摘要
自然化认识论与传统认识论争论的规范性问题,不仅仅在于能否用描述性的概念来取消或代替规范性概念,更根本的是对规范自身问题的回答,即认识论规范为什么以及如何具有规范性力量?对于这一问题,奎因、戈德曼、斯蒂奇、科恩布里奇等自然化认识论者诉诸于工具主义分别给出了不同的解释。但是,把规范仅仅看作为了达到特定目标的特定方法的有效性,将规范性力量看作来自为达到特定目标的内在倾向和愿望,或者看作是一种行为的合理性又难免会陷入相对主义。
The problem of normativlty quarreied between the Naturalized epistemology and the traditional epistemology is not just whether the descriptive concepts can abolish or repiace the normative concepts, more essentlaliy the answer to the normativity, in other words, why and how the eplstemoiogical norms have their normative force？ To this problem, Quine , A. I. Goidman, Stephen P Stich, and Hilary Kornblith , who claimed naturalized epistemology resorted to the instrumentalism and offered different iliustrations respectively. But, taking the norms merely as the special ways to the special goals, taking the normative force as the inner tendency and desire to speclai goals, or taking them as the rationallty of a behavior, it inevitablygets into relativism.
出处
《自然辩证法研究》
CSSCI
北大核心
2007年第11期16-19,共4页
Studies in Dialectics of Nature
