题目：自然规律及其建构性研究
答辩人：樊姗姗
指导老师：刘大椿教授
答辩时间：2020年5月25日
绪论
0.1 论文选题依据
0.1.1 论文题目所涉及的研究对象（范围）及其界定0.1.2 论文题目选择的依据和理由
0.2 国内外研究概况
0.3 研究方案与创新之处
0.4 论文章节安排
第1章 自然规律概念和问题的历史考查
1.1 近代意义上“自然规律”概念的提出
1.1.1 “自然规律”概念的考释
1.1.2 关于“自然规律”概念起源的四种观点
1.1.3 “自然规律”概念在近代中国的确立
1.2 科学哲学中“自然规律”观点的历史演变
1.2.1 自然规律问题的历史演变路径
1.2.2 自然规律事实性到建构性问题域新变革
1.3 当代作为新趋势的自然规律建构观
1.3.1 建构的内涵与渊源
1.3.2 当代语境下建构主义思潮
1.3.3 “自然规律”建构性的旨趣
1.4 本章小结
第2章 范弗拉森论语义学自然规律建构性
2.1 范弗拉森解构传统“自然规律”
2.1.1 自然规律存在的动机
2.1.2 自然规律的性质及其问题
2.2 范弗拉森无自然规律观
2.2.1 自然规律传统认识中的困境
2.2.2 哲学立场：无自然规律
2.2.3 否定自然规律是否会陷入怀疑论或相对主义？
2.3 范弗拉森建构语义学自然规律
2.3.1 作为模型、寻求“接受”的自然规律
2.3.2 作为对称、概率论的逻辑自然规律
2.3.3 作为建构的、经验适当性的自然规律
2.4 本章小结
第3章 罗纳德•吉尔视角实在论的自然规律建构性
3.1 吉尔视角实在论及其“自然规律”
3.1.1 吉尔视角实在论的含义
3.1.2吉尔视角实在论中“自然规律”内涵的多面性
3.2 吉尔视角实在论处置“自然规律”层次建构性特点
3.2.1 本体论中自然规律的隐含客观性与层次建构性
3.2.2 认识论中自然规律的隐含客观性与层次建构性
3.2.3 方法论中自然规律的多重建构性及其深层隐含客观性
3.3 吉尔视角实在论建构自然规律的意义与局限
3.3.1 对传统实在论的一种继承与发展
3.3.2 科学认识评价标准的多元
3.3.3 吉尔自然规律实在论建构的局限
3.4 本章小结
第4章 卡尔波恩和舒特论信息计算主义自然规律建构性
4.1 卡尔波恩和舒特计算主义定律观
4.1.1 识别、推理问题与计算机定律
4.1.2 计算机定律的隐喻性、创造性与不变性
4.1.3计算机定律中的积极启示法与负面启示法
4.2 从“信息计算主义”到“建构性定律观”
4.2.1 信息计算主义与卡特赖特的“律则机器”
4.2.2 信息计算主义建构自然规律的优越性
4.3 “信息计算主义定律观”的哲学依据
4.3.1 计算是信息计算主义建构自然规律的基础
4.3.2 抽象是信息计算主义建构自然规律的本质
4.3.3 弗洛里迪的信息结构实在论是信息计算主义的理论来源
4.4 本章小结
第5章 温伯格终极理论与自然规律建构性
5.1 温伯格“终极理论”的定律观
5.1.1 “终极理论”的深刻内涵
5.1.2 “终极理论”对哲学中的几种自然规律观的批判
5.2 温伯格定律观的本体论建构及其特点
5.2.1 温伯格“有终极”的自然规律观
5.2.2 温伯格客观实在的还原论自然规律观
5.3 温伯格的建构本体论的自然规律观与其他物理学家观点的对比
5.3.1 与爱因斯坦“实在”的自然规律相比较
5.3.2 与霍金“地图式”的多元自然规律
5.3.3 与罗杰.G.牛顿的“约定的”自然规律
5.4 本章小结
第6章结语：究竟该如何看待自然规律
6.1 重要结论
6.2 自然规律建构性意义与启示
参考文献
致谢
读期间的研究成果
摘 要
自然规律及其建构性是本文研究的主题。
首先，作为近现代科学基本概念的“自然规律”，虽然是个元概念，却是在历史演变中逐渐形成和发展的。当今，科学家和哲学家一方面在共同使用自然规律概念，另一方面，对自然规律的诠释又各不相同。本文在厘清自然规律概念历史演变的基础上，指出自然规律的基本内涵可归结为两类：自然界固有的规律（客观规律），以及人的认识为自然确立的规律（认识规律）。一些科学哲学派别对于自然规律的陈述，常常从这两类基本意义衍生而来，最终又归入其中之一。那么，如何将自然规律的两种矛盾见解往前推进呢？
作者发现，自然规律建构性的新观念企图将二者进行融合，他们强调主体用形象、概念、符号、语言等去描述、临摹客观事物，并且在这个实践过程中主客相互作用建构了自然规律。本文的重点就是考察以范弗拉森、吉尔为代表的哲学家、以卡尔波恩和舒特为代表的计算机科学家和以温伯格为代表的物理学家等颇具学术声望的当代学者，介绍和分析他们如何持有并论证自然规律的建构性。在此基础上，试图通过建构性来推进对当代自然规律概念的了解。本文结构和主要内容如下：
绪论介绍了本文选题的依据、国内外研究的概况、所使用的研究方法与创新之处等。这其中尤其是从国内外两个方面介绍当前国内外学者对自然规律及其建构性问题的基本认识，以及它们彼此间的渊源关系。
第一章通过三大部分对自然规律概念起源、观点演变及其建构性的内涵进行了分析。其中，第一部分考查了“自然规律”如何在近代西方语境上产生的以及如何再经日本传入近代中国。第二部分则是从科学哲学史的角度，梳理了自然规律问题中从机械论、约定论、实在论，到建构论的演变过程及其特征。第三部分考察了建构的历史含义，以及本文“自然规律及其建构性研究”中的“建构”具体意旨。
