柯瓦雷科学哲学思想研究
|
摘要
本文认为胡塞尔的现象学哲学、马休斯的哲学思想、莱纳赫的历史观以及迪昂的科学思想史思想是柯瓦雷科学哲学思想的主要理论来源,而“人类思想的统一性”信念则是其主要支撑。柯瓦雷以这一信念为基础,结合科学发展的具体史实深入开展科学哲学的研究,在科学本质、科学进步以及科学革命等问题上提出了科学是“通往真理的旅程”,科学进步表现为对于真理的无止境的探求,“思想实验”是一种新的思想观念的建构,科学革命是一种观念上的漫长变革过程等富有独创性的思想,构建了较为完备的科学哲学思想体系。柯瓦雷的科学哲学思想直接促成了逻辑实证主义向历史主义的转变,对于我国科学哲学的建构与发展、科学的发展与进步具有重要的启示意义。
In the foreign academe the researches into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy were more centralized on the comparison in the research method of science history between Koyr′e and Starton,Merton,only some papers and works that were written by the scientific philosophers such as Kuhn,Lakatos,Shapin,Cohen,Feyerabend etc.came down to a part of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy, the monograph about it is few. In the domestic academe the researches into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy were also very weak, the research achievements were less. Anyway , in the foreign and domestic academes the researches into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy were neither systemic nor embedded.
This dissertation’s innovations lie in making a more systemic and embedded research into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy, concretely include some nether aspects:Ⅰthinking that Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy is rich and colorful with his thought of history of science, and it is more profound and particular comparing with the contemporary scientific philosophy on the opinions about the essence of science, the progress of science and the revolution of science etc;Ⅱhome probing into the main theoretic sources of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy and its faith basis;Ⅲmore integrally exhibiting the system of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy and thinking that Koyr′e takes“the oneness of mankind’s thought”as its faith support, takes the thought and method of thought history of science as its guidance, takes the particular viewpoints about the essence of science, the progress of science and the revolution of science as its core contents combining with the concrete historical facts of the development of science, and constructs a more self-contained thought system of scientific philosophy;Ⅳprobing into the historical status of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy and its realistic revelatory signification to our country.
This dissertation thinks that Husserl’s Philosophy of Phenomenology, Martius’s thought of philosophy, Reinach’s viewpoint of history and Duhem’s thought of thought history of science are the main theoretical sources of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy ,and“the oneness of mankind’s thought”is its main support. Koyr′e deeply researches scientific philosophy based on this faith,combining with the concrete historical facts of the development of science, and puts forward these Promethean thoughts such as science is“the trip to truth”, the progress of science represents as the everlasting hunting for truth,“thought experiment”is a construction of the new thought and idea, the revolution of science is a far-flung course of idea transformation etc about the essence of science, the progress of science and the revolution of science ctc and constructs a more self-contained thought system of scientific philosophy. Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy directly caused the change from Logic Positivism to Historicism, and have the important revelatory signification to the construction and the development of scientific philosophy ,the development and the progress of science in our country.
In the student age Koyr′e was taught by lots of the famous teachers and influenced by them, such as Hilber,Brunschvicg,Husserl,Meyerson,Martius,Reinach etc.After he entered the research realm of history of science thought, he was deeply influenced by Duhem who was the forerunner in history of science thought again. Thereinto, the theory of“life world”and the criticism to the science viewpoint of Positivism in Husserl’s Philosophy of Phenomenology, Martius’s thought about combing the Christian tradition with science thought to research the philosophical problems, Reinach’s thought about emphasizing researches into the thought of thought history of science through historical method ,and Duhem’s thought of science thought history deepest influenced Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy ,and become its main theoretical sources.
Koyr′e’s makes a research into scientific philosophy with a firm faith, namely,“the oneness of mankind’s thought”.According to Koyr′e, it is not imaginable for science to leave philosophy, metaphysics, indeed religion, they touch and influence each other, sometime also represent as each other’s confrontation. Koyr′e’formed the faith of“the oneness of mankind’s thought”based on his deep research into history of science thought, this faith is also proved by the historical facts of history of science thought and its key content is the thought about the mutual pervasion between religion and science. In fact, Koyr′e himself prongs the faith in his researches into history of science thought, scientific philosophy all the time. For example, in his main works the faith incarnates everywhere. So, some scholars’query about“Koyr′e having not incarnated the faith of‘the oneness of mankind’s thought’all along”is groundless.
