Thagard,Paul."Scientific Cognition:Hot or cold? ", in Steve Fuller,Marc De Mey,Terry Shinn and Steve Woolgar(eds.),The Cognitive Turn:Sociological and Psychological Perspectives on Science—Sociology of the Science: A Yearbook
[4].Thagard, Paul. "The Conceptual Structure of the ChemicalRevolution", Philosophy of Science,Vol.57 (1990) ,No.2,P.183—209.
[5].Thagard, Paul.Conceptual Revolution, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992
[6] .P. Thagard. Computational philosophy of Science[M]. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1988.
[7] .P. Thagard. Mind, society and the growth of knowledge. Philosophy of Science[J]61: 629—645, 1994.
[8].Thagard, P. Mind: Intruduction to cognitive science. Cambridge, MA; MIT Press, 1996.
[9].P. Thagard. Societies of Mind: Science as distributed computing. Studies in Histroy and philosophy of science[J]. 1993, 24: 49—67
[10] .Guerlac, Henry. Lavoisier—The Crucial Year, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1961.
[11] .Holmes, Fredric Lawrence. Lavoisier and the Chemistry ofLife: An Exploration of Scientific Creativity, Madison, Wis.University of Wisconsin Press,1985.
[12].Laudan, Larry. Progress and its Problem, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971.
[13] .Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolution, 2nd ed.,Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.
[14].C.G.Hempel. Aspects of Scientific explanation [M]. New York: Free Press, 1965.
[15] M. Minsky. A framework for representing Knowledge [M J. In P. H. Winsten, The Psychology of computer Vision.New York.Mc Graw—hi 11.1975.
[16].H. Putmam. Mind, language, and reality[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975.
[17].J. R. Anderson. The architecture of cognition[M]. Cambridge, Mass.Harvard Universitv Press. 1983.
②郭贵春．后现代科学实在论[M]．北京：知识出版社。1995．2—3．
①魏屹东．认知转向：科学哲学发展史上一次新的战略性转移[A]．见李平等编．科学、认知、意识——哲学与认知科学国际研讨会文集(1)[C]．南昌：江西人民出版社，2004．4．
②Concept Revolution,Paul Thagard,Princeton,Princeton University Press,28
[1].P．萨伽德，认知科学导论．朱菁译[M]．合肥．中国科学技术大学出版社．1999．8．
[2].萨伽德．病因何在——科学家解释疾病[M]．刘学礼译．上海科技出版社．2001．
[3].熊哲宏．认知科学导论．华中师范大学出版社．2002．
[4]．章士嵘．认知科学导论．人民出版社．1992．
[5].郭贵春．科学实在论教程[M]．北京：高等教育出版社，2001．
[6].魏屹东．广义语境中的科学．科学出版社．2004．
[7].魏屹东．认知转向：科学哲学发展史上一次新的战略性转移．江西人民出版社．2004．3．
[8].魏屹东．认知科学对科学哲学的影响及意义．科学技术与辩证法．2005．6．
[9].魏屹东．20世纪西方科学哲学关于科学划界的四种标准．洛阳师范学院学报．2001．4．
[10].魏屹东．论哲学对认知科学的作用．科学技术与辩证法．2003．6．
[11].魏屹东．科学理论中心概念变化的语境分析．科学技术与辩证法．2004．6．
[12].魏屹东．概念变化、科学革命与语境化．科学技术与辩证法．2003．2．．
[13].魏屹东．从系统观看历史主义科学哲学的中心概念．系统辩证法学报．2003．2．
[14].刘放桐．现代西方哲学，北京：人民出版社[M]．1998．6．
[15].费耶阿本德．反对方法：无政府主义认识论纲领[M]．1975英文版．23．
[16].拉卡托斯．证伪与科学研究纲领方法论[M]．1978．
[17].(美)拉瑞·劳丹．进步及其问题[M]．刘新民译．华夏出版社．1999．125．
[18].任定成．科学哲学认知转向的出色范例．哲学研究．2000．9．
[19].(英)卡尔·波普尔．猜测与反驳[M]．傅季重等译．上海译文出版社，1986．
[20].(美)托马斯·库恩．科学革命的结构[M]．金吾伦．胡新和译．北京大学出版．2003．
[21].科恩，科学中的革命[M]．北京：商务印书馆，1998．
[1].Paul Thagard.Coherence in Thought and Action.MIT Press Cambridge,Massachusetts London,England 2000
[2].Thagard,P(1990) Concept and conceptual change,synthese 82,255-274.
[3] .Thagard,Paul."Scientific Cognition:Hot or cold? ", in Steve Fuller,Marc De Mey,Terry Shinn and Steve Woolgar(eds.),The Cognitive Turn:Sociological and Psychological Perspectives on Science—Sociology of the Science: A Yearbook
[4].Thagard, Paul. "The Conceptual Structure of the ChemicalRevolution", Philosophy of Science,Vol.57 (1990) ,No.2,P.183—209.
[5].Thagard, Paul.Conceptual Revolution, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992
[6] .P. Thagard. Computational philosophy of Science[M]. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1988.
[7] .P. Thagard. Mind, society and the growth of knowledge. Philosophy of Science[J]61: 629—645, 1994.
[8].Thagard, P. Mind: Intruduction to cognitive science. Cambridge, MA; MIT Press, 1996.
[9].P. Thagard. Societies of Mind: Science as distributed computing. Studies in Histroy and philosophy of science[J]. 1993, 24: 49—67
[10] .Guerlac, Henry. Lavoisier—The Crucial Year, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1961.
[11] .Holmes, Fredric Lawrence. Lavoisier and the Chemistry ofLife: An Exploration of Scientific Creativity, Madison, Wis.University of Wisconsin Press,1985.
[12].Laudan, Larry. Progress and its Problem, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971.
[13] .Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolution, 2nd ed.,Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.
[14].C.G.Hempel. Aspects of Scientific explanation [M]. New York: Free Press, 1965.
[15] M. Minsky. A framework for representing Knowledge [M J. In P. H. Winsten, The Psychology of computer Vision.New York.Mc Graw—hi 11.1975.
[16].H. Putmam. Mind, language, and reality[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975.
[17].J. R. Anderson. The architecture of cognition[M]. Cambridge, Mass.Harvard Universitv Press. 1983.