【作者】 裘涵；

【导师】 盛晓明；

【作者基本信息】 浙江大学 ， 科技哲学， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 技术标准是一个历史现象,它随着人类文明的产生而产生,并随着时代的变迁而变化。随着西方启蒙主义和工业革命的兴起,技术标准从地方的、自然的、单一化的前技术标准化时期转向了全球化、复杂化、暗箱化的技术标准化时期。技术标准化时期的技术标准在生成过程中往往会形成一个个暗箱(Black Box),使得人们难以透视其内部真实结构,难以观察其具体的生成过程,难以把握其复杂的面相,尤其是霸权主义的面相。因此,当下技术标准发展的趋势提出了两大研究任务:一是研究行动中的技术标准,探究技术标准具体的形成和扩张过程;二是批判性地认知技术标准,把握技术标准的真实面相。然而,既有的技术标准化研究进路无法应对当下技术标准发展趋势提出的两大研究任务。技术工程学研究进路不仅是一种功能主义的视角,而且是一种技术决定主义的逻辑,直接导致了技术工程学研究走向技术决定论的终点。经济学研究进路的经济理性和封闭系统的理论假设、功能主义的视角和在先的理论假设决定了经济学研究进路对技术标准化过程研究的忽视。另外,经济学天生缺乏批判性的理论品格决定了经济学研究不可能承担起批判性认知技术标准化的任务。有鉴于此,本文是从科学技术论进路切入技术标准化问题的研究,并针对现有科学技术论研究技术标准问题的不足,将科学技术论的社会研究和文化研究两大视角有机结合,并融入了布迪厄的场域理论(Field Theory),创造性地提出了“技术标准实践论”的分析框架。基于科学技术论的“技术标准实践论”的分析框架是将技术标准看作一个“参与性”(Engaging)的游戏,抛弃中立的、旁观的、非参与的立场,力图以游戏参与者的角色,进入技术标准化的权力场域之中,观察技术标准化的游戏过程,认识和把握技术标准化的具体过程和真实面相。本文在科学技术论的视野中,基于“技术标准实践论”的分析框架,通过对RFID技术标准、乳腺癌风险检测标准等技术标准化案例的分析,先后提出了技术标准化的四大结论,从而形成了对技术标准形成和扩张的完整的认知体系。在第五章的“地方性生产”一章中,提出了技术标准的结论一:技术标准是地方性的技术方案。技术标准并不具有普遍客观性,它只是一个地方性的技术方案,技术标准化的过程离不开地方性生产,它去地方性和去情景性的努力也抹不去其地方性的特征。在第六章“标准与修辞”一章中,提出了技术标准的结论二:技术标准化是一个修辞的过程。技术标准是需要修辞的,修辞能力的高低直接影响了技术标准的影响力和扩张范围,技术与其说是技术标准的决定性要素,还不如说是它的一种修辞手法。在第七章“网络的建构”一章中,提出了技术标准的结论三:技术标准化过程是行动者网络建构的过程,技术标准化的竞争是不同行动者网络之间的竞争。谁的网络编织得更强壮且富有弹性,那么它的标准就更具有竞争力,而网络编织能力则取决于行动者网络的利益转译机制和相应的联盟策略。在第八章“标准的旅行”一章中,提出了技术标准的结论四:技术标准的扩张是一个中心向边缘扩张的过程。技术标准的扩张往往是处于中心的西方向处于边缘的东方的扩张,这种扩张会引起地方的反抗,这种反抗往往是一种力量失衡的抗争,而这种抗争的本质是争夺相关产业的话语权和定价权。技术标准化四大结论的提出标志着本文完成了对技术标准完整生命周期的研究。本文在对技术标准整个生命周期进行研究的同时,也完成了对技术标准和客观性关系的探讨。本文指出,技术标准是获得客观性的最佳手段,而这种客观性并不是笛卡尔意义上的“绝对客观性”(Absolutely Objectivity),而是西斯蒙多(Sismondo)所说的“形式客观性”(Formal Objectivity)。这种形式客观性是有视角的、有立场的和非中立的,它与权力要素结合在一起,它的形成过程是一个中心向边缘扩张的过程。技术标准在获得形式客观性的同时,也完成了对自身的客观性塑造。因此,技术标准并不具备先验或超验的知识论地位。如果说它有客观性的话,那么也只能属于一种“形式客观性”。因此技术标准往往只具有一种合理性和有效性,它并不等同于预设了对真理掌握的“绝对客观性”。中国大国崛起需要强大的科学技术水平的支持,也需要强大的技术标准体系的支撑。然而,在现有不平等的国际技术标准化秩序下,中国技术标准化的发展遇到了技术标准化发展的困境,许多自主标准在内外交困的状况下“死亡休克”抑或“痛苦挣扎”。由此,本文在最后基于“技术标准实践论”的分析框架和技术标准化结论回应了中国技术标准化的困境问题,并提出了中国技术标准化的四大策略,最终完成了从理论到实践的技术标准化的科学技术论研究。更多还原

