海德格尔是一位全面思考现代科技本质的哲学家。从开始学习自然科学起，他就开始思考科学之“何所是”，即科学之本质的问题，而且，这一兴趣在他以后漫长的学术生涯中从没有间断过，关于科学技术的思考构成了他思想的重要组成部分。海德格尔批判了胡塞尔的现象学，扬弃了胡塞尔的意向性、明证性、本质直观（还原）以及世界等概念，把现象学建立于“存在论”的地基之上。并且在亚里士多德、司各特、拉斯克、舍勒、狄尔泰等人思想的影响下，通过对存在问题的考察和对“现象学”的词源学追溯，把现象学方法和存在论问题统一起来，把早期“司各特式的现象学”发展成“实际性的”解释学。在他那里，“本体论”、“认识论”与“方法论”是统一的。

海德格尔在现象学、存在论的背景中展开对科学、技术以及真理等问题的“本质”思考。对于科学的本质问题，主要进行了三个层次的考察，一是对科学作为“自然的数学筹划”思想的探讨，二是对“科学的本质”问题进行分析，三是阐述科学的“进步”问题。另外，主要从知识论以及“物”两方面着手进行对科学的“基础”问题展开论述。在《存在与时间》中，海德格尔认为科学是“自然的数学筹划”，20世纪30年代和50年代海德格尔对于“科学本质”问题分别又有不同的表述。20世纪30年代海德格尔提出“现代科学的本质是研究”，“研究”包括了三个组成要素：筹划（Entwurf）与严格性(Strenge)、方法（Verfahren）、企业活动（Betrieb）。20世纪50年代海德格尔提出“科学是现实之物的理论”。通过“对置性”这一概念，揭示了“科学的研究本质”与“科学是现实之物的理论”这两个不同时期的命题是紧密相关、内在统一的。在科学之本质的探讨中包含了科学的“何以是”，也就包含了科学的发展、进步问题。因为一方面“科学进步”、“科学革命”这些问题在当前被误解和肤浅化，另一方面，由于“科学进步”、“科学革命”与“创新”、创造问题结合紧密，而这些问题在海德格尔看来被人们极大地歪曲了，所以在科学的本质讨论中对“科学的进步”问题作了进一步的探讨，论述了科学进步的动力以及科学创造与无等问题。

对科学本质问题的进一步深化必然涉及到科学的“基础”问题。现代社会中，“科学”与“知识”两个词的区分是十分模糊的，两者常互相代替，而“物”的问题是知识论问题的核心。海德格尔对“什么是物、物性、物与知识论的关系、物与器具的区别”等问题都进行了详细的探讨。正像杜威指出的那样，现代科学是寻求“确定性寻求”的结果。“确定性”是西方知识论的重要特征，是西方科学哲学中的重要内容。文中借用狄尔泰对这个问题的最早区分，阐述了海德格尔关于确定性与正确性，精确性与严格性之间的联系与区别。

海德格尔从批判工具性、人类学的技术观出发，揭示了它们“正确但不真实”的观点。他通过对技术的词源学分析，提出了技术本质上是一种“展现”的方式，论述了技术之本质在支配人、存在者和世界方面的绝对地位。海德格尔从存在论的立场指出了技术的形而上学根源，并深入分析了技术的本质——“集置”（Ge-stell）这一核心概念以及与之相关的“持存物”概念。另外，还针对海德格尔“技术的本质存在于科学中”和“科学的本质存在于技术本质中”两个看似矛盾的概念进行分析，澄清了技术与科学的关系。现代技术是一种“挑战性（challenging）去蔽”，它使人和存在者都丧失了自己的本质，所以海德格尔认为技术时代是“最高的危险”。

真理问题永远都是科技哲学领域不可或缺的部分。科学和技术都是广义上的“对自然的筹划”，都属于解蔽（“源始真理”）的领域。文中首先澄清了海德格尔的“本质”概念。接着在批判符合论真理观的同时，把海德格尔“解蔽”的真理观全面展现出来。由于“真理的本质是非真理”，所以遮蔽与解蔽，真理、非真理与谬误之间的关系也是真理问题中的重要内容。“解蔽”的真理几乎涵盖了人类所有的活动领域，所以，在分析“真理的本质乃是自由”这一命题的基础上，论述了真理与艺术、语言之间的密切关系，以及“真理发生的五种方式”。

最后，论述了在科学技术时代人类生活的“意义”问题以及海德格尔关于时代所面临的“转折”的思想。不管是对科学还是技术，都是“此在的存在方式”，而在人的生存问题中，生活的意义问题无疑是普遍的和首要的。在介绍海德格尔“科技批判”思想的基础上，分析了何谓“意义”、科学与意义的关系问题。在海德格尔看来，生活“意义”的失落与虚无主义都是当代社会中“存在遗忘”的必然结果。科学与技术在当代以“集置”的极端形式体现出来。但是“集置”不但是进攻和强迫式的解蔽，还作为“允诺”而持续，所以在这一极端形式对人的统治中，却蕴含着新的“转折”——“哪里有危险，哪里就有救”。借用荷尔德林的诗，海德格尔表达了这一带有神秘启示意义的“转折”思想。海德格尔认为，冷静意味着对存在保持敞开，要靠人冷静地去思，为即将到来的“转折”做好准备。只有在“冷静”中，事物的多种可能性中才能体现出来，只要在不同于“科技”展现方式的地方，才蕴含着转折的可能性。