第二章选取了范弗拉森关于自然规律语义学建构观。通过解构传统观念、提出新认识、说明重要概念等三个方法，范弗拉森系统地建立了语义学自然规律观。过程中，他一方面极力否定了传统哲学中认为自然规律是固有的、普遍的并且与科学必然相关的主张。另一个方面，他提出模型、逻辑和适当性是其语义学建构的三大特色。在该路径下，自然规律不再是绝对真的，而是经验充足的、可接受的、与概率相关的、可以用不同语言用多种方式所描述的、受科学话语环境影响的模型。
第三章考查了视角实在论者吉尔关于自然规律的建构观。罗纳德•吉尔用其视角实在论的观点，从不同的层面对自然规律问题做了处置。其处置的方式具有客观性与建构性双重性质。在自然本体论上，吉尔强调了客观世界本身规律性的存在。在近似的认识论中，通过“适合”、“视角”理论，吉尔给予自然规律以客观实在性和科学建构性。在方法论上，吉尔持多元视角论以期构建多重性的自然规律。吉尔的理论有其超越范·弗拉森等人思想的一面，也破除了人们对科学真理的绝对“迷信”。
第四章详细介绍了以卡尔波恩和舒特为代表的计算机科学家关于定律问题的信息计算主义建构思想。他们从隐喻性、创造性与不变性的角度分析了计算机定律的性质。这很好地辩护了包括卡特赖特在内的建构性的、人为的自然规律观。如果说卡尔波恩和舒特从计算机科学的角度辩护还不够深入，那么他们从计算、抽象以及弗洛里迪的信息哲学不仅为计算科学中定律观的研究提供了哲学依据，也间接地从方法论的角度对“建构性定律观”给予了支持。而在信息计算主义的影响下，自然规律被理解为是一个人类创造的、隐喻的、规定性的、抽象的律则机制。
第五章选取了物理学家温伯格关于终极理论的学说，从中可见他对自然规律建构性的本体论态度。本章首先分析了温伯格的终极定律的内涵、特点以及他对哲学家的一些自然规律认识的批判。再者，“有终极”和“可还原”共同构成了温伯格独具特色的建构路径。最后，与爱因斯坦、霍金、罗杰.G.牛顿理论的对比，温伯格将自然规律看作是实在的、可知的、可还原的。他持有一种“客观实在的还原论自然规律”观。温伯格终极理论的意义在于，当我们谈及自然规律的建构性时，“客观性”、“实在性”不应该排除在讨论的范围之外，而应该是其必不可少的一部分。
结论部分总结全文，通过批判、反思的方式，尝试完整地勾勒出自然规律及其建构性的基本特质与意义。
通过整理分析，本文认为，科学家如温伯格更愿意从本体论的角度考察自然规律的建构性，强调他们的科学发现是对客观世界的实在性建构，同时他们还强调依据外部世界得来的认识也是客观的。而哲学家，无论是范弗拉森、还是吉尔，更愿意从建构认识论的角度，强调“人”在认识自然规律过程中或采用语义方法的、或是视角表征的作用。而信息计算主义者，更愿意从建构方法论的角度来审视自然规律的多样性及其作用。当然，自然规律的上述三个论题，并不是截然分开的，彼此相互交叉，互相渗透，一起描绘出了自然规律的新建构图景。
关键词：自然规律；语义学；视角建构论；信息计算主义；终极理论
Abstract
Laws of nature and its constructiveness are the subjects of this paper.
First of all, as the basic concept of modern science, laws of nature, although a Meta concept, is gradually formed and developed in the historical evolution. Nowadays, scientists and philosophers use the concept of laws of nature together. On the other hand, they have different interpretations of laws of nature. On the basis of clarifying the historical evolution of the concept of laws of nature, this paper points out that the basic connotation of laws of nature can be divided into two categories: the inherent laws of nature (objective laws) and laws established by human cognition for nature (cognitive laws). Some schools of philosophy of science often derive their statements of laws of nature from these two basic meanings, and finally they belong to one of them. So, how to advance the two contradictory views of laws of nature?
