论文部分内容阅读
在中国乃至全球社会科学史上,本土化都是一个不断引起讨论的议题。虽然各种本土化论述意见杂陈,难以统一,但是不少观点都在不同程度上体现着社会科学中各种反思普遍主义的知识论立场。这些反思普遍主义的知识论立场在社会科学史上通常被称为历史主义。社会科学中的历史主义思想发轫于19世纪的德国,而在当代知识论和知识社会学中则有多条演进路径,可以从多个角度进行把握。这些不同的角度大致可以概括为四种类型,分别为诠释学、实践论、权力论和复杂性视角。这些知识论视角都牵涉到了社会科学研究中不同于自然科学的某些独特要素,如意义、价值、权力和系统的开放性等,在更强的意义上对普遍主义科学观构成了挑战和批判。从不同视角反思社会科学中的普遍主义科学观,为社会科学本土化论述提供了重要的思想启示,也有助于揭示错综复杂的本土化论述背后深层的理论逻辑,从而为社会科学本土化论提供了有力的知识论基础。
In the history of social sciences in China and even in the world, localization is an issue that constantly leads to discussion. Although all kinds of localization disunity opinion, difficult to unify, but many views are to varying degrees reflect the social sciences in a variety of reflection universalism epistemological position. These epistemological universalist epistemological positions are often called historicism in the history of social science. The historical thoughts in the social sciences developed in Germany in the 19th century. However, there are many evolution paths in contemporary epistemology and knowledge sociology that can be grasped from many angles. These different perspectives can be broadly summarized into four types, namely Hermeneutics, Practice Theory, Power Theory and Complexity Perspective. These epistemological perspectives involve some unique elements in social science research different from those of natural science, such as meaning, value, power and system openness, which pose challenges and criticisms to the universalist view of science in a more powerful sense . Reflecting the universalist view of science in the social sciences from different perspectives provides an important thought enlightenment for the localization of the social sciences and also helps to reveal the deep theoretical logic behind the intricate localization argument and thus provides a Powerful epistemological foundation.