【作者】 张蕴；

【导师】 何向东；

【作者基本信息】 西南大学 ， 逻辑学， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 本文立论于这一崭新视角：基于识别问题重审斯特劳森的主体哲学思想,并提炼出内嵌于斯特劳森哲学思想中的识别理论。这种研究既为在各个核心主题背景下推进对其识别问题的研究提供了丰富的理论支撑,又为深化研究其哲学的各个相关主题开辟了一条新的进路。本文的立论基于以下原因：通过对其著述的研究我们发现：第一、尽管他的各个核心主题并非直接探讨识别问题,却与该问题有着密切关联。解答“识别的实现”的必要条件离不开各核心主题的论证和支持,而要完整把握各核心主题及其相互关系,又必须将其置于“识别的实现”这一分析框架中。第二,通过研究解答“识别的实现”的各相关主题,能清晰呈现其哲学思想的演进过程,该过程符合他在《分析的形而上学》中关于哲学总体构想和哲学分析方法的阐释。由此我们认为,识别理论完整而自成一体地内嵌于他的整体性哲学中。其一在于他涉及到识别问题的多个方面：指称与识别的关系、识别的本体论依据、认识框架和方法论等；其二在于识别理论并非孤立于他的描述的形而上学及先验论证的方法体系外,而是与之紧密结合,为他后期总结性提出哲学的分析方法和整体构想提供了坚实的理论基础。总之,识别理论贯穿于他的逻辑学、本体论与认识论之中,与它们融合成一个纵横交织的缜密系统,是其学术思想的重要组成部分。本文拟从以下部分展开研究：第1章探讨识别理论的形成基础。他与罗素和奎因的论争为识别概念的形成提供了直接的铺垫,其中已提出了殊相识别的部分观点并包含了后来思想的萌芽。本章首先考察了他在对摹状词理论和单称词项可消除论的批评中正面树立的识别指称观以及将识别指称作为单称词项本质规定性的观点,接下来探讨了《个体》中的识别概念,从“听者—说者”这一识别的基本模式出发提炼出识别的几种情况并对各自适用范围进行了分析。第2章探讨识别的本体论依据。本章围绕“识别的基础性”与“本体论的优先性”的关联展开。第1节从他对逻辑主项与存在的关系的论述入手探讨其本体论的基本立场。第2节探讨他对奎因本体论化约纲领的批评,这为正面阐发本体论的等级论提供了直接铺垫。第3节考察本体论等级论这一特色理论,剖析了“赋予基本殊相以本体论优先性”这一关键命题的内涵,重点分析了他通过对语法标准与范畴标准的比较以揭示主谓区分背后的“本体论优先性”的思路。第4节通过对他与奎因本体论思想的系统比较,深入揭示其本体论的特征和独特意义。第3章探讨识别的认识框架,该框架与概念图式的构想有关。本章首先通过与康德“图式”的比较分析了这一概念图式的性质和特征,接下来围绕“时空系统与作为经验实在的基本殊相对于反映该概念图式具有怎样的关联性”的问题,探讨了作为概念图式之基本构架的时空系统的特征,以及他确立物质物体为基本殊对于识别活动的意义,并从“经验的可能性条件”的先验意义上分析了人对其它殊相的“不同却相关方式”的识别支持作用。本章最终揭示了他确立物质物体和人为基本殊相的目的,即将殊相放入现有的时空系统中以揭示思想的概念图式,整个识别活动正是围绕着对概念图式的说明这一基本任务而展开。第4章探讨识别的方法论特征。旨在通过对识别理论中所运用的先验论证的特征、有效性和目标定位的考察,审视其先验论证关于识别活动之价值。第1节参照康德的策略考察了他有关经验的讨论与概念图式中基础概念之间的本质关联。第2节在考察关于识别的可能性的先验论证的形式特征的基础上,分析了其论证应对怀疑论的有效性,并赋予适度先验论证的内在辩护策略下的解读。第3节考察他对先验论证的深化,即对康德先验演绎的重构的“经验的客观性论证”,说明其论证的实质仍是对康德式方法路径的延续。第4节考察他的先验论证的价值目标,联系于对信念确定性的分析,从自然主义观点中为其论证寻找支撑。第5章总结评价识别理论对于当代哲学的新贡献。我们通过前几章的研究的支撑,并结合他在《分析与形而上学》中对形而上学、分析方法及哲学整体图景的阐释,从三个方面归纳了他的贡献。第6章基于以上研究对其哲学思想作出了拓展性思考：第一,从形而上学的“描述性”与“修正性”之关系、“语言理论的现实转向”的合理性以及识别活动的解释途径三个方面对识别理论的局限性进行了思考；第二,在知识论框架下将其思想解读为特殊的“先验建构型”的基础主义；第三,从拓扑学视角探析了其哲学观和方法论的启示。本文的创新工作可概括为：1.主题上：通过综合思考,将识别理论作为内嵌于斯特劳森哲学中的一个系统整体而非局限于《个体》中对识别的直接探讨,从不同论著中提取出“识别的实现”作为统摄其主体哲学思想的基础问题。2.思路上：拟定了深入挖掘该问题的框架性思路,从形成基础、本体论依据、认识框架、方法论以及对当代哲学的影响等方面进行系统探讨,揭示出识别理论的内在发展理路,展现各核心主题的相互关系,并通过该思路彰显他的哲学整体图像。3.研究方法上：结合各核心主题,将他与奎因、康德的思想进行系统比较,比较中揭示其理论的思想渊源、特征和独特意义。4.归纳和解析上：(1)将其把握客观经验知识的方式解析为适度先验论证的内在辩护策略；(2)基于信念确定性的“普遍印证观”重审其先验论证的价值目标；(3)结合语言现象学,以及心理或认知科学的相关观点,对比研究中揭示其理论的局限性；(4)将其思想定位为“先验建构型”的基础主义；(5)从对其哲学思想的特征与拓扑学基本思想的内在相似性的分析中,归纳出从这种“拓扑学”风格的哲学研究中所得的方法启示。更多还原

【Abstract】 This thesis is argued in a novel visual angle, which is said:reviewing Strawson’s main thoughts of philosophy based on the theme of identification, and extracting the identification theory which is integrated in Strawson’s philosophy. Such studies, on one hand, provide abundant theory supports to the studies about the theme of identification, and on the other hand, start a new approach for deepening each related coin subject in his philosophy. The arguments are based on the following reasons:By studying Strawson’s works, the writer finds that his each coin subject doesn’t directly discuss the identification, but is closely related with it. It must be based on the support of each core subject to supply an explanatory key for "the realization of identifying", and also must be linked with the analytical frame about "the realization of identifying" to understand each core subject and demonstrate the correlations among them. Furthermore, by studying each correlative subject, can we clarify the evolvement of his philosophy thoughts, which accords with his explanation about the entire conception and analysis methods of philosophy in Analysis and Metaphysics. Accordingly, we think identification theory is integrated in Strawson’s whole philosophy. One reason is that it entails many aspects of