歸納法與自然類：裴爾士、蒯因、與哈克

Induction and Natural Kinds: Peirce, Quine, and Haack

10.7065/MRPC.200808.0067

鄭喜恆(Hsi-Heng Cheng)

蒯因 ； 裴爾士 ； 哈克 ； 歸納法 ； 自然類 ； W. V. Quine ； Charles Peirce ； Susan Haack ； induction ； natural kinds

哲學與文化

35卷8期（2008 / 08 / 01）

67 - 90

繁體中文

「蒯因是否是實用主義哲學家？」是相當受到討論的議題。本文檢視蒯因對於歸納法問題、以及歸納法與自然類之間關係的主張，並且比較蒯因、裴爾士以及哈克對於相關議題的主張。目的是從以裴爾士與哈克為代表人物的實用主義與自然主義傳統來檢視蒯因的主張。本文所做的比較顯示出，雖然蒯因的想法與裴爾士與哈克的想法有相當多類似之處，但是也有重要的不相容之處，這顯示我們無法將蒯因毫無扭曲地嵌進從裴爾士到哈克的自然主義傳統之中。

The question of whether W. V. Quine is a pragmatist is one that has attracted much discussion. This paper examines Quine's reconstruction of and solution to the traditional problem of induction and his view of the role of the notion of natural kinds in his solution, and then compares his views with those of Charles Peirce and Susan Haack about the problem of induction and related issues. The main purpose is to connect Quine to the philosophical tradition of pragmatism and naturalism, of which Peirce and Haack are representatives. However, this comparison shows that despite many similarities, some important disagreements between Quine, on the one hand, and Peirce and Haack, on the other hand, prevent Quine's views from being smoothly integrated into the realist framework that Peirce builds for understanding and answering the problem of induction and related issues.

1. C. Hartshorne,P. Weiss,A. Burks. (eds)(1960).Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce.Harvard University Press.
2. Goodman, Nelson.(1983).Fact, Fiction, and Forecast.Harvard University Press.
3. Haack, Susan.(1992)."Extreme Scholastic Realism": Its Relevance to Philosophy of Science Today.Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society,28(1),19-50.
4. Haack, Susan.(1993).Evidence and Inquiry: Towards Reconstruction in Epistemology.Blackwell.
5. Hahn, L.,Schilpp, P. A. (eds.)(1986).The Philosophy of W. V. Quine.La Salle, IL:Open Court.
6. Koskinen, H. J.,Pihlström, S.(2006).Quine and Pragmatism.Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society,42(3),309-346.
7. M. Fisch,C. Kloesel,E. Moore,N. Houser(eds)(2000).W Writings of Charles S. Peirce: A Chronological Edition.Indiana University Press.
8. N. Houser,C. Kloesel(ed.)(1992).The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings.
9. N. Houser,C. Kloesel(ed.)(1998).The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings.Indiana University Press.
10. Putnam, Hilary.(1995).Pragmatism: An Open Question.Blackwell.
11. Quine, W. V.(1991).Two Dogmas in Retrospect.Canadian Journal of Philosophy,21,265-274.
12. Quine, W. V.(1934).Review of Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Vol. III: Exact Logic,22(1),285-297.
13. Quine, W. V.(1935).Review of Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Vol. IV: The Simplest Mathematics,22(2),551-553.
14. Quine, W. V.(1969).Ontological Relativity and Other Essays.Columbia University Press.
15. Quine, W. V.(1933).Review of Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Vol. II: Elements of Logic,9(1),220-229.
16. Quine, W. V.(1980).From a Logical Point of View.Harvard University Press.

1. 鄭喜恆(2009)。詹姆士論「真理」與「實在」的關係。東吳哲學學報，20，91-112。
2. 鄭喜恆(2009)。中年裴爾士的兩個「實在」觀念：裴爾士論科學方法、「真理」與「實在」之關聯。歐美研究，39(2)，295-332。