摘要
在证据关系的问题上,持非充分决定性观点者认为,数据不能完全决定假说评价。一部分哲学家认为,非充分决定性可以表达为多重经验等价的不相容理论的可能性问题,而反对者则将问题转换为诸如未被考虑的替代物观点等,但他们都将问题看作是多重理论的有效性。这种解释可被称为对非充分决定性问题的整体论解释,但是这种解释不能完全解决这个问题,而通过对科学知识的社会解释则能提供对非充分决定性问题的一些解决方案。科学哲学家的任务就是去理解,科学共同体如何运作从而最小化由非充分决定性带来的对可靠性威胁,以及能以清楚表达规范的方式发展我们的科学认识论,这些规范可应用于该共同体实践。即使面对新形式的非充分决定性,知识的社会解释也有资源来完成这两项任务。
On the issue of the problems about evidential relations, underdetermination shows that data underdetermine hypothesis evaluation. Some of the philosophers represent the issue as the possibility of multiple empirically equivalent incompatible theories. But the opponents express the problem as that of unconceived alternatives. They all treat the problem as the availability of multiple theories which is called the holist interpretation of underdetermination and can't entirely solve the problem. The social account of scientific knowledge can provide some solutions to the problem of underdetermination. Our tasks as philosophers of science are to understand both how the scientific community works to minimize the threats to reliability posed by underdetermination and to develop our epistemology for science in a way that articulates norms that apply to that community practice. Even in the face of new forms of underdetermination, the social account of knowledge has resources to accomplish both tasks.
出处
《哲学分析》
2015年第6期115-126,共12页
Philosophical Analysis
关键词
证据关系
理论假说
科学知识
非充分决定性
evidence relations
theoretical hypotheses
scientific knowledge
underdetermination