One of the basic contents of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy is the thoughts of the essence of science and the progress of science. The problems of the essence of science and the progress of science are Logical Positivism and Falsificationism’s classical fields and also Koyr′e’s focus. Basing on sublating the science viewpoint of Logical Positivism and Falsificationism, Koyr′e gives his comprehension of the essence of science, namely, science is not to possess truth but“the trip to truth”, science is a particular method of mankind’s hunting for truth, it itself can depend on its power to correct the error;the research of scientific philosophy should take the revelation of the progres of science as its theme,the progress of science doesn’t mean that truth which is constructed unambiguously strides one-step to other unambiguous discoveries, but represents as the everlasting hunting for truth; science is progressive in the error, and developing in the failure. Therefore, it is coequally important to research the failure and the success in science.
The second basic content of Koyr′e’s thoughts of scientific philosophy is the thoughts of“thought experiment”and the revolution of science.“thought experiment”of science and the revolution of science are the most characteristic important aspects of Koyr′e’s thoughts of scientific philosophy. In Koyr′e’s opinion,“thought experiment”is an important research method of science, and is still a construction of the new thought and idea, it plays a key role in the science discovery. And the success of“thought experiment”represent as the rise of the revolution of science, the revolution of science is a far-flung course of idea transformation. Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy in the course of the change from Logic Positivism to Historicism plays a very important role.Contemporary western scientific philosophy has undergone two important changes ,thereinto, the influence of the change from Logic Positivism to Historicism is the most. There are many factors which caused the important change of Contemporary western scientific philosophy, but Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy is without fail an important factor which implements the change. Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy directly caused the growing up of Historicism.
Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy takes“the oneness of mankind’s thought”as its faith support,annotates the huge function of science and philosophy which are the two highest wisdom of mankind in science history of mankind and the mutual relation between them, fully brings forth the internal power of thought of scientific philosophy.Besides the basic characteristic,namely taking the faith of“the oneness of mankind’s thought”as its support, Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy still has two basic characteristics, namely,it is based on history of science,and emphasizes the notional analytical method. The three basic characteristics of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy make it differentiate from other thoughs of scientific philosophy definitely,and also establish its important status in the development history of scientific philosophy.The thought of the whole of science, the method of history of science thought, the thought of“thought experiment”, and the thought of the revolution of science so on in Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy have the important revelatory signification to the construction and the development of scientific philosophy ,the development and the progress of science in our country.
Still, this dissertation’s researches into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy also must be more perfected, though this dissertation makes a more systemic researches into the theoretic source, the faith basis, the basic content and the historical status, the contemporary value of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy, only refers to the main aspects of his thoughts of scientific philosophy, other aspects such as Koyr′e’s reflections on the revolution of science and“thought experiment”etc in his late years have not been deep researched, the method of his thought of scientific philosophy is less involved. These problems without question need be ceaselessly solved by us in the research for the future. This dissertation’s researches into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy is just the beginning of a tentative research. With Koyr′e’s research date continuously introduced into and the translation exact, the researches into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy will be continually rich and deep, the last research will also prove that Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy is as glamorous as his thought of history of science thought.
In the foreign academe the researches into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy were more centralized on the comparison in the research method of science history between Koyr′e and Starton,Merton,only some papers and works that were written by the scientific philosophers such as Kuhn,Lakatos,Shapin,Cohen,Feyerabend etc.came down to a part of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy, the monograph about it is few. In the domestic academe the researches into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy were also very weak, the research achievements were less. Anyway , in the foreign and domestic academes the researches into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy were neither systemic nor embedded.
This dissertation’s innovations lie in making a more systemic and embedded research into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy, concretely include some nether aspects:Ⅰthinking that Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy is rich and colorful with his thought of history of science, and it is more profound and particular comparing with the contemporary scientific philosophy on the opinions about the essence of science, the progress of science and the revolution of science etc;Ⅱhome probing into the main theoretic sources of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy and its faith basis;Ⅲmore integrally exhibiting the system of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy and thinking that Koyr′e takes“the oneness of mankind’s thought”as its faith support, takes the thought and method of thought history of science as its guidance, takes the particular viewpoints about the essence of science, the progress of science and the revolution of science as its core contents combining with the concrete historical facts of the development of science, and constructs a more self-contained thought system of scientific philosophy;Ⅳprobing into the historical status of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy and its realistic revelatory signification to our country.
This dissertation thinks that Husserl’s Philosophy of Phenomenology, Martius’s thought of philosophy, Reinach’s viewpoint of history and Duhem’s thought of thought history of science are the main theoretical sources of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy ,and“the oneness of mankind’s thought”is its main support. Koyr′e deeply researches scientific philosophy based on this faith,combining with the concrete historical facts of the development of science, and puts forward these Promethean thoughts such as science is“the trip to truth”, the progress of science represents as the everlasting hunting for truth,“thought experiment”is a construction of the new thought and idea, the revolution of science is a far-flung course of idea transformation etc about the essence of science, the progress of science and the revolution of science ctc and constructs a more self-contained thought system of scientific philosophy. Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy directly caused the change from Logic Positivism to Historicism, and have the important revelatory signification to the construction and the development of scientific philosophy ,the development and the progress of science in our country.
