Comparison as a Matter of Concern
Comparison as a Matter of Concern
复制标题
值得关注的比较问题
作者：
I. Stengers
普遍主义和相对主义的问题常常被认为是一个批判性的反身性问题。本文试图将这个问题作为一个实际的、政治的和始终关注的问题来提出。这种尝试是从现代实验科学的考虑出发的。这些科学通常是普遍主义主张的据点，因此也是相对主义的目标。有人认为，这些科学的特殊性不是一种方法，而是一种关注。能够声称他们没有单方面将自己的定义强加于他们研究的现象是实验者最关心的问题，并且应该从以下成就的角度来理解：建立一种非常特殊的“融洽关系”，授权声称可操作定义的东西“适合”这种相关性。将知识生产与建立融洽关系联系起来需要科学的多元化以及与融洽关系相关的关注模式的多元化。然而，抵制单方面强加的定义是不够的，因为随着“知识经济”的到来，本文提出的问题将很快成为浪漫过去的一部分。因此，它以一种思辨的方式结束，这可能是一首安魂曲，将融洽关系的创造与类似于威廉·詹姆斯永远在建设中的多元宇宙的实践生态联系起来。
The question of universalism and relativism is often taken to be a matter of critical reflexivity. This article attempts to present the question instead as a matter of practical, political, and always-situated concern. The attempt starts from the consideration of modern experimental sciences. These sciences usually serve as the stronghold for universalist claims and as such are a target of relativism. It is argued that the specificity of these sciences is not a method but a concern. To be able to claim that they have not unilaterally imposed their definitions on the phenomena they study is the leading concern of experimenters and should be understood in terms of the following achievement: the creation of a very particular “rapport” that authorizes claiming that what is operationally defined “lends itself” to this correlation. Linking knowledge production with a creation of rapports entails a pluralization of sciences along with the pluralization of modes of concern associated with the rapport. However, resisting unilaterally imposed definitions is not enough, since with the coming “knowledge economy” the questions that this article raises will soon be part of a romantic past. Thus it concludes with a speculative touch, which may be a requiem, relating the creation of rapports with an ecology of practices akin to William James’s always-under-construction pluriverse.