我们在真正的理解时,可以称什么为哲学

康德在《纯粹理性批判》和《逻辑》中将哲学的学术概念同哲学的世界概念区分开。但是,这两个概念都以相同的方式隶属于哲学:世界概念表示那种必定引起所有人兴趣的事物;而学术概念仅仅对学哲学的学生们的狭小圈子才具有意义。按照学术概念,哲学最终应该是“哲学认识的体系,或者是由概念组成的理性认识的体系”;相反,按照世界概念,哲学则是关于人类理性之最终目的的科学,并由此获得它的“地位”和“绝对价值”。学术概念的哲学旨在建立一个“理性认识的丰富库存”,并使这些认识“在一个总体的观念下”形成体系的关联。这种哲学最终成为得到证明的形而上学。     

胡塞尔的现象学与科学实在论

胡塞尔对“伽利略科学”的议论(载于其《欧洲科学的危机和先验现象学》一书1970年英文翻译版)常以其幼稚的工具主义态度和对科学抱有的敌意而遭到摈弃。由于他对科学理想化的误解,由于他将生活世界当作一种专用的概念构架,以及由于他否认科学在原则上能够完全描述世界(因为普通的前科学概念是不可替换的),他受到了公开的批评。本文中我要阐明胡塞尔关于实在论的主张,并运用这种主张说明前两种批评是立足于曲解。第三种批评应予采纳,不过,这种批评与胡塞尔的基本主张是一致的,即议论事物的现象是重要的,但是经验科学却难以彻底了解这些现象。     

共产主义实验在苏联

1.斯大林个人扭曲了的共产主义意识形态“斯大林主义”,是苏联官方理论家从不使用的一个术语。而且,它一般也并没有被人们广泛地当作马克思-列宁主义来运用。有时候,斯大林主义被误解为是马列主义的一种扩大或发展。实际上,斯大林主义倒可以看作是从马列主义中派生出来并且背离了马列主义的,它(直到1953年斯大林去世时     

系统剪影:作为哲学的一般系统

我对介绍一般系统论有为难和讨厌之感。显然,在我看来,一般系统论者所关注的中心问题即“系统的本质是什么?”基本上是一个哲学问题。然而,我所接触的一般系统论者不仅没提及哲学,而且似乎把哲学看作废弃的和缺乏时代性的东西(哲学的某些问题很久以前就被逻辑实证主义者取消     

克劳德·莱维—斯特劳斯:走向艺术的结构

一种无法遏止的对比,已被D.莱温(Levine)用漫画手法清晰地表现出来了。一边是受过极高教育的法国学者克劳德·莱维-斯特劳斯,他对古典哲学传统有渊博的知识,并且对世界范围内不同文化的人类学造诣极深;另一边是卢梭所说的高尚的原始人的形象,直接取自自然的状态,即处在自由自在的形式中的人性。这两位也许正在一间富丽堂皇的沙龙中,呷着各自的马丁尼酒,进行着一场深刻的讨论。这幅漫画表明了菜维-斯特劳斯对我们时代的社会科学变革所做的主要贡献,他认为,     

A quantitative analysis of chain-schedule performance

Six pigeons were trained with a chain variable-interval variable-interval schedule on the left key and with reinforcers available on the right key on a single variable-interval schedule arranged concurrently with both links of the chain. All three schedules were separately and systematically varied over a wide range of mean intervals. During these manipulations, the obtained reinforcer rates on constant arranged schedules also frequently changed systematically. Increasing reinforcer rates in Link 2 of the chain increased response rates in both links and decreased response rates in the variable-interval schedule concurrently available with Link 2. Increasing Link-1 reinforcer rates increased Link-1 response rates and decreased Link-2 response rates. Increasing reinforcer rates on the right-key schedule decreased response rates in Link 1 of the chain but did not affect the rate in Link 2. The results extend and amplify previous analyses of chain-schedule performance and help define the effects that a quantitative model must describe. However, the complexity of the results, and the fact that constant arranged reinforcer schedules did not necessarily lead to constant obtained reinforcer rates, precluded a quantitative analysis.     

