期刊文献+

洛克是自然类的实在论者吗? 被引量:2

An exploration into John Locke’s thoughts on natural kinds
下载PDF
导出
摘要 当代哲学家关于自然类的许多争论似乎都可以从洛克的思想中找到根源。洛克主张类语词指称的是人类心灵从个体事物中抽象出来的一般观念,而不是事物共同具有的客观内在结构。这种观点通常被解读为关于自然类的反本质主义和约定论,即自然类不是根据本质属性来定义的,并且不存在独立于心灵的自然类。一些学者从多元实在论和自我平衡属性簇的意义上来解释自然类,并认为洛克的自然类反本质主义立场可以与自然类实在论相容,但是这两种进路仍然存在困难。自然类不应当被视作独立于心灵,而洛克的观点可以被理解为承认自然类的心灵依赖性,并且依赖于心灵的自然类仍然拥有某种程度的实在性。 It seems that many debates over the nature of natural kinds among contemporary philosophers can trace back to John Locke, who claims that kind terms refer to general ideas abstracted from individual things by human minds, rather than objective internal structures shared by different things. This view is usually interpreted as anti-essentialism and conventionalism about natural kinds. That is to say, natural kinds are not defined by essential properties, and there are no natural kinds with mind independence. Some scholars expound natural kinds in terms of Plural Realism and HPC theory, and argue that Locke’s anti-essentialism of natural kinds could be compatible with natural kind realism. However, these two approaches still face difficulties. This paper attempts to argue that natural kinds do not have mind-independence, and that Locke’s views can be understood as admitting that natural kinds are mind-dependent, and natural kinds with mind-dependence possess certain degree of reality.
作者 陈明益 CHEN Mingyi(School of Marxism,Wuhan University of Technology,Wuhan 430063,China)
出处 《中南大学学报(社会科学版)》 CSSCI 北大核心 2020年第4期50-57,共8页 Journal of Central South University:Social Sciences
基金 国家社科基金青年项目“当代科学哲学中的自然类问题研究”(18CZX011) 国家社科基金重大项目“广义逻辑悖论的历史发展、理论前沿与跨学科应用研究”(18ZDA031)。
关键词 洛克 自然类 本质 约定论 心灵依赖性 Locke natural kinds essence conventionalism mind-dependence
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献21

  • 1J. Dupre, "Natural Kinds", W. H. Newton-Smith, ed. , A Companion to the Philosophy of Science, Blaekwell, 2001, pp. 311 -319.
  • 2. T. E. Wilkerson, "Natural Kinds", Philosophy, 63 (243) , 1988.
  • 3B. Ellis, Scientific Essentialism, Cambridge University Press, 2011, p. 21.
  • 4I. Hacking, "A Tradition of Natural Kinds", Philosophical Studies, 61, 1991.
  • 5W. V. O. Quine, "Natural Kinds", Ontological Relativity and Other Essays, Columbia University Press, 1969, p. 119.
  • 6R. De Sousa, "The Natural Shiftiness of Natural Kinds", Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 14 (4), 1984.
  • 7J. Dupre, "Natural Kinds and Biological Taxa", The Philosophical Rev/ew, 90 (1), 1981.
  • 8M. Ali Khalidi, Natural Categories and Human Kinds: Classification in the Natural and Social Science, Cambridge University Press, 2013.
  • 9R. Boyd, "Homeostasis, Species and Higher Taxa", Robert A. Wilson, ed. , Species: New Interdisciplinary Essays, the MIT Press, 1999, pp. 141 - 186.
  • 10C. L. Elder, "A Different Kind of Natural Kind", Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 73 (4), 1995.

共引文献7

同被引文献1

引证文献2

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