The author finds that the new constructive concept of laws of nature attempts to integrate the two. It emphasizes that the subject uses image, concept, symbol and language to describe and copy the objective things, and in this process of practice, the subject and the object interact to construct laws of nature. The focus of this paper is to investigate the philosophers represented by van Fraassen and Giere, the computer scientists represented by Colburn and Shute, and the physicists represented by Weinberg, and other contemporary scholars with great academic reputation, to introduce and analyze how they hold and demonstrate the constructiveness of laws of nature. On this basis, the author tries to promote the understanding of the concept of contemporary laws of nature through constructiveness. The structure and main contents of this paper are as follows:
The introduction points out the basis of the topic selection, the general situation of domestic and foreign research, the research methods and innovations used. In particular, this paper introduces the current domestic and foreign scholars' basic views on laws of nature and its constructiveness, as well as the relationship between them.
The first chapter analyzes the origin of the concept of laws of nature, the evolution of views and its constructive connotation through three parts. Among them, the first part examines how the laws of nature came into being in the modern western context and how it was introduced into modern China through Japan. The second part, from the perspective of the history of philosophy of science, combs the evolution process and characteristics of laws of nature from mechanism, convention theory, and realism to constructivism. The third part examines the historical meaning of constructiveness, and the specific meaning of constructiveness in this paper.
In the second chapter, we choose van Fraassen's view of semantic constructiveness of laws of nature. By deconstructing traditional concepts, putting forward new understandings and explaining important concepts, van Fraassen systematically established laws of nature of semantics. In the process, on the one hand, he strongly denied the traditional philosophy that laws of nature are inherent, universal and related to science. On the other hand, he proposed that model, logic and appropriateness are the three characteristics of his semantic constructiveness. In this path, laws of nature are no longer absolutely true, but an experienced, acceptable, probability related model, which can be described in different languages and in various ways, and is influenced by the scientific discourse environment.
The third chapter examines Giere's view on the constructiveness of laws of nature. Ronald.N.Giere used his view of realism to deal with the problem of laws of nature from different levels. The way to deal with it is objective and constructive. In ontology, Giere emphasizes the existence of the regularity of the objective world itself. In the similar epistemology, through the theory of fit and perspective, Giere gives the objective reality and scientific constructiveness to laws of nature. In methodology, Giere holds the theory of multiple perspectives in order to construct laws of nature of multiplicity. Giere's theory has its own side, which surpasses the thoughts of van Fraassen and others. It also breaks people's absolute superstition of scientific truth.
In the fourth chapter, we introduce in detail the info-computationalism’s construction views of the computer scientists represented by Colburn and Shute. They analyzed the nature of laws in computer science from the perspective of metaphor, creativity and invariance. This is a good defense of the constructive and artificial view of laws of nature, including Cartwright. If Colburn and Shute's defense from the perspective of computer science is not deep enough, then they not only provide philosophical basis for the research of laws in computer science from the perspective of computation, abstraction and Floridi's information philosophy, but also indirectly support the constructive laws from the perspective of methodology. Under the influence of info-computationalism, laws of nature are understood as a human created, metaphorical, prescriptive and abstract legal mechanism.
In the fifth chapter, the author selects Weinberg's theory of final theory, from which we can see his ontology attitude to the constructiveness of laws of nature. First of all, this chapter analyzes the connotation and characteristics of Weinberg's final law and his criticism of philosophers understanding of laws of nature. Moreover, the final and reducible laws constitute Weinberg's unique constructiveness path. Finally, compared with Einstein, Hawking and Roger G. Newton's theory, Weinberg regards laws of nature as real, knowable and reducible. He holds a view of objective and realistic reductionist laws of nature. The significance of Weinberg's final theory is that when we talk about the constructiveness of laws of nature, objectivity and realityshould not be excluded from the scope of discussion, but should be an essential part of it.
The conclusion part summarizes the whole paper, and tries to outline the basic characteristics and significance of the laws of nature and its constructiveness through the way of criticism and reflection.
Through sorting out and analyzing, this paper holds that scientists like Weinberg are more willing to examine the constructiveness of laws of nature from the perspective of ontology, emphasizing that their scientific discoveries are the constructiveness of reality of the objective world, and that their knowledge based on the external world is also objective. Philosophers, whether van Fraassen or Giere, prefer to emphasize the role of human in the process of understanding laws of nature, or in the semantic method or perspective representation from the perspective of constructive epistemology. The info-computationalism is more willing to examine the diversity and function of laws of nature from the perspective of constructiveness methodology. Of course, the above three topics of laws of nature are not totally separate, intersect and permeate each other, and together depict a new constructiveness picture of laws of nature.
Key words: laws of nature; semantics; perspective constructivism; info- computationalism; final theory
站内搜索
