Complexity and Critical Pluralism

复杂性和批判性多元主义

• 批准号: 9710615
• 负责人: Sandra Mitchell
• 金额: $ 9.37万
• 依托单位: University of California-San Diego
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 1997
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 1997-07-01 至 1999-06-30
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=9710615&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Complexity; Critical; Pluralism

In many scientific disciplines, political discussions, and social policy forums, there has been increasing interest in diversity as an inherent good. There is corresponding concern about sliding down a slippery slope to complete relativism with an accompanying loss of critical standards. In philosophy of science, this tension takes the form of a debate between defenders of the unity of science-those who advocate strong critical standards based on metaphysical and methodological monism-and supporters of the disunity of science-some of whom endorse forms of pluralism that verge on the brink of an `anything goes` leniency. In this research Mitchell explores a middle ground. The aim is to develop a pluralistic picture of scientific practice that retains critical standards of acceptability within science. The strategy adopted is two-pronged, focusing on both metaphysical questions and epistemological issues. Contemporary biology provides the location for exploring these topics and testing the results. The metaphysical investigation involves a comprehensive analysis of the metaphysics of complexity. Three forms of complexity are identified: complexity of structure, complexity of process, and complexity of evolved domains. In the epistemological part of the research, Mitchell clarifies the possibilities and constraints on representing scientific laws, models and explanations. Particular attention is paid to the idealized character of models, the need for integration of multiple models in explanation and the degrees of contingency symbolized in laws of nature. The framework of critical pluralism that will result from this work will provide three practical benefits: 1) it will allow one to distinguish between real and spurious scientific disputes; 2) it will offer a taxonomy of types of conflict; and 3) it will allow a better understanding of different kinds of compatibility and complementarity between alternate theories.

在许多科学学科、政治讨论和社会政策论坛中，人们越来越关注多样性作为一种内在的善。 相应地，人们担心滑下一个滑坡，以完成相对主义，伴随着批判标准的丧失。 在科学哲学中，这种紧张关系表现为科学统一性的捍卫者和科学不统一性的支持者之间的辩论，前者主张基于形而上学和方法论一元论的强有力的批判标准，而后者则支持处于“一切皆行”的宽容边缘的多元主义形式。 在这项研究中，米切尔探索了一个中间立场。 其目的是发展一个多元化的科学实践的图片，保留在科学的可接受性的关键标准。 所采取的策略是双管齐下的，既关注形而上学问题，又关注认识论问题。 当代生物学为探索这些主题和测试结果提供了场所。 形而上学的研究包括对复杂性形而上学的全面分析。 复杂性有三种形式：结构的复杂性、过程的复杂性和演化领域的复杂性。 在研究的认识论部分，米切尔阐明了代表科学规律，模型和解释的可能性和限制。 特别注意模型的理想化特征，在解释中需要整合多种模型，以及自然规律中象征的偶然性程度。 从这项工作中产生的批判多元主义框架将提供三个实际好处：1）它将允许人们区分真实的和虚假的科学争议; 2）它将提供冲突类型的分类; 3）它将允许更好地理解替代理论之间的不同类型的兼容性和互补性。