In the student age Koyr′e was taught by lots of the famous teachers and influenced by them, such as Hilber,Brunschvicg,Husserl,Meyerson,Martius,Reinach etc.After he entered the research realm of history of science thought, he was deeply influenced by Duhem who was the forerunner in history of science thought again. Thereinto, the theory of“life world”and the criticism to the science viewpoint of Positivism in Husserl’s Philosophy of Phenomenology, Martius’s thought about combing the Christian tradition with science thought to research the philosophical problems, Reinach’s thought about emphasizing researches into the thought of thought history of science through historical method ,and Duhem’s thought of science thought history deepest influenced Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy ,and become its main theoretical sources.
Koyr′e’s makes a research into scientific philosophy with a firm faith, namely,“the oneness of mankind’s thought”.According to Koyr′e, it is not imaginable for science to leave philosophy, metaphysics, indeed religion, they touch and influence each other, sometime also represent as each other’s confrontation. Koyr′e’formed the faith of“the oneness of mankind’s thought”based on his deep research into history of science thought, this faith is also proved by the historical facts of history of science thought and its key content is the thought about the mutual pervasion between religion and science. In fact, Koyr′e himself prongs the faith in his researches into history of science thought, scientific philosophy all the time. For example, in his main works the faith incarnates everywhere. So, some scholars’query about“Koyr′e having not incarnated the faith of‘the oneness of mankind’s thought’all along”is groundless.
One of the basic contents of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy is the thoughts of the essence of science and the progress of science. The problems of the essence of science and the progress of science are Logical Positivism and Falsificationism’s classical fields and also Koyr′e’s focus. Basing on sublating the science viewpoint of Logical Positivism and Falsificationism, Koyr′e gives his comprehension of the essence of science, namely, science is not to possess truth but“the trip to truth”, science is a particular method of mankind’s hunting for truth, it itself can depend on its power to correct the error;the research of scientific philosophy should take the revelation of the progres of science as its theme,the progress of science doesn’t mean that truth which is constructed unambiguously strides one-step to other unambiguous discoveries, but represents as the everlasting hunting for truth; science is progressive in the error, and developing in the failure. Therefore, it is coequally important to research the failure and the success in science.
The second basic content of Koyr′e’s thoughts of scientific philosophy is the thoughts of“thought experiment”and the revolution of science.“thought experiment”of science and the revolution of science are the most characteristic important aspects of Koyr′e’s thoughts of scientific philosophy. In Koyr′e’s opinion,“thought experiment”is an important research method of science, and is still a construction of the new thought and idea, it plays a key role in the science discovery. And the success of“thought experiment”represent as the rise of the revolution of science, the revolution of science is a far-flung course of idea transformation. Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy in the course of the change from Logic Positivism to Historicism plays a very important role.Contemporary western scientific philosophy has undergone two important changes ,thereinto, the influence of the change from Logic Positivism to Historicism is the most. There are many factors which caused the important change of Contemporary western scientific philosophy, but Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy is without fail an important factor which implements the change. Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy directly caused the growing up of Historicism.
Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy takes“the oneness of mankind’s thought”as its faith support,annotates the huge function of science and philosophy which are the two highest wisdom of mankind in science history of mankind and the mutual relation between them, fully brings forth the internal power of thought of scientific philosophy.Besides the basic characteristic,namely taking the faith of“the oneness of mankind’s thought”as its support, Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy still has two basic characteristics, namely,it is based on history of science,and emphasizes the notional analytical method. The three basic characteristics of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy make it differentiate from other thoughs of scientific philosophy definitely,and also establish its important status in the development history of scientific philosophy.The thought of the whole of science, the method of history of science thought, the thought of“thought experiment”, and the thought of the revolution of science so on in Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy have the important revelatory signification to the construction and the development of scientific philosophy ,the development and the progress of science in our country.
Still, this dissertation’s researches into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy also must be more perfected, though this dissertation makes a more systemic researches into the theoretic source, the faith basis, the basic content and the historical status, the contemporary value of Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy, only refers to the main aspects of his thoughts of scientific philosophy, other aspects such as Koyr′e’s reflections on the revolution of science and“thought experiment”etc in his late years have not been deep researched, the method of his thought of scientific philosophy is less involved. These problems without question need be ceaselessly solved by us in the research for the future. This dissertation’s researches into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy is just the beginning of a tentative research. With Koyr′e’s research date continuously introduced into and the translation exact, the researches into Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy will be continually rich and deep, the last research will also prove that Koyr′e’s thought of scientific philosophy is as glamorous as his thought of history of science thought.
