论皮尔逊的科学观

卡尔·皮尔逊是１９和２０世纪之交著名的哲人科学家．他的科学观在本世纪初对我国学术界和思想界有很大影响．本文主要以他的代表作《科学规范》为据，较为详细地讨论了他的科学观的几个方面：科学的目的、特性和价值；科学的范围、方法和分类；科学与想象力和审美判断。     

Taking Simmel seriously in evolutionary epistemology

Donald T. Campbell outlines an epistemological theory that attempts to be faithful to evolution through natural selection. He takes his position to be consistent with that of Karl R. Popper, whom he credits as the primary advocate of his day for natural selection epistemology. Campbell writes that neither he nor Popper want to give up the goal of objectivity or objective truth, in spite of their evolutionary epistemology. In discussing the conflict between an epistemology based on natural selection and objective truth, Campbell cites an article by the German sociologist and philosopher Georg Simmel entitled ‘On a Connection of Selection Theory to Epistemology’, as presenting the issue in a notably forthright manner.The present essay summarizes Simmel's article, with the purpose of clarifying, in terms that Campbell apparently finds satisfactory, the conflict that Campbell acknowledges between an evolutionary epistemology and ultimate truth; the essay then examines the responses of Campbell and Popper to Simmel's position. While Campbell and Popper acknowledge the work of Simmel, their responses suggest something less than a full consideration of Simmel's position.     

试论科学理性的限制

通过对波普尔、拉卡托斯、库恩三位哲学家的科学哲学理论来讨论科学理性的限制。这种限制来自主客观两个方面 ,是不可避免的 ,限制是超越的起点     

从马克思到邓小平的社会主义商品经济发展模式探析

社会主义国家能否发展商品经济，在马克思主义经济学说史上有过一个从否定到部分肯定再到肯定的认识发展过程。马克思、恩格斯预测社会主义是没有商品生产的社会。列宁认为从资本主义到社会主义过渡的时期仍然需要保留商品生产。斯大林部分肯定了社会主义商品生产的可能性，但又把它局限在个人消费品的范围。毛泽东在不同时期对社会主义发展商品经济的问题有着相互矛盾的态度。邓小平科学地解决了社会主义同商品经济的关系问题，创造性地提出了社会主义市场经济理论，这是对在社会主义条件下发展商品经济的创新性认识。     

Kuhn, Popper, and the Superconducting Supercollider

The demise of the Superconducting Supercollider (SSC) is often explained in terms of the strain that it placed on the federal budget of the United States, and change in national security interests with the end of the Cold War. Recent work by Steve Fuller provides a framework to re-examine this episode in epistemological terms using the work of Kuhn and Popper. Using this framework, it is tempting to explain the demise as resulting from the overly Kuhnian character of its proponents, who supposedly argued for its construction by appealing to the importance of testing the predictions of a specific paradigm (i.e. the Standard Model). On this reading, the SSC case appears as an example of how Kuhn’s paradigm-driven view of science was invoked to keep science closed and autonomous from society. I argue that the SSC episode should not be viewed as giving support to the displacement of Kuhn’s view of science for Popper’s, and that such a displacement is detrimental to the project of integrating discussion on science into the public sphere. Drawing upon Rouse and Wimsatt, I argue that understanding paradigms as practices blunts some criticisms against Kuhn’s model, and that his model should play an important epistemological role in the aforementioned project.     

Relations between Karl Popper and Michael Polanyi

Karl Popper and Michael Polanyi grew up in central Europe and, having escaped from Nazism, went on to pursue academic careers in Britain where they wrote prolifically on science and politics. Popper and Polanyi corresponded with each other, and met for discussions in the late 1940s and early 50s, but they seldom referred to each other in their publications. This article examines their correspondence so as to produce a picture of their intellectual relations. The most important of the letters was one that Popper wrote in 1952, which we reproduce in its entirety, indicating his dissatisfaction with ideas that Polanyi had expressed in a paper of that year, ‘The Stability of Beliefs’. In this paper, Polanyi used the example of the framework of Zande witchcraft to shed analogical light on science and other systems of belief, arguing that ‘frameworks of belief’ equip their adherents with intellectual powers whose use reinforces commitment to the framework, inoculating adherents against criticism. Polanyi’s 1952 paper and his 1951 and 1952 Gifford Lectures (to which that paper is intimately tied) are the first articulation of Polanyi’s sharp rejection of the modern critical philosophical tradition that by implication included Popper’s philosophical ideas. The 1952 paper is also part of Polanyi’s constructive philosophical effort to set forth a fiduciary philosophy emphasizing commitment. Popper regarded Polanyi’s position as implying cognitive relativism and irrationalism, and from the time of Polanyi’s 1952 paper their personal relationship became strained. Discord between them became publicly manifest when Polanyi subtitled his book Personal Knowledge (1958), Towards a post-critical philosophy, and Popper lambasted the idea of a ‘post-critical’ philosophy in his Preface in The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1959).     

论马克思《手稿》中"人"的概念

劳动、异化及人是马克思《手稿》中的三个互相联系的基本范畴。马克思对异化劳动的批判根源于他对“人”的理解，“人”是马克思据以批判私有制的基础和前提。马克思所理解的“人”既是历史的、现实的，又是理想的、完满的，因而是二重的。马克思关于“人”的思想是西方人道主义传统的新发展。     

大学:一个寻求真理的地方——雅斯贝尔斯《大学之理念》的解读

“大学是致力于寻求真理的共同体“的观点是雅斯贝尔斯在《大学之理念》中最为重点论述的一个观点。以此观点展开,雅斯贝尔斯认为,科学是通往真理的最重要的道路,交流是教师和学生在大学里寻求真理的最典型方式。“大学是致力于寻求真理的共同体“的观点是雅斯贝尔斯在《大学之理念》中最为重点论述的一个观点。以此观点展开,雅斯贝尔斯认为,科学是通往真理的最重要的道路,交流是教师和学生在大学里寻求真理的最典型方式。     

谈欧洲社会学家的社会分层理论

介绍了社会分层理论及其产生的原因。阐述了马克思、索罗金等欧洲知名社会学家关于社会分层的理论。     

人与自然界关系的哲学思考

人类社会是在认识、利用、改造和适应自然界的过程中不断发展的.马克思深刻总结了历代思想家们关于人与自然界关系的思想遗产,把自然界纳入人的实践活动范围进行考察,在人与自然界关系问题上提供了既不同于旧唯物主义又不同于唯心主义的思维方式.马克思在人与自然界关系问题上深刻阐述了下列基本思想:人与自然界的关系,是一种对象性关系;实践是联结人与自然界关系的纽带;社会性是人与自然界关系的一般性质;异化的扬弃是人与自然界和谐关系重建的重要前提.