日常语言视角的人类学本体论

本文讨论“日常语言视角实在论”这一人类学本体论的进路。对这一进路的介绍从近年来有关中国社会学本土化的争论开始。本文提出金岳霖的常识实在论与日常语言视角实在论人类学有内在契合,并对金岳霖的核心概念“势”与地势本体视角的关联进行论述。本文还对潘光旦的“位育论”与日常语言视角实在论的关联进行讨论。     

Continuities Between Peircean Realism and Critical Realism: On Causation,Ontology, and Truth

In recent years, critical realists have increasingly engaged with the thought of Charles S. Peirce (1839-1914), the founder of the American pragmatist tradition. But the engagement has been mostly narrow in focus and at times misinformed. This paper examines points of continuity between Peircean thought and critical realism with respect to causation, ontology, and truth. Its purpose is to lay the groundwork for further and more fruitful engagement between the traditions by bringing attention to some things critical realists may not have known, and to correct some inaccurate things they thought they knew, about Peirce's philosophy.     

The Failure of Roy Bhaskar's Explanatory Critique

According to Roy Bhaskar, social science can derive values from social facts by a process called “explanatory critique.” Bhaskar offers two different versions of explanatory critique: a belief-based version and a need-based version. Both versions are faced with a difficult objection. They seem either to employ an invalid inference or to assume the values that they are attempting to derive. I argue that at least the need-based version of Bhaskar's explanatory critique falls to the objection, and that the belief-based version on its own is insufficient. Bhaskar anticipates the objection and offers a defense. I show that his defense is unsuccessful. I also suggest a Baskar-inspired alternative explanatory critique.     

戴维森、达米特的实在论、反实在论之争的形而上学渊源

西方形而上学整体演进的理论视域下,实在一词具有核心性价值。当代实在论、反实在论思想的特定形态,是由哲学传统中不同形态的本体论,经过认识论的过渡,最终转向语言从而生成的。这为西方形而上学发展脉络的明晰提供了关键支撑。代表不同哲学发展阶段具体形态的实在论思想,定会引发与之对应的反实在论。这种构成各个阶段的形而上学主题的方式,应被视为“实在—反实在”哲学范式。西方形而上学的整体发展在这一独特视角下呈现为二者具体理论形态之演进。戴维森、达米特的实在论、反实在论之争是以此为理论渊源,基于现代逻辑、当代意义理论的新进展所形成的西方哲学后语言转向的新产物。继弗雷格、维特根斯坦之后,戴维森、达米特开启的基于意义与真的实在问题之争,决定了各类不同程度、形态的实在论观点所坚守的共同理论底线。这一理论临界点和论争焦点就是是否坚持二值原则。