引文
[1]袁江洋.柯瓦雷:描绘人类思想的统一画卷[N],中华读书报,2005-11-19.
[2]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学版社,2003: 2.
[3]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:1.
[1]转引自范莉·魏屹东.西方科学思想史哲学建构的成功范例[J].科学技术与辩证法.2007,2:88.
[2]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版,2003:2.
[3]Husserliana,BD,VI,1976,317.
[4]埃德蒙德·胡塞尔.经验与判断[M].(邓晓芒等译),北京:三联书店,1999:59.
[5]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:17.
[6]转引自山郁林.简论胡塞尔对柯瓦雷科学史篇史的影响[J].科学·经济·社会2006,1:80.
[7]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:4.
[8]埃德蒙德·胡塞尔.现象学与哲学的危机[M].(吕祥译),北京:国际文化出版公司,1988:174.
[9]转引自山郁林.简论胡塞尔对柯瓦雷科学史篇史的影响[J].科学·经济·社会2006,1:80.
[10]同上2006,1:80.
[11]埃德蒙德·胡塞尔.欧洲科学危机和超验现象学[M].(张庆熊译),上海:上海译文出版社,2005:7-8.
[12]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:17.
[13]埃德蒙德·胡塞尔.欧洲科学危机和超验现象学[M].(张庆熊译),上海:上海译文出版社,2005:7.
[14]同上2005:11.
[15]同上2005:12.
[16]同上2005:12.
[17]张庆熊.欧洲科学危机和超验现象学[M]. (译者的话),上海:上海译文出版社,2005:10.
[18]埃德蒙德·胡塞尔.欧洲科学危机和超验现象学[M].(张庆熊译),上海:上海译文出版社,2005:16.
[19]范莉?魏屹东.柯瓦雷与库恩科学观的哲学反思[J].山西大学学报.2007,6:21.
[20]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与规划[J].(孙永平译),1973,1.1.原载Etudes d’nistoire de la Pensee scientifigue,paris,1973.
[21]同上1973,1.
[22]Jorland(1981),P,28,original in English,partlally Yeproduced in spiegelberg(1960),p225.
[23]转引自范莉·魏屹东.西方科学思想史哲学建构的成功范例[J].科学技术与辩证法.2007,2:89.
[24]李创同.科学哲学思想的流变[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2006:65.
[25]Duhem:The Aim and structure of Physical Theory,(trans)by Philip Wiener,Princeton university Pass,1982,p.1.
[26]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:3.
[27]同上2002:6.
[28]同上2002:6
[1]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与规划[J].(孙永平译),1973,1.原载Etudes d’histoire de la pensee scientifique,Paris,1973.
[2]同上1973,1.
[3]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[4]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:202.
[5]同上2002:170.
[6]同上2002:171.
[7]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:63.
[8]同上2003:64.
[9]同上2003:65.
[10]同上2003:67.
[11]同上2003:67.
[12]同上2003:111.
[13]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:1-2.
[14]同上2003:2.
[15]同上2003:6.
[16]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:10.
[17]同上2003:11.
[18]同上2003:24-25.
[19]同上2003:30.
[20]同上2003:32.
[21]同上2003:226.
[22]柯巴.科学革命与上帝之死[J].科学与民主.2007,3:3.
[23]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:17.
[24]转引自林成滔.科学简史[M].北京:中国友谊出版公司,2004:266.
[25]同上2004: 266.
[26]刘魁.当代科学与宗教关系研究述评[J].国外社会科学.2000,5:35.
[27]杜红燕.科学与宗教关系五论[J].世界宗教文化.2003,2:7.
[28]丹皮尔.科学史与哲学和宗教的关系[M].北京:商务印书馆,1997:109.
[29]恩格斯.自然辩证法[M].北京:人民出版社,1984:305.
[30]丹皮尔.科学史与哲学和宗教的关系[M].北京:商务印书馆,1997:12.
[31]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与规划[J].(孙永平译),1973,2.原载Etudes d’histoire de la pensee scientifique,Paris,1973.
[32]菲利普·弗兰克.科学的哲学──科学和哲学之间的纽带[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1985:55.
[33]袁江洋.柯瓦雷:描绘人类思想的统一画卷[N].中华读书报,2005-1-19.
[34]丹皮尔.科学史[M].南宁:广西大学出版社,2001:173.
[35]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:317.
[36]转引自袁江洋.牛顿炼金术:高贵的哲学?[J].自然科学史研究,2004,23:291.
[37]同上2004,23:286.
[38]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:317.
[39]转引自袁江洋.牛顿炼金术:高贵的哲学?[J].自然科学史研究.2004,23:284.
[40]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:23.
[1]转引自袁伟新.简论科学的本质观的类型与特征[J].科学技术与辩证法.2006,1:18.
[2]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[3]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:14.