结论部分提出，要摒弃对象化、表征性的思维模式，“为天然的知识恢复权利”，做存在的守护者，而不是主人，这样就能“诗意地栖居在这片大地上”。

目  录

导 言

0.1 思考科技本质的现代哲学家

0.2 国内外研究现状综述

0.3 论文的逻辑结构

0.4 论文的核心内容与创新

第1章  海德格尔研究方法的起点

1.1 对胡塞尔等人思想的继承与超越

1.1.1 胡塞尔现象学的核心内容

1.1.2海德格尔对胡塞尔现象学的批判

1.1.3 海德格尔现象学的内涵——面向事情本身

1.2 重提“存在”问题

1.2.1 存在与哲学、现象学

1.2.2此在与存在及其超越性

1.2.3“在-世界-之中”

1.3从司各特式的现象学到“实际性的解释学”

第2章 海德格尔论科学的本质、“基础”与科技进步

2.1 从“基本概念”到“数学筹划”

2.1.1作为“筹划”结果的“基本概念”

2.1.2 关于“数学的东西”（数学因素）

2.1.3 数学的可应用性来自于“可靠性”

2.2 近现代科学本质的两种表述

2.2.1“现代科学的本质是研究”

2.2.2 “世界图象的时代”

2.2.3 “科学是现实之物的理论”

2.2.4“科学本质乃是研究”与“科学是现实之物的理论”之间的关系

2.3 科学“进步”的本质与动力

2.3.1 什么是“科学进步”

2.3.2 “科技变革”的动力

2.4 科学创造是从“无”中“汲取”

2.4.1科学依赖于无而建

2.4.2“无”是创造的源泉

2.5 对传统知识论的批判

2.5.1“知识”是“对某物的看和对某物的自明”

2.5.2 知识论的客观性批判

2.6 对物、器具与实在关系的思考

2.6.1 “物的追问”是一个历史性问题

2.6.2 物之物性与器具之器具性

2.6.3 科技时代物之物性的丧失

2.6.4“实在”问题是一个存在论问题

2.7 论确定性、精确性与严格性之关系

2.7.1科学知识是“确定性的寻求”

2.7.2精确性不同于严格性

第3章  海德格尔论技术及其本质

3.1 批判工具性和人类学的技术观

3.1.1工具性和人类学的技术观分析

3.1.2工具性的、人类学的技术观批判

3.2 论新时代技术的特征及其“展现”

3.2.1新时代技术的特征

3.2.2技术从丰富到较贫乏的展现

3.3 技术的本质是“集置”

3.3.1 “技术”的词源学考察

3.3.2 “持存物”

3.3.3技术的本质——“集置”

3.3.4“科学的本质建立于技术的本质中”——技术与科学的关系

3.4 技术是“最高的危险”

3.4.1 文化诸领域在科学技术后面充当爬虫

3.4.2 “同类相食”——人与事物本质的丧失

3.4.3 技术是“最高的危险”

第4章 海德格尔对真理的思考

4.1符合论真理观批判

4.2解蔽（aletheia）是真理的本质

4.2.1 本质一词的多种含义

4.2.2此在与真理

4.2.3 存在与真理

4.2.4真理的本质——解蔽与遮蔽、真理与非真理

4.2.5真理的本质是非真理

4.3 “真理的本质乃是自由”

4.3.1自由是“让存在”

4.3.2 “真理的本质乃是自由”

4.3.3 自由与束缚的“辩证法”

4.4 真理、艺术与语言的“亲缘”

4.4.1艺术是“真理自行设置入作品”

4.4.2 “语言是存在之家”

4.5 “真理”发生的五种方式

第5章 意义的失落与“原子时代”的转折

5.1 科学与意义

5.1.1“意义总是意味着意义结构和意义世界”

5.1.2 科学要“反其道而行之”

5.2 时代的虚无主义

5.2.1虚无主义作为时代的命运

5.2.2 “哲学的终结与思想的任务”

5.3 “冷静”与“转折”

结束语：把科学收回到它应有的基础上

参考文献

后   记

Abstract

Heidegger was a philosopher who reflected the essence of science and technology thoroughly. From highschool when he began to study natural science on, he reflected “what is science” right away, and this interest never broke during his long academic career. From “Freiberg period” on, when he became a assistant to his latest collections of essays: Technology and Turning, Heidegger brought forth abundant thinking about science, technology and truth during this 50 years or so. Though his thought varied ceaselessly in several decades, science and technology as a theme never changed fundamentally.Heidegger criticized husserl’s phenomenology, sublated Husserl’s conceptions such as intentionality, evidence, seeing of essence(reduction),world etc, founded phenomenology on the basis of Being and fore-understanding of the world. Through tracing the problem of Being and phenomenological referencework by etymology, Heidegger integrated phenomenological method with his ontology .In the meantime, he developed Scotus’ phenomenology into fractical hermeneutic with the influence of Lask, Scheler and Dilthey, etc. For Heidegger, phenomenological method and his philosophy are unified.

