题名

科學哲學及其與社會科學研究的關聯

并列篇名

The Philosophy of Science and Its Relevance for the Social Science

DOI

10.6231/CME.2003(13)01

作者

沈六(Liow Sheen)

关键词

科學哲學 ; 否證論 ; 革命科學 ; 科學社群 ; 典範衝突 ; philosphy of science ; falsifiability ; revolutionary science ; scientific community ; paradigm conflict

期刊名称

公民訓育學報

卷期/出版年月

13期(2003 / 01 / 01)

页次

1 - 19

内容语文

繁體中文

中文摘要

有些研究者通常會質疑要求他們必須理解社會科學哲學(philosophy of social science)文獻的必要性與重要性。他們會認為他們需要的是在獲得研究的技術,以幫助他們蒐集、處理與分析資料,而非研究哲學上爭論性的問題,那些通常會被認為是邊緣的,甚至是浪費他們時間的。依據此種詮釋,社會科學研究的技術就如同駕駛飛機或輪船的技術一樣,應該學習,以至於能應用。但是,此一觀點所以沒有被認同,乃因哲學提出對人性(human nature)與社會被概念化的假定(assumption),不論所蒐集的資料的本質,以及分析、詮釋、和理解資料所使用方法的有效性,這些都與社會科學哲學文獻所研究的爭論性問題直接有關聯。 正如Hughes(1993:11)所言:研究工具和方法不能脫離理論;研究工具的運作唯有在哲學所提出的有關社會實體的本質、人性之本質兩者間的關係,以及它們可能被探知的方法的假定之內,始有意義與價值。若要了解社會科學方法論所討論的問題,就必須參照廣大文化情境所討論的問題;而且社會科學對社會世界(social world)所提出的分析能力,就沒有像自然科學(natural science)對自然世界(natural world)那樣的成功,這也是值得辯論的問題。所以,不足為奇的,已有大量的能力投注於自然與社會科學方法論的比較研究。

英文摘要

Some researchers often question why they are required to have an understanding of the philosophy of social sciences literature as part of their research training. Their trainings are often associated with the acquisition of research skills that will help them collect, process and analyze data, and not to study philosophy issues which are often as marginal and rather a waste of time. According to this interpretation, social science research skills should be acquired and then applied as though they were the skills of a craft. What this view fails to acknowledge is that philosophical assumption about human nature and how society is conceptualized are directly related to issues social sciences research, whether that be the nature and status of data that is collected and the validity of the methods by which data is analyzed, interpreted and understood. This article searches for the philosophy of science literature and explore its relevance for the social sciences.

主题分类 社會科學 > 教育學
参考文献
  1. Burton, Dawn(2000).Research Tinning for Social Scientists.Thousand Oaks CA:Sage.
  2. Collins, H. M.(1994).Yes, Science is a Social Construct.The Times Higher,30,17-18.
  3. Collins, H. M.(1985).Changing Order Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice.Thousand Oaks CA:Sage.
  4. Collins, Randall(1994).Why the Social Science Won`t become High-Consensus, Rapid-Discovery Science.Sociological Forum,9,155-177.
  5. Feyerabend, P.(1975).Against Method.London:New Left Books.
  6. Friman, P.C.,Allen, K. D.,Kerwin, M. L. E.,Larzelere R.(1993).Changes in Modern Psychology: a Citation Analysis of the Kuhnian Displacement Thesis.American Psychologist,48,658-664.
  7. Gholsen, B.,Barker, P.(1985).Kuhn, Lakatos and Landan: Applications in the History of Physics and Psychology.American Psychologist,40,755-769.
  8. Grünbaum, A.(1979).Is Freudian Psychoanalytic Theory Pseudo-Scientific by Karl Popper`s Criterion of Demarcation.American Philosophical Quarterly,16,131-141.
  9. Hughes, J.(1993).The Philosophy of Social Research.NY:Longman.
  10. Kuhn, Thomas S.(1970).The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd ed).Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
  11. Kuhn, Thomas S.,P. Rabinow,W. Sullivan (eds.)(1979).Interpretive Social Science: A Reader.Berkeley:University of California Press.
  12. Lakatos, I.,Musgrave, A.(1970).Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  13. Lakatos. I.,I. Lakatos,A. Musgrave (eds.)(1970).Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  14. Lambie, J.(1991).The Misuse of Kuhn is Psychology.The Psychologist,4(1),6-11.
  15. Laudan, Larry(1977).Progress arid its Problems.Berkeley:University of California Press.
  16. Magee, B.(1982).Popper (2nd).Glasgow:Fontana.
  17. Medawar, P.(1969).Induction and Intuition in Scientific Thought.London:Methuen.
  18. Peterson, G. L.(1981).Historical Self-Understanding in the Social Sciences: the Use of Thomas Kahn in Psychology.Journal of Theory of Social Behavior,11,1-30.
  19. Popper, K.(1986).Target Article and Commentaries.Tire Behavioral and Brain Sciences,9(2),100-120.
  20. Popper, K.(1979).Objective Knowledge: Art Evolutionary Approach (2nd).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  21. Rowell, J. A.(1983).Equilibration: Developing the Hard Core of the Piagetian Research Program.Human Development,26,61-71.
被引用次数
  1. 紀博棟(2012)。兩岸經貿研究之方法論探討。國立金門大學學報,2,179-212。