[4]同上2003:24.
[5]同上2003:48-49.
[6]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:34.
[7]同上2003:35.
[8]同上2003:35.
[9]同上2003:1.
[10]同上2003:70.
[11]孔德.实证哲学概观[M].北京:商务印书馆,1938:25.
[12]西方现代资产阶级哲学著作选辑[M].北京:商务印书馆,1964:30.
[13]洪谦主编.逻辑经验主义[M].北京:商务印书馆,1989:69.
[14]同上1989: 31.
[15]拉卡托斯.科学研究纲领方法论[M].北京:商务印书馆,1992:31.
[16]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:62.
[17]同上2002:64.
[18]同上2002:77.
[19]同上2002:80.
[20]同上2002:81.
[21]同上2002:90.
[22]同上2002:60.
[23]同上2002:130.
[24]同上2002:130.
[25]同上2002:3.
[26]同上2002:64.
[27]同上2002:72.
[28]同上2002:76-77.
[29]同上2002:80.
[30]同上2002:83.
[31]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:300.
[32]同上2003:297.
[33]同上2003:41.
[34]同上2003:42.
[35]转引自林成滔.科学简史[M].北京:中国友谊出版公司,2004:221.
[36]爱因斯坦、英费尔德.物理学的进化[M].湖南教育出版社,1999:185.
[1]R Hareed.The science,their origin and Metheod.Glasgow,Beackie,1976,145 .
[2]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002: 8.
[3]吴国盛.反思科学[M].北京:新世界出版社,2004:57.
[4]爱因斯坦文集(第一卷)[M].(许良英、范岱年译),北京:商务印书馆,1976: 211.
[5]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与规划[J].(孙永平译),原载Etudes d’histoire de la pensee scientifique,Paris,1973.
[6]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M]. (张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:1.
[7]转引自范莉、魏屹东.西方科学思想史哲学建构的成功范例[J].科学技术与辩证法.2007,2:87.
[8]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:55.
[9]同上2002: 42.
[10]同上2002: 52.
[11]同上2002: 52.
[12]同上2002: 55.
[13]同上2002: 206.
[14]吴国盛.反思科学[M].北京:新世界出版社,2004:51.
[15]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:3.
[16]托马斯·库恩.必要的张力[M]. (范岱年、纪树立译),北京:北京大学出版社,2004:236.
[17]同上2002:239.
[18]史蒂文·夏平.科学革命──批判性的综合[M]. (徐国强等译),上海:上海科技教育出版社,2004:2.
[19]科恩.科学革命史[M].军事科学出版社,1992:28.
[20]转引自李创同.科学哲学思想的流变[M].高等教育出版社,2006:80.
[21]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M]. (张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[22]同上2003: 3.
[23]转引自蔡贤浩.试论柯瓦雷的科学史观[J].长江大学学报,2005,2:72.
[24]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M]. (张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[25]吴国盛.反思科学[M].北京:新世界出版社,2004: 112.
[26]转引自蔡贤浩.试论柯瓦雷的科学史观[J].长江大学学报,2005,2:73.
[27]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:6.
[28]刘钝、王扬宗主编.中国科学与科学革命──李约瑟难题及其相关问题研究论著选[M].沈阳:辽宁教育出版社,2002:812-813.
[29]同上2002:813-814.
[30]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:5.
[31]同上2003:6.
[32]范莉、魏屹东.语境分析方法在科学史研究中的作用[J].自然辩证法通讯,2007,4:58-59.
[33]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M]. (张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:3.
[34]同上2003:3.
[35]范莉、魏屹东.语境分析方法在科学史研究中的作用[J].自然辩证法通讯,2007,4:59.
[1]转自舒伟光、邱仁宗.当代西方科学哲学评述(第二版)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007:33.
[2]洪谦.纳也纳学派哲学[M].北京:商务印书馆,1989:27.
[3]同上1989: 9.
[4]孟建伟.从科学主义走向后现代主义——当代西方哲学的命运[J].自然辩证法研究.1996,2:98.
[5]劳丹.分界问题的消逝[J].自然哲学问题.1988,3:20.
[6]胡塞尔.欧洲科学危机和超验现象学[M].(张庆熊译),上海:上海译文出版社,2005:5.
[7]同上2005:12.
[8]柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与计划[J].(孙永平译),原载Etudesd histore de la pensee scientifique ,paris,1973.
[9]卡尔纳普.通过语言的逻辑分析清除形而上学[M].北京:商务印书馆,1984:32.
[10]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:4.
[11]同上2002: 163.
[12]库恩.必要的张力[M].(范岱年等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2004:111.
[13]袁江洋.柯瓦雷:描绘人类思想的统一画卷,中华读书报[N].2005-11-19.
