“不可通约性”论题的语言转向

摘要

《科学革命的结构》出版后即引起了激烈的论战。由于库恩的不可通约性论点过分强调理论的不可比性，而采取了否认科学进步的极端观点，波普尔、拉卡托斯、夏皮尔等都指责库恩陷入相对主义和非理性主义范式，并且存在范式概念模糊不清的问题。这些人对《科学革命的结构》的解读，特别是对不可通约性概念的理解，均不能令库恩满意。当库恩不再谈论范式时，他希望对不可通约性概念更加精细地说明，能够为自己的立场提供坚实的基础。因此库恩在后期的主要研究旨趣，是要填补《科学革命的结构》遗漏的哲学环节。但在库恩看来，无论是传统的意义理论还是新的指称因果理论，都不能有效地说明科学革命后同一术语的意义变化。为此，库恩希望借助语言分析，对不可通约性提出新的分类学解释，这就是人们通常所理解的“语言转向”。研究通过对库恩在这一问题上的思想变化历程的考察指明这一变化的实际可能性，既是其应对批评的内在需要，也是他为挽救科学哲学而作的一种努力。%The publication of The Structure of Scientific Revolution caused an intensive controversy:Kuhn over-emphasized the point of incommensurability and took an extreme viewpoint that denied scientific development .Karl Popper, Lakatos, Dudley Shapere all pointed out that Kuhn had fallen into relativism and irrational paradigm , and there existed problems of vague concept of paradigm .The interpretation of The Structure of Scientific Revolution of those people , especially their understanding towards the concept of incommensurability , could not satisfied Kuhn . When Kuhn did not talk about paradigm , he hoped to elaborate the concept of incommensurability in order to pro-vide his standpoint with a stronger basis .So Kuhn ’ s later research aimed to complete the missing philosophical link in The Structure of Scientific Revolution.From Kuhn’ s perspective, no matter it is the traditional theories or the causal chain theory of reference , can’ t make an effective interpretation of the change of the meaning of the same term after the scientific revolution .Therefore , Kuhn hoped to give a new taxonomic explanation of incommensura-bility through linguistic analysis , which is known as “linguistic turn .” This paper points out the possibilities of“linguistic turn” through observation on logical changes of this proposition .It is not only the inner needs for criti-cism, but also an effort for saving scientific philosophy .