【Abstract】 Technical standard is a historical phenomenon. It came into being with theemergence of human civilization and has been developing with the ages. With the rise of Western Didacticism and Industrial Revolution, local, natural and simplified technical standard had become global, complex and opaque. The epoch of technical standardization arrived. The production of technical standards in the epoch of technical standardization tended to develop in Black Box. Due to the opacity of the Black Box, its inner structure, its production process and its real face and especially its hegemonic character were all hidden. Thereby current technical standard development has raised two research questions: one is to study technical standard in action and explore its detailed formation and expansion process. The other is to critically cognize technical standard and unveil its real essence.However, the existing research approaches to technical standardization are incapable of accomplishing the mentioned two tasks. The approach of technical engineering is a functionalism perspective; furthermore its logic is technical determinism which directly pushed technical engineering into a dead end. Economic approach ignores the process of technical standardization due to its economic rationality, theory hypothesis which is a closed system, functionalism perspective and transcendental theory hypothesis. Besides, economists are born without critical spirit, which determines their inability to undertake the second task -to critically cognize technical standardization and unveil its real essence.Considering the above facts, the paper tries to explore the problem from the perspective of science and technology studies. Recognizing the limitation of technical standardization researches under the same perspective, the paper adopts both social and cultural approaches, imports Bourdieu’s Field Theory and creatively set up a new analytical framework based on "Praxis Theory of Technology Standard". This framework is based on science and technology studies. It views technical standardization an engaging game rather than on a "neutral, spectator and non-involving" standpoint. It tries to enter the "power field" of the technical standardization as game participants and observe the whole game process and unveil the true essence of technical standardization. Within the perspective of science and technology studies, the paper adopts a new analytical framework based on "Praxis Theory of Technology Standard". It analyzes some real cases like RFID technical standardization, technical standardization for mammary cancer risk testing and etc.In Chapter Five, which focuses on local production, the first principle of technical standardization is put forward: technical standardization is a local technical scheme. It means that technical standardization is not universal and objective. It is no more than a local technical proposal. Technical standardization cannot live without local production; furthermore even after delocalization, its local character was still there and was impossible to erase.Chapter Six discusses the relationship between standardization and rhetoric. The second principle of technical standardization is put forward: technical standardization is a process of rhetoric. It means that technical standardization needs rhetoric and the effects of the rhetoric directly decide to which extent the technical standardization can reach. Technology in this context is actually a way of rhetoric rather than a decisive objective element.Chapter Seven presents Actor Network construction. In this chapter, the third principle of technical standardization is brought forward: technical standardization is a process of Actor Network construction. The competition among various technical standards is actually the competition among various Actor Networks. Those who can intwine a stronger and more flexible network are surely to have more competitive power. How can the network be constructed is dependent on its interest translation system and alliance policy.The eighth chapter describes the implementation of technical standardization. The fourth principle is proposed: technical standardization is an expansion process from the center to the periphery. It means technical standardization was usually set up by western countries and was expanded to the less developed countries. The expansion could cause local resistance, while the power of the two sides is unbalanced. The real purpose of the struggle is to scramble for discourse power and the rights to decide the price in certain industry. The four principles put forward in the paper signifies that the paper has finished the research which covers the whole production process of technical standardizationThe present paper analyzes the whole life circle of technical standardization and further explores the relationship between technical standardization and objectivity. It points out that objectivity can be best achieved from technical standards. This sense of objectivity does not mean "absolutely Objectivity" (in Descartes’s term) but means "Formal Objectivity" as Sismondo called. The formal objectivity has its own visual angle and standpoint, rather than being neutral. It connects with power elements and its process of formation expands from the center to the periphery. In the process of achieving formal objectivity, technical standards complete the shaping of its own objectivity as well. Thus, technical standard does not take the transcendent position in Epistemology. If it had objectivity, technical standard could be categorized into "Formal Objectivity". Therefore, technical standard only has rationality and effectiveness, but it does not equal to the truth mastery of "Absolutely Objectivity" expected in advance.China’s rise needs not only advanced science and technology, but also the support of powerful systems of technical standardization. Considering the existing unequal international technical standardization, China is in an adverse place in the complex and fierce competition for technical standardization. Many technical standards developed ourselves are in the danger of dying away. Therefore the paper at the last part analyzes these problems and proposed some strategies for Chinese technical standardization development. This part realizes the research’s leap from theory to practice.更多还原