科學概念的指稱與投射

Reference and Projection of Scientific Concepts

陳瑞麟(Ruey-Lin Chen)

科學實在論 ； 指稱的因果理論 ； 投射 ； 科學概念 ； 科學哲學 ； scientific realism ； the causal theory of reference ； projection ； scientific concepts ； philosophy of science

歐美研究

33卷1期（2003 / 03 / 01）

125 - 192

繁體中文

本文將論證，針對說明「科學語詞（也就是「科學概念」）和世界的關係」這個議題上，分析傳統的「指稱的因果理論」和「指稱」觀念兩者都將面對難以解決的困境。「投射」的觀念才是更好的途徑，科學語詞和科學概念是透過「投射」而和世界建立一定的相互關係。本文試圖提出一個科學概念的「經驗投射理論」。我們將以量熱學、熱力學、燃素理論等等實際的科學案例，來詳細論證下列論旨：1.心智將科學概念投射到世界，並建構可落實模型來印證它們。2.每個科學概念是一概念網絡的一部分。3.科學概念與現象的關聯由其在概念網絡中的位置來決定。4.科學概念投射的對象被落實後，此概念才指稱該被落實的物體。5.出現在不同理論中的語詞對應了不同的科學概念。

What is the relation between scientific terms (scientific concepts) and the world? In this article I argue that the several versions of causal theory of reference fail to provide a good answer to this question. As the notion of reference is presupposed, the versions encounter some unsolvable difficulties. But there is a better approach along the notion of projection. I claim that some degree of correlation between scientific terms or concepts and the world can be established through projection This article proposes and develops an Empirical Projection Theory (EPT) for scientific concepts. The theory exhibits an essential characteristic of the scientific concept: empirical projectibility. EPT claims the following theses. (1) Scientific concepts can be projected onto the world by the mind and confirmed by constructing realizable models. (2) Each scientific concept is a part of a conceptual network that is constituted by a classificatory system. (3) The correlation between each scientific concept and phenomena depends on the concept's topological location or the way it is linked to the other concepts. (4) When the object projected by a scientific concept is confirmed or realized, the scientific concept and its correspondent scientific term refers to the realized object. (5) The same scientific term occurring in different scientific theories would then correspond to different scientific concepts. Some scientific cases, such as carloimetry, thermodynamics, and phlogiston theory, are taken as examples to justify EPT in this article.