Heidegger reflected the essence of science, technology and truth in the background of phenomenology and ontology. For the essence of science separately, there are three aspects of research. First, I probe into the problem of science as “mathematical project” firstly, then “the essence of science”, finally, the problem of scientific development. In Being And Time, he thought science was mathematical project of nature. Between 1930s and 1950s, Heidegger put forward different propositions on the problem of scientific essence. In 1930s,he put forward “the essence of modern science was research”, and concretely there were three elements project（Entwurf）＆severeness (Strenge),method（Verfahren）, corporation（Betrieb）.Then in 1950s, Heidegger put forward “science is the theory of practical thing” which was Heidegger’s other conclusion in reflecting the “unseeing and un-avoiding thing” in science. In light of etymology analysis on the concepts “practical thing” and “theory”, Heidegger referred “practical thing” was varied from “effecting presence” into object(Gegen-Stand).Theory（theorein、theoria）means “caring the truth” in Ancient Greek. Finally, the two theories were unified in analyzing through the concept——contrapositionness（Gegenständlichkeit）,It made conclusions that these two theories were united. The essence of science means “what is science”, and in the mean time it includes the development, “progress” of science. On the one hand, the problems such as “scientific development, revolution” are misunderstood superficially. On the other hand, because these problems tight closely with innovation or creation, while these problems were distorted in Heidegger’s view, this chapter stated “scientific development” including “what is development”, “the motivation of development” in the discussion of the essence of science furthermore.

The basis of science is further broadening of the essence of science in which “epistemology” and “thing ＆reality” are its main contents. In modern society, science and knowledge are coincided to a large extent and could usually be displaced. In addition, the problem of thing is the core of epistemology in the view of Heidegger. Heidegger once discussed such as thing, thingness , the relations between thing and knowledge, the difference between thing and instrument in detail. As Deway once said, any knowledge is the result of “pursuing certainty”. Certainty is the important character of west epistemology and the main content of west philosophy of science. Quoting Dilthey’s famous statement in distinguishing between natural science and humanities, this chapter illustrated the relations between certainty and rightness, accuracy and severity on the ground of Heidegger’s thinking.

From the view point of instrumentallity and anthropology, Heidegger referred they were “right but not real”, through etymology analysis he thought that technology was one form of “unfolding” essentially which was dominating the man, the beings and the world. Heidegger pointed out the metaphysical origination of technology from ontological standpoint, and analyzed “enframing”（Ge-stell）,inventory (bestand) which related it closely. Moreover, this chapter analyzed the two contradictory concepts superficially: “the essence of technology lies in science” and “the essence of science lies in the essence of technology”, clarified their relations. Modern technology is a forced un-concealment which makes man and beings lose their essence. So this chapter analyzed Heidegger’s important proposition “technology era is supreme danger” at last.

The problem of truth which was a indispensable part in the field of philosophy of science and technology forever. Science and technology are both “project on nature” in broad sense and belong to the field of “unfolding”. This chapter clarified the concept of “essence” firstly. In criticizing the correspondence theory of truth, “unfolding” theory of truth was disclosed namely. Owing to “the essence of truth is un-truth”, this chapter also discussed relations among concealment and un-concealment, truth, un-truth and fallacy. Since unfolding truth is the most original truth which mostly includes all human being field, so on the basis of analysis of the proposition “the essence of truth is freedom”, this chapter discusses the connections among truth and art, language, as well as “five occurring forms of truth”.

Finnally, I discussed the meaning of human life and the “turning” faced by our era in science and technology age. No matter investigating science, technology or truth, Heidegger would divert all problems into the existence of human. In the problem of existence, the meaning of living is no doubt prime and general. This chapter analyzed “what is meaning”, the relation between science and meaning”. In Heidegger’s view,the lost of meaning, the nihilism, namely “the forgetting of Being” tight together briefly. These problems revealed in the form of enframing(Ge-stell) in modern epoch. Enframing is not only attack and compelling, but acts as “promise”and lasting, so this radical form of dominating human being implies new turning——“where there is danger, there is redemption”. Heidegger considered that calm means open to Being. In light of reflecting calmly, man could prepare for the coming turning. Only in the calm, the abundant possibility could appear. Only where there is different from the unfolding of science and technology, there contain the possibility of turning.

    In conclusion part I put forward, only human abandon the thinking pattern of objectification and representation, “recover the right of natural knowledge”, act as the guardian of Being, not the owner, man can “dwell in this good earth poetically”.

    Key words: Heidegger, science, technology, truth , ontology.