期刊文献+

科学与中国传统文化讨论的三个误区 被引量:4

Common Pitfalls in Discussion about Modern Science and Chinese Culture
下载PDF
导出
摘要 关于现代科学与中国传统文化之间关系,时下的讨论常常落入三个误区。误区之一是语境主义的缺失,将当代中国在科学竞争上的乏力笼统地归咎于传统文化;误区之二是将文化与制度作截然区分,忽视了已经获得制度化表达的非儒家文化的强大影响力;误区之三是将科学文化视为西方文化,未能深刻认识科学价值与科学规范的普世性。 Three common pitfalls in discussion about the relationship between modem science and Chinese traditional culture are examined. The first one is the deficiency of contextualism, which ascribes the incompetence of scientific achievements in contemporary China to Chinese traditional culture. The second one is the distinction between culture and institution, which ignores the heterogeneity of Chinese culture and thus can' t recognize the institutionalization of values and norms other than those of Confucianism. The third one is the confusion between modernity and locality, which fails to understand the local resistance to the universality of scientific culture.
作者 郝刘祥
出处 《科学文化评论》 2012年第6期5-15,共11页 Science & Culture Review
关键词 科学 价值 制度化 传统文化 政治文化 科学文化 儒家 法家 science, value, institutionalization, traditional culture, political culture, scientific culture, Confucianism, Legalism
  • 相关文献

参考文献17

二级参考文献120

  • 1[3]Feynman, R. P. (1965). The Character of Physical Law. Cambridge (Massachusetts): The M. I. T.Press.
  • 2[11]Nakayama, S. (1984). Academic and Scientific Traditions in China, Japan and the West. translated by Jerry Dusenbury. Tokyo: Tokyo University Press.
  • 3[12]Pais, A. (1986). Inward Bound of Matter and Forces in the Physical World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • 4[14]Weyl, H. (1968). David Hilbert and his Mathematical Work (1944). in K. Chandrasekharan (Hrsg.),Hermann Weyl Gesammelte Abhandlungen (Band Ⅳ, pp. 130-172). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
  • 5艾耶尔.2006.《语言、真理与逻辑》.伊大贻译.上海:上海译文出版社.
  • 6Boyd, R. 1993. On the Current Status of Scientific Realism. in R. Boyd et al. (eds.). The Philosophy of Science. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
  • 7Camap, R. 1936/1937. Testability and Meaning. Philosophy of Science. 3 & 4.
  • 8Camap, R. 1950. Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology. Revue Internationale de Philosophie. 4:20 - 40.
  • 9reprinted in R. Boyd et al. (eds.) 1993. The Philosophy of Science. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press. pp. 85 - 98.
  • 10Earman, J. 1993. Camap, Kuhn, and the Philosophy of Scientific Methodology. in Horwich, E (ed.). World Changes. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. pp. 10 - 36.

共引文献104

同被引文献84

引证文献4

二级引证文献14

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部