identification, such as the relation between referring and identifying, the ontology accordance, epistemology frame, and the methodology of identifying. Another reason is that identification theory is related to his descriptive metaphysics and the methodology system of transcendental arguments, which afford theoretical basis for his later analysis methods and entire conception of philosophy, In a word, the identification theory, integrated into his logic, ontology and epistemology, forming an inner complex meticulous system with them, is an important part of his academic thoughts.The chapters are arranged as following:Chapter1is about the basis for the formation of identification theory. The debate between Strawson and Russell or Quine, in which his partial viewpoints have been included, lays a certain foundation for the formation of the concept of "identification". Firstly, it analyzes his views of identifying reference, and regarding identifying reference as the essential prescriptive of singular terms, which are formed in the process of criticizing the descriptions theory and the viewpoint that the singular terms is eliminable. Then, starting with the model of "Listener-speaker", it researches into the concept of identification in Individual, sums up the kinds of identifying, and makes an analysis about the applied Scope of each of them.Chapter2is about the ontology accordance of identifying. This chapter centers about the correlation of the foundation position in identifying with ontological priority. Section1, starting with the relation between logical subject and existence, analyzes his basic standpoint of ontology. Section2is about his criticism to Quine’s program of ontological reduction, which paves the way for his theory of ontological hierarch. Section3is about his characteristic theory—the ontological hierarch. It has a further analysis about the connotation of his key proposition—"endowing basic particulars with ontological priority", and especially analyzes his train of thought, which reveals the ontological priority hidden behind the Subject-Predicate items distinction by comparing grammar-criterion with the type-criterion. Section4compares his ontology with Quine’s for revealing the characteristics and significance of his ontology.Chapter3is about the epistemology frame of identifying, which is related to the conceptual schemes. Firstly, it analyzes the essence and characteristics of conceptual schemes by comparing the schemes with Kant’s schemes. Then, concentrating on the question of "what’s the correlation of temporal and spatial relations system with basic particulars in reflecting the conceptual schemes", it analyzes the characteristics of temporal and spatial relations system, and the significance of establishing material bodies as basic particulars for identifying. At last, from the transcendental angle of "the conditions for the possibility of experience", it analyzes the support with "different but correlative ways" given by the basic particular—"person" to other particulars. It finally reveals his motive to establish material bodies and person as basic particulars, which is to put particulars into the temporal and spatial relations system to elucidate the conceptual schemes. The whole identifying activity is around the basic task of elucidating the conceptual schemes.Chapter4is about the methodology of identifying. Through the analysis about the characteristics, validity and objective orientation of transcendental arguments used in identification theory, it researches into the value of transcendental arguments in identifying activity. By discussing Kant’s strategies as