Effects of relative reinforcer frequency on complex color detection

Pigeons were trained under a discrete-trials detection procedure in which one of a set of color stimuli was presented on the center key and a single response turned off the stimulus and illuminated two side keys. Single responses to one or the other side key produced occasional reinforcers depending on the value of the color stimulus. In Experiment 1, one color-stimulus set comprised 559, 564, 569, and 574 nm, and right-key pecks were occasionally reinforced following presentations of members of this set. The other stimulus set comprised 579, 584, 589, and 594 nm, and left-key pecks were occasionally reinforced following presentations of members of this set. Across seven experimental conditions, the left/(left + right) relative reinforcer frequency was varied from .1 to .9. In Experiment 2, one stimulus set contained only one member, 574 nm, and right-key responses were occasionally reinforced following its presentation. Over 12 experimental conditions, two manipulations were carried out. First, the number of stimuli comprising the other stimulus set was increased from one (579 nm) to two (579 and 584 nm) to three (579, 584, and 589 nm) and to four (579, 584, 589, and 594 nm), and left-key responses were reinforced occasionally following center-key presentations of members of this set. Second, for each stimulus combination, the left/(left + right) relative reinforcer frequency was varied from .1 to .5 to .9 across three experimental conditions. The principal finding of Experiments 1 and 2 was that reinforcers and stimuli interacted in their effects on behavior. In Experiment 3, pairs of adjacent stimuli (5 nm apart) in the range 559 to 594 nm were presented in each experimental condition, and the left/(left + right) relative reinforcer frequency was held constant at .5. The data from all three experiments were analyzed according to a detection model describing performance in multiple-stimulus two-response procedures. This model provided independent measures of stimulus discriminability, contingency discriminability, and bias. The analysis showed that (a) consistent with the color-naming function, pigeons were better able to discriminate between higher nanometer values than lower nanometer values; (b) their ability to discriminate between the stimuli was independent of the number of wavelengths comprising each stimulus set; (c) they allocated delivered reinforcers very accurately to the previously emitted response; and (d) no consistent biases emerged.     

Algorithmic shaping and misbehavior in the acquisition of token deposit by rats

In two experiments, rats were trained to deposit ball bearings down a hole in the floor, using an algorithmic version of shaping. The experimenter coded responses expected to be precursors of the target response, ball bearing deposit; a computer program reinforced these responses, or not, according to an algorithm that mimicked the processes thought to occur in conventional shaping. In the first experiment, 8 of 10 rats were successfully shaped; in the second, 5 of 5 were successfully shaped, and the median number of sessions required was the same as for a control group trained using conventional shaping. In both experiments, “misbehavior,” that is, excessive handling and chewing of the ball bearings, was observed, and when the algorithmic shaping procedure was used, misbehavior could be shown to occur in spite of reduced reinforcement for the responses involved.     

解释学

一、从1966到1976年,是解释学尤其是“哲学解释学”内部急剧发展的十年,是它同当代各种思想流派对话、进行活跃的“解释的论战”的十年。我们可以用P.利科尔在《论解释》一书(1965)中的一句话,即“语言的问题和原文(或译为本文——译者)解释的问题已经变为当代思想的十字路口”,来说明这整个十年的情况。除了传统的解释学、神学的解释学和H.-G.加达默尔的哲学解释学以外,其他思想运动也一一涌现了出来——例如结构主义、符号学、拉康的以语言为中心的弗洛伊德精神分析学、福柯以及对尼采的研究。后面这些研究的发展使国际上认为法国在语言理论和原文解释理论方面是大步前进的研究中心。当然,有     

谈谈唯物辩证法与现代形式逻辑的关系问题

在当代思想斗争中,下述的问题也具有重要的意义,即:对传统所理解的逻辑问题的创造性探讨,马克思是否起过重大促进作用?人们都很清楚,马克思常常被承认为伟大的政治经济学家,但同时却否定他在探讨逻辑问题上的任何作用。在资产阶级思想家中间不时地传来这样的声音:马克思的唯物辩证法至多不过是关于历史的学说,是与逻辑、“演绎意义的逻辑”理论毫无关系的、单纯的经验-描述理论。例如,鲍波尔说:“因为可以把逻辑看作为演绎理论。但是我们没有任何根据假定,辩证法与演绎有某