1. Bishop, M.,Stich, S.(1996).The flight into reference or how not to make progress in the philosophy of science.Philosophy of Science,63(1),33-49.
2. Blackburn, S.(1984).Spreading the word.Oxford:Clarendon Press.
3. Blackburn, S.,G. MacDonal (Eds.),C. Wright (Eds.)(1986).Fact, science, and morality: Essays on A. J. Ayer's language, truth and logic.Oxford:Basil Blackwell Press.
4. Boyd, R.,A. Ortony (Ed.)(1979).Metaphor and thought.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
5. Boyd, R.,G. Boolos (Ed.)(1990).Meaning and method.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
6. Boyd, R.,J. Earman (Ed.)(1992).Inference, explanation, and other frustrations.Berkeley:University of California Press.
7. Carnap, R.(1966).Philosophical foundations of physics.New York:Basic Books, Inc..
8. Chappell, T. D. J.(1998).The incomplete projectivist: How to be an objectivist and an attitudinist.The Philosophical Quarterly,48,190-50-66.
9. Chen, Ruey-Lin(2000).Theory versions instead of articulations of a paradigm.Studies in History and Philosophy of Science,31A(3),449-471.
10. Dampier, W. C.(1966).A history of science.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
11. Davies, P.(Ed.)(1993).The new physics.Cambridge University Press.
12. Drestke, F.(1999).The Cambridge dictionary of philosophy.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
13. Dupré, J.(1981).Natural kinds and biological taxa.The Philosp-phical Review,90(1),66-90.
14. Dupré, J.(1994).The philosophical basis of biological classification (Essay Review).Studies in History and Philosophy of Science,25(2),271-279.
15. Enç, B.(1976).Reference of theoretical terms.Nous,10,261-282.
16. Estes, W. K.(1994).Classification and cognition.Oxford:Oxford University; Clarendon Press.
17. Fauconnier, G.,Turner, M.(1998).Conceptual integration networks.Cognitive Science,22(2),133-187.
18. Fodor, J.(1998).Concept: Why cognitive science went wrong.Oxford:Clarendon Press.
19. Freedman, E. G.,Giere (Ed.)(1992).Cognitive models of science.Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
20. Fu, D.(1995).Higher taxonomy and higher incommensurability.Studies in History and Philosophy of Science,26(2),273-294.
21. Fu, D.(1996).Crossing taxonomies and boundaries: a critical note on comparative history of science and Zhao Youqin's "Op-tics.".Taiwanese Journal for Philosophy and History of Science,5(1),103-128.
22. Fu, D.,C. H. Lin, (Eds.),D. Fu (Eds.)(1993).Philosophy and conceptual history of science in Taiwan.Dordrecht:Kluwer Academic Publishers.
23. Goodman, N.(1965).Fact, fiction, and forecast.Indianapolis:The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc. Press.
24. Hacking, I.(1983).Representing and intervening.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
25. Hacking, I.,H. Paul (Ed.)(1993).World changes.Massa-chuetts:The MIT Press.
26. Hacking, I.,M. Douglas (Eds.),H. David (Eds.)(1992).How classification works.Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press.
27. Hansen, N. R.(1965).Patterns of discovery.Cambridge:Cam-bridge University Press.
28. Hardin, C.,Rosenberg, A.(1982).A defense of convergent realism.Philosophy of Science,49,604-615.
29. Johnson-Laird, P. N.(1983).Mental model.Cambridge, Mass.:Harvard University Press.
30. Kitcher, P.(1978).Theories, theorists and theoretical change.The Philosophical Review,87(4),519-547.
31. Kitcher, P.(1993).The advancement of science.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
32. Komatsu, L. K.(1992).Recent views of conceptual structure.Psychological Bulletin,112(3),500-526.
33. Kripke, S.(1980).Naming and necessity.Cambridge, Mass.:Harvard University Press.
34. Kuhn, T.(1970).The structure of scientific revolution.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
35. Kuhn, T.,P. D. Asquith (Eds.),T. Nickles (Eds.)(1983).PSA 1982 proceedings of the 1982 Biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association.East Lansing:Philosophy of Science Association.
36. Kuhn, T.,P. Horwich (Ed.)(1993).World changes.Massachuetts:The MIT Press.
37. Lea, S. M.,Burke, J. R.(1997).Physics: The nature of things.New York:Brooks/Cole Publishing Company & West Publishing Company.
38. Maxwell, G.(1989).Readings in the philosophy of science.New Jersey:Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
39. Mechelem, I. V.,Hampton, J.,Michalski, R. S.,Theuns, P.(1993).Categories and concepts: Theoretical views and inductive data analysis.London:Academic Press.
40. Neisser, U.(1987).Concepts and conceptual development: Eco-logical and intellectual factors in categorization.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
41. Nersessian, N. J.(1989).Conceptual change in science and in science education.Syntheses,80,163-183.
42. Newton-Smith, W. H.(1981).The rationality of science.London:Routledge Press.
43. Nowak, G.,Thagard, P.,Giere (Ed.)(1992).Cognitive models of science.Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
44. Palmer, S. E.,E. Rosch (Eds.),B. Lloyd (Eds.)(1978).Cognition and categorization.Hillsdale, New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
45. Percival, P.,Newton-Smith (Ed.)(2000).A companion to the philosophy of science.Oxford:Blackwell Publisher.
46. Psillos, S.(1999).Scientific realism: How science tracks truth.London:Routledge Press.
47. Putnam, H.(1975).Mind, language and reality.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
48. Putnam, H.(1975).Mind, language and reality.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
49. Putnam, H.(1981).Reason, truth, and history.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
50. Rubinstein, A.(1998).Induction, grue emeralds and lady Macbeth's fallacy.The Philosophical Quarterly,48(190),37-49.
51. Sainbury, R. M.(1998).Projections and relations.The Monist,81(1),133-160.
52. Smith, E. E.,Medin, D. L.(1981).Categories and concepts.Cambridge, Mass.:Harvard University Press.
53. Thagard, P.(1992).Conceptual revolutions.Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton University Press.
54. Tweney, R. D.,R. Giere (Ed.)(1992).Cognitive models of science.Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
55. Usher, A. P.(1982).A history of mechanical inventions.New York:Dover Publications, Inc..
56. 林正弘(1985)。邏輯·知識·科學哲學。臺北市:東大圖書公司。
57. 陳瑞麟(1996)。以說話行事模式來說明意向性的結構。國立台灣大學文史哲學報，45(2)，173-200。
58. 陳瑞麟(1999)。組織科學理論：分疇、分類和模型。東吳哲學學報，4，1-36。
59. 陳瑞麟(1998)。科學理論的模型和分類。台灣哲學學會1998年度學術研討會，臺北市:
60. 陳瑞麟、傅大爲主編、朱元鴻主編(2001)。孔恩：評論集。臺北市:巨流圖書公書。
61. 傅大爲、何志青主編、洪裕宏主編(1995)。第四屆美國文學與思想研討會論文選集－哲學篇。臺北市:中央研究院歐美研究所。

1. 陳瑞麟(2005)。科學的戰爭與和平—「科學如何運作」的建構論與實在論之爭。歐美研究，35(1)，141-223。
2. 陳瑞麟(2005)。科學現象的觀察與建構。東吳哲學學報，11，57-98。
3. 韓菊美(2012)。泥岩區農民的生活世界與環境識覺形構─以燕巢、田寮為例。社會與區域發展學報，3(2)，89-126。
4. (2023)。科學實在論爭辯在臺灣的發展－林正弘的關鍵地位。東吳哲學學報，47，1-31。