reference, Section1analyzes the essential relation between Strawson’s discussion about experience and the basic concepts in conceptual schemes. Then, On the basis of reviewing the form characteristics of transcendental arguments about the possibility of identifying, Section2analyzes the validity of his arguments to cope with skepticism, and links his arguments with the strategy of internal defense of proper moderate transcendental arguments. Section3is about his further studies on transcendental arguments. From the analysis of his objectivity arguments of experience in restructuring Kant’s transcendental deduction, it shows that the essence of his arguments is also a continuation of Kant’s ways. Section4analyzes the value objective of his transcendental arguments. Linking it with the analysis about the certainty of belief, the writer tries to quest for a theory support from the view about naturalism.Chapter5is about his new contribution to contemporary philosophy. Based on the above chapters, and his explanation of metaphysics, analysis methods and entire conception of philosophy in Analysis and Metaphysics, it generalizes the contributions in three aspects. Based on all above studies, Chapter6does some divergent thinking about his philosophy thoughts. Firstly, it discusses the limitation from such aspects as the relationship between the descriptiveness and revisability of metaphysics, the rationality of the transition to reality of linguistic theory, and the ways of explanation to identifying. Secondly, it unscrambles his thoughts as special foundationalism of transcendental-construction under the frame of epistemology. Thirdly, it does some thinking of his views on philosophy and methodology from the angle of topology.The creative work can be concluded as follows:Firstly, it is not limited in the direct analysis about identifying in Individual, but considers the identification theory as a whole which is integrated in Strawson’s whole philosophy. It distills a question, that is,"the realization of identifying", and considers it as the basic question to govern his main philosophical thoughts. Secondly, it provides the analytical frame of this question, and makes an in-depth study from the aspects of the basis for the formation, ontology accordance, epistemology frame, methodology and the contribution to contemporary philosophy, so as to reveal the intrinsic development route of identification theory, clarify how the coin subjects are related to each other, and demonstrate his whole image of philosophy. Thirdly, through systematic comparative analyses of his thoughts’ with Kant’s and Quine’s, it reveals the thought origins, characteristics and the peculiar significance of his theory in the comparative research. Fourthly, it makes some new generalizations and explanations as following:(1) It interprets the way of Strawson to understand the knowledge of objective experience as a strategy of internal defense of proper moderate transcendental arguments;(2) Based on the view of "universal conformation" about certainty of belief, it re-examines the value objective of his transcendental arguments;(3) By taking some viewpoints of the language" phenomenology, psychology and cognitive science as reference, it reveals the limitation of his theory in comparative research;(4) It unscrambles his thoughts as special foundationalism of transcendental-construction;(5) By analyzing the inner similarity between the characteristics of Strawson’s philosophical view, and the basic thought of topology, it summarizes the inspiration of methodology from Strawson’s philosophical studies with topologic style.更多还原