[14]见网络“逸仙时空”Yat-sen Channel (Sat Jun 24 12:58:33 2000).
[15]转引自范莉、魏屹东.语境分析方法在科学史研究中的应用[J].自然辩证法通讯.2007,4:61.
[16]库恩.科学革命的结构[M].(金吾仑等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[17]同上2003:3.
[18]同上2003:3.
[19]B.拉尔沃.库恩的<科学革命的结构>为什么会引起惊异?[J].(刘刚译),原载:Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 34(2003).369—370.
[20]柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与计划[J].(孙永平译),原载Etudesd histore de la pensee scientifique ,paris,1973.
[21]B.拉尔沃.库恩的<科学革命的结构>为什么会引起惊异?[J].(刘刚译),原载:Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 34(2003).368.
[22]库恩.科学革命的结构[M].(金吾仑等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[23]李创同.科学哲学思想的流变[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2006:79.
[24]库恩.哥白尼革命[M].(吴国盛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:1.
[25]同上2003:1.
[26]同上2003:131.
[27]库恩.科学革命的结构[M].(金吾仑等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[28]库恩.哥白尼革命[M].(吴国盛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:93.
[29]库恩.必要的张力[M].(范岱年等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2004:236.
[30]库恩.哥白尼革命[M].(吴国盛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:1.
[31]同上2003:4.
[1]舒伟光、邱仁宗.当代西方科学哲学评述(第二版)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007:30.
[2]波普尔.无穷的探索[M].福州:福建人民出版社,1984:139.
[3]库恩.必要的张力[M].(纪树立等译),福州:福建人民出版社,1981:12.
[4]转引自袁江洋:http://www.ihns.ac.cn/members/liud/doc/ldjy.htm
[5]舒伟光、邱仁宗.当代西方科学哲学评述(第二版)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007:4.
[6]吴国盛.让科学回归人文[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2003:226.
[7]同上2003:227.
[8]诸大建.科学革命研究的十个问题[J].科学技术与辩证法.1997,6:1.
[9]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:270.
[10]同上2003:7.
[11]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:1.
[12]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:70.
[1]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].南昌:江西教育出版社,2002.
[2]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003.
[3]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003.
[4]赫尔奇·克拉夫.科学史导论北[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[5]爱德文·阿瑟·伯特.近代物理科学的形而上学基础[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003.
[6]托马斯·库恩.哥白尼革命[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003.
[8]托马斯·库恩.必要的张力[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
[9]欧内斯特·内格尔.科学的结构[M].上海:上海译文出版社,2002.
[10]史蒂文·夏平.科学革命——批判性的综合[M].上海:上海科技教育出版社,2004.
[11]埃德蒙德·胡塞尔.欧洲科学危机和超验现象学[M].上海:上海译文出版社,2005.
[12]海德格尔.海德格尔选集(下)[M].上海:生活·读书·新知上海三联书店,1996.
[13]海德格尔.演讲与论文集[M].上海:生活·读书·新知上海三联书店,2005.
[14]瓦托夫斯基.科学思想的概念基础——科学哲学导论[M].北京:求实出版社,1982.
[15]拉卡托斯.科学研究纲领方法论[M].北京:商务印书馆,1992.
[16]保罗·费耶阿本德.告别理性[M].南京:江苏人民出版,2002.
[17]保罗·费耶阿本德.知识、科学与相对主义[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2006.
[18]保罗·费耶阿本德.自由社会中的科学[M].上海:上海译文出版社,1990.
[19]弗里德里希·A·哈耶克.科学的反革命[M].南京:译林出版社,2003.
[20]汉斯·波塞尔.科学:什么是科学[M].上海:上海三联书店,2002.
[21]柯林武德.自然的观念[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2006.
[22]亚历克斯·罗森堡.科学哲学[M].上海:上海科技教育出版社,2004.
[23]H·赖欣巴哈.科学哲学的兴起[M].北京:商务印书馆,1984.
[24]R·H·默顿.十七世纪英国科学、技术与社会[M].北京:人民出版社,1987.
[25]R·霍伊卡.宗教与现代科学的兴起[M].成都:四川人民出版社,1991.
[26]约翰·H·布鲁克.科学与宗教[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2000.
[27]W·C·丹皮尔.科学史[M].桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2001.
[28]安德鲁·芬伯格.可选择的现代性[M].北京:中国社会科学出版,2003.
[29]亚·沃尔夫.十六十七世纪科学、技术和哲学史[M].北京:商务印书馆,1985.
[30]I·伯纳德·科恩.科学革命史普及[M].北京:科学出版社,1992.
[31]怀特海.科学与近代世界[M].北京:商务印书馆,1959.
[32]贝尔纳.科学的社会功能[M].北京:商务印书馆,1982.
