從科學哲學思辨政治科學的基礎

Rethink the Foundation of Political Science with Scientific Philosophy

10.7074/YDAJB.201009.0145

徐暄景(Hsuan-Jing Hsu)

科學哲學 ； 科學內容 ； 科學準則 ； 後行為主義 ； 經驗意涵 ； Scientific Philosophy ； Scientific Content ； Scientific Criteria ； post Bebavioralism ； Empirical Implication

育達科大學報

24期（2010 / 09 / 01）

145 - 166

繁體中文

政治科學包涵理論與方法論，政治理論大致分規範性與科學性，規範性理論如「應然」取向的政治哲學思想屬之；科學理論則是「實然」取向，志在描述、解釋與預測現象，以建立經驗通則成理論。這種分殊起因於認識論考察現象的立場差異，因此產生方法論在研究設計與研究途徑的爭論。影響所及，政治學在理論建構與知識累積的過程，面臨應該用什麼準則建立科學知識的挑戰。科學理論難道沒有哲學？哲學理論難道沒有科學精神？科學哲學結合兩者，其意涵為何？何以政治科學的基礎當從科學哲學來思辨？這些問題涉及科學的經驗面與理論面，這要追溯自本體論到認識論，西哲企圖建構科學知識的脈絡。 本文的立論不在探討科學哲學的哲理意義，或是學派爭辯與方法論的優劣，而是運用具影響力的科學哲學家－孔恩、波柏、拉卡托斯，他們為科學方法所建構的理論意涵，省思科學哲學對政治學建立科學知識的啟發。特別是針對（後）行為主義以降經驗政治所掀起的典範爭議，促使政治學反省科學知識的建構，不應急速下拉到方法論層次論方法的技術面，應該回歸科學哲學的法統進行經驗意涵的辯證。

The scope of political science consists of theory and methodology. Political theory is usually divided into normative theory and scientific theory. The former is ”ought to be” approach, while the latter refers ”is” approach that aims to describe, explain and predict phenomena so as to build generations or theories. Both are in the position of epistemological differences, and then the methodological aspects research designs and approaches are differentiated. Political science bears the brunt to build scientific criteria to accumulate scientific knowledge: Is philosophy embedded in scientific theory? Does scientific philosophy contain the spirit of science? What scientific philosophy really is? Why should we verify political science with scientific philosophy? These thinking points are related to theoretical and empirical surfaces of science, and lead us to the context from which western philosopher tried to construct ontology and epistemology. The research does not explain philosophical significance of the philosophy of science, or argue with the methodology of the merits of school, yet shows Kuhn, Popper, and Lakatos discourse by which the scientific theories or methods are constructed. We especially focus on the paradigm argument comes from (post) behavioralism. Rethink that political science should not rapidly drop down to the technical aspects of methods, researchers might hold scientific philosophy to make empirical implication in dialectic thinking.

