摘要
“解释”与“理解”这两个概念,在西方哲学史上分别被用来代表自然科学与人文社会科学的不同方法论,并经历了长期的争论。新老实证主义者皆主张一元的方法论,认为人文社会科学的方法也应以自然科学的精确方法为楷模,它们的目的都在于把握规律。新康德主义、后期维特根斯坦哲学主张“理解”的方法论,强调从“意义”、“价值”的角度来把握人文社会科学的对象。哲学解释学提出了“解释学经验”的概念,将它作为理解的对象,意在把握科学活动与人类行为的本体论前提。笔者则提出“语境论”的解释观,将科学解释与人文理解的不同,归结为问题语境的差别。
In the history of Western philosophy, ＂understanding＂ and ＂explanation＂ are used as two kinds of methodology, representing respectively that of natural sciences and humanities. The old and new positivists maintain the unitary methodology, holding that the precise method of natural sciences should be the model for humanities, for they have the same end for pursuing the laws. Neokantianism and the late- Wittgenstein philosophy claim the method of understanding, putting emphasis on ＂meaning＂, ＂value＂ in dealing with the object of humanities. Philosophical hermeneutics puts forwards the notion of ＂experience of hermencutics＂ as the object of understanding. Its purpose is to hold the ontological precondition of scientific activities and human behavior. The author of this paper puts forward ＂ eontexualism＂ with an interpretive perspective, arguing that the difference between scientific explanation and human understanding lies in the difference of contexts.
出处
《厦门大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2005年第6期72-79,共8页
Journal of Xiamen University(A Bimonthly for Studies in Arts & Social Sciences)
基金
教育部博士点基金项目(03JB720001)
关键词
解释
理解
方法论
语境论
explanation, understanding, methodology, eontexualism