[33]贝尔纳.历史上的科学[M].北京:科学出版社,1959.
[34]丹皮尔.科学史[M].北京:商务印书馆,1975.
[35]艾耶尔.语言、真理与逻辑[M].上海:上海译文出版社,1981.
[36]查尔默斯.科学究竟是什么[M].北京:商务印书馆,1982.
[37]戈兰.科学与反科学[M].北京:中国国际广播出版社,1988.
[38]弗兰克.科学的哲学——科学与哲学之间的纽带[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1985.
[39]拉卡托斯.批判与知识的增长[M].北京:华夏出版社,1987.
[40]科恩.当代哲学思潮比较研究[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,1988.
[41]齐曼.真科学[M].上海:上海科技教育出版社,2002.
[42]哈耶克.经济、科学与政治[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2000.
[43]劳丹.进步及其问题[M].北京:华夏出版社,1999.
[44]皮尔逊.科学的规范[M].北京:华夏出版社,1999.
[45]怀特海.思想方式[M].北京:华夏出版社,1999.
[46]波普尔.开放社会及其敌人[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1999.
[47]波普尔.二十世纪的教训[M].桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2004.
[48]罗素.西方的智慧[M].北京:文化美术出版社,1997.
[49]孔德.论实证精神[M].北京:商务印书馆,1996.
[50]沃克迈斯特.科学的哲学[M].北京:商务印书馆,1996.
[51]罗森堡.科学哲学[M].上海:上海科技教育出版社,2004.
[52]格里芬编.后现代科学——科学魅力的再现[M].北京:中央编译出版社,1995.
[53]萨顿.科学的历史研究[M].北京:科学出版社,1990.
[54]萨顿.科学史和新人文主义[M].北京:华夏出版社,1989.
[55]萨顿.科学的生命[M].北京:商务印书馆,1987.
[56]里吉斯.科学也疯狂[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,1994.
[57]维科.新科学[M].北京:商务印书馆,1989.
[58]桑迪拉纳编著.冒险的时代——文艺复兴时期的哲学家[M].北京:光明日报出版社,1989.
[59]伽达默尔.科学时代的理性[M].北京:国际文化出版公司,1988.
[60]拉德纳.科学与谬误[M].上海:生活·读书·新知上海三联书店,1987.
[61]罗素.宗教与科学[M].北京:商务印书馆,1999.
[62]卢梭.论科学与艺术[M].北京:商务印书馆,1963.
[63]培根.新工具[M].北京:商务印书馆,1981.
[64]波珀.科学发现的逻辑[M].北京:科学出版社,1986.
[65]普特南.理性、真理与历史[M].沈阳:辽宁教育出版社,1988.
[66]邦格.科学的唯物主义[M].上海:上海译文出版社,1989.
[67]莫泽克.论科学[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1997.
[68]约翰·西克.上帝与信仰的世界[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.
[69]罗杰·G·牛顿.何为科学真理——月亮在无人看时是否在那儿[M].上海:上海科技教育出版社,2001.
[70]戴维·林德伯格.西方科学的起源[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,2001.
[71]王天成.直觉与逻辑[M].长春:长春出版社,2000.
[72]江天骥.当代西方科学哲学[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1984.
[73]夏基松.现代西方哲学教程[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1985.
[74]林定夷.科学研究方法论[M].杭州:浙江人民出版社,1986.
[75]周昌忠.西方科学方法论史[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1986.
[76]黄顺基、刘大椿.科学的哲学反思[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1987.
[77]舒炜光、邱仁宗主编.当代西方科学哲学述评(第二版)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007.
[78]舒炜光主编.科学认识论[M].长春:吉林人民出版社,1990.
[79]洪谦主编.逻辑经验主义[M].北京:商务印书馆,1989.
[80]洪谦.维也纳学派哲学[M].北京:商务印书馆,1989.
[81]李克特.科学是一种文化过程[M].北京:三联书店,1989.
[82]李创同.科学哲学思想的流变[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2006.
[83]江天骥主编.科学哲学与科学方法论[M].北京:华夏出版社,1990.
[84]孙小礼.科学方法论史纲[M].北京:北京出版社,1988.
[85]姚大志.现代之后[M].北京:东方出版社,2000.
[86]王大珩、于光远.论科学精神[M].北京:中央编译出版社,2001.
[87]郭贵春.当代科学实在论[M].北京:科学出版社,1991.
[88]刘放桐等编.现代西方哲学[M].北京:人民出版社,1991.
[89]黄顺基等编.科学技术哲学引论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1991.
[90]王岳川.后现代主义文化研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1992.
[91]肖峰.科学精神与人文精神[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1994.
[92]张华夏、叶侨健编著.现代自然科学与科学哲学[M].广州:中山大学出版社,1996.