1. 郭秋永(2006)。價值中立：實然與應然之間的糾葛。政治與社會哲學評論，19，153-214。
   連結：
2. 郭秋永(2002)。邏輯實證論、行為主義及後行為主義：經驗性政治研究的理論基礎。人文及社會科學集刊，12，465-514。
   連結：
3. 陳敦源,吳秀光(2005)。理性選擇、民主制度與操控遊說：William H. Riker新政治經濟學的回顧與評述。政治科學論叢，26，175-222。
   連結：
4. Aldrich, John H.(2002).Empirical Implications on Theoretical Methods.The Political Methodologist,11(1),7-10.
5. Alker, Hayward R.(1996).Political Methodology: Old and New.A New Handbook of Political Science,Oxford:
6. Almond, Gabriel A.(1996).Political Science: The History of the Discipline.A New Handbook of Political Science,Oxford:
7. Benton, Ted,Craib, Ian(2001).Philosophy of Social Science: The Philosophy Foundations of Social Thought.New York:Palgrave.
8. Brecht, Arnold(1959).Political Theory: The Foundations of Twentieth-Century Political Thought.New Jersey:Princeton University Press.
9. Delanty, Gerard(1997).Social Science: Beyond Constructivism and Realism.Buckingham:Open University Press.
10. Downs, Anthony(1957).An Economic Theory of Democracy.New York:Harper & Row.
11. Dudley, Shapere(1984).Reason and the Search for Knowledge: Investigations in the Philosophy of Science.Dordrecht:D. Reidel..
12. Easton, David(1969).The New Revolution in Political Science.American Political Science Review,63,1051-1061.
13. Easton, David(ed.),Gunnel, John G.(ed.),Graziano, Luigi(ed.)(2002).The Development of Political Science: A Comparative Survey.New York:Routledge.
14. Godfrey-Smith, Peter(2003).Theory and Reality: An Introduction to Philosophy of Science.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
15. Granato, Jim,Scioli, Frank(2004).Puzzles, Proverbs, and Omega Matrices: The Scientific and Social Significance of Empirical Implications of Theoretical Models (EITM).Perspectives on Politics,2(2),313-323.
16. Green, Donald P.,Shapiro, Ian(1994).Parhologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Critique of Applications in Political Science.New Haven:Yale University Press.
17. Green, Donald P.,Shapiro, Ian(1994).Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Critique of Applications in Political Science.New Haven:Yale University Press.
18. Hempel, Carl G.(1965).Aspects of Scientific Explanation: Find Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science.New York:Free Press.
19. Hollis, Martin(1994).The Philosophy of Social Science: An Introduction.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
20. Hoover, Kenneth,Donovan, Todd(1995).The Elements of Social Scientific Thinking.New York:St. Martin's Press.
21. Hughes, John A.,Sharrock, Wesley W.(1990).The Philosophy of Social Research.London:Longman.
22. Isaak, Alan C.(1985).Scope and Method of Political Science: An introduction to the Methodology of Political Inquire.Homewood, Illinois:The Dorsey Press.
23. King, Gary(1991).On Political Methodology.Political Analysis,2,1-12.
24. King, Gary,Keohane, Robert O.,Verba, Sidney(1994).Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research.New Jersey:Princeton University Press.
25. Kuhn, Thomas S.(1970).The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
26. Kunicova, Jana(2002).Reflections on EITM.The Political Mehodologist,11(2),10-11.
27. Lakatos, Imre(1970).Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes.Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge,Cambridge:
28. Morton, Rebecca B.(1999).Methods and Models: A Guide to the Empirical Analysis of Formal Models in Political Science.New York:Cambridge University Press.
29. Nachmias, David,Nachmias, Chava(1987).Research Methods in the Social Sciences.New York:St Martin's Press.
30. Popper, Karl R.(2002).The Logic of Scientific Philosophy.London:Routledge.
31. Popper, Karl R.(1991).The Poverty of Historicism.London:Routledge.
32. Popper, Karl R.(1970).Normal Science and its Danger.Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge,Cambridge:
33. Popper, Karl R.(1957).The Open Society and Its Enemies.London:Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd..
34. Popper, Karl R.(1963).Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge.London:Routledge.
35. Popper, Karl,Bosetti, Giancarlo,王凌霄（譯）(2000).二十世紀的教訓.臺北:城邦文化.
36. Reichenbach, Hans(1951).The Rise of Scientific Philosophy.Los Angeles:University of California Press.
37. Shapiro, Ian(ed.),Smith, Rogers M.(ed.),Masoud, Tarek E.(ed.)(2004).Problems and Methods in The Study of Politics.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
38. 王寶貫(2001).洞察：科學的人文觀與人文的科學觀.臺北:天下文化.
39. 何秀煌(1991).思想方法導論.臺北:三民.
40. 何思因（編）,吳玉山（編）(2000).邁入二十一世紀的政治學.臺北市:中國政治學會.
41. 呂亞力(2000).政治學方法論.臺北:三民書局.
42. 易君博(1991).政治理論與研究方法.臺北:三民.
43. 林正弘(2001)。論孔恩的典範概念。孔恩評論集，臺北:
44. 苑舉正(2001)。典範社會學的限制。孔恩評論集，臺北:
45. 袁頌西(2003).當代政治研究：方法與理論探微.臺北:時英.
46. 高永光,郭中玲(2002)。跨世紀政治學發展趨勢之探討。政治科學論叢，12，59-100。
47. 郭仁孚(1997)。對傳統經典政治理論的基本認識。東吳政治學報，8，87-116。
48. 郭承天(2000)。新制度論與政治經濟學。邁入二十一世紀的政治學，臺北:
49. 郭秋永(1988).政治學方法論研究專集.臺北:臺灣商務印.
50. 蕭全政(1998)。讓政治科學回到政治的科學。暨大學報，2(1)，103-132。
51. 謝復生（編）,盛杏湲（編）(2000).政治學的範圍與方法.台北:五南.