理性的不可自适:“逻辑—实证”在公共行政学应用中的局限——兼论复杂性视角与公共行政学研究的契合性

Rational Incompatibility: Limitations of “Logic-between Evidence” in the Application of Public Administration——Concurrently Discussing Agreement Character between the View of Complexity and the Research of Public Administration Science

在公共行政学的方法谱系中,无论是经验研究法还是规范性研究法,其本质均为“逻辑—实证”的操作化变体。伴随着公共事务的日益复杂化,“逻辑—实证”分析范式显现出相当的不可自适性。这主要表现为线性逻辑、机械还原、工具理性与建构理性以及“主—客”二分在面对公共行政网络化、整体化、不确定化以及价值多元化趋势时的不可自适。然而,复杂性视角对公共行政变得日益复杂的事实却有着方法论层面的更强的涵摄力。在复杂性视角的统挈下,公共行政的研究需从“物”的实在转向“关系”的实在、从化约还原转向跨层次的整体综观、从线性思维转向网络式的交互思维、从“主—客”二分转向“天人合一”的深度触诊。

In the methodological lineage of public administration, whether it is empirical research or normative research, it is essentially an operational variant of “logic-positive”. Along with the increasing complexity of public affairs, the “logical-positive” analytical paradigm shows considerable incompatibility. This is mainly manifested in linear logic, mechanical reduction, instrumental rationality and constructive rationality, and the “subject-object” dichotomy is incompatible with the trend of public administration networked, integration, uncertainty and value diversification. However, the complexity perspective has become more and more powerful in terms of the complexity of public administration. Under the circumstance of complexity perspective, the study of public administration needs to shift from the reality of “object” to the reality of “relationship”, from the reduction to the overall perspective of cross-level, from linear thinking to interactive thinking of network, from the “object-subject” turned to the deep palpation of “Oneness of Nature and Man”.