[93]陈嘉映.哲学科学常识[M].北京:东方出版社,2007.
[94]陈健.科学划界——论科学与非科学及伪科学的区分[M].北京:东方出版社,1997.
[95]孙正聿.哲学通论[M].沈阳:辽宁人民出版社,1998.
[96]孙正聿.哲学导论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2000.
[97]孙正聿.思想中的时代[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
[98]邹铁军等.现代西方哲学[M].长春:吉林大学出版社,2001.
[99]周昌忠.西方科学的文化精神[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1995.
[100]郑福祥等.科学的精神[M].上海:上海三联书店,2001.
[101]林德宏.科技哲学十五讲[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
[102]吴国盛.科学的历程(第二版)[M].北京:北京大学出版,2002.
[103]吴国盛.追思自然[M].沈阳:辽海出版社,1998.
[104]吴国盛.现代化之忧思[M].北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1999.
[105]吴国盛.反思科学[M].北京:新世界出版社,2004.
[106]吴国盛.让科学回归人文[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2003.
[107]吴国盛.科学思想史指南[M].成都:四川教育出版社,1994.
[108]张之沧.科学哲学导论[M].北京:人民出版社,2004.
[109]王巍.科学哲学问题研究[M].北京:清华大学出版,2004.
[110]杨庆峰.技术现象学初探[M].上海:上海三联学术文库,2005.
[111]李建华.科学哲学[M].北京:中共中央党校出版社,2004.
[112]刘大椿.科学哲学通论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1998.
[113]刘大椿.科学哲学[M].北京:人民出版社,1998.
[114]林成滔.科学简史中[M].北京:国友谊出版公司,2004.
[115]钱时惕.科学与宗教——关系及其历史演变[M].北京:人民出版社,2002.
[116]章士荣.科学发现的逻辑[M].北京:人民出版社,1986.
[117]樊洪业.科学业绩的辨伪[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1982.
[118]赵鑫珊.科学·艺术·哲学断想[M].北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1985.
[1]柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与计划[J]. (孙永平译),原载Etudes d’histoire de la Pensee scientifique,Paris,1973,1:1-3.
[2]倪梁康.现象学的动态意向分析及其问题[J].江苏社会科学.2004,1:80-86.
[3]江晓原.到底有没有科学革命[J].上海交通大学学报.2003,2:16-17.
[4]袁江洋.牛顿炼金术手稿的历史境遇[J].自然辩证法通讯.1990,2:56-61.
[5]袁江洋、王迪克.论牛顿的宇宙论思想[J].自然辩证法通讯.2001,5:26-29.
[6]袁江洋.探索自然与颂扬上帝:波义耳的自然哲学与自然神学思想[J].自然辩证法通讯.1991,6:34-42.
[7]袁江洋.牛顿炼金术:高贵的哲学?[J].自然科学史研究.2004.4:283-298.
[8]袁江洋.“自然哲学之数学原理”‘总释’的史境诠释[J].华中师范大学学报.1994,1:133-137.
[9]王天成.感知、想象力与本质直观[J].长白学刊.2003.1:45-48.
[10]王天成.黑格尔概念辩证法中个体生命原则[J].天津社会科学.2005,2:19-22.
[11]王天成.辩证法的三种形态[J].社会科学战线.2007,7:28-33.
[12]刘魁.当代科学与宗教关系研究述评[J].国外社会科学.2004,4:32-37.
[13]王云霞、李建珊.试论库恩科学史观[J].北京理工大学学报.2007,2:92-95.
[14]刘魁.揭开牛顿的异端神学与科学研究之谜[J].南京理工大学学报.2004,3:5-9.
[15]胡海波.科学的创造精神与科学的批判精神——波普尔科学发展模式理论解读[J].学术交流.2006,6:25-27.
[16]刘凤朝.科学史的层次划分及其编史学意义[J].自然辩证法研究.2002,1:152.
[17]刘凤朝.历史主义学派对科学编史学的贡献[J].自然辩证法通讯.2003,2:63-66.
[18]曹志平.科学与宗教关系的三个层次[J].自然辩证法研究.2002,10:62-65.
[20]E·D·克雷克.科学的本质[J].世界哲学.1982,6:37-40.
[21]刘晓峰.试析伽利略运用数学工具研究自然的原因[J].自然辩证法研究.1999,4:4-8.
[22]诸大建.科学革命研究的十个问题[J].科学技术与辩证法.1997,6:1-6.
[23]李醒民.略论迪昂的编史学纲领[J].自然辩证法通讯. 1997,2:38-46.
[24]李醒民.迪昂科学成就与哲学思想[J].哲学动态.1999,1:42-45.
[25]李醒民.评库恩的科学史观[J].大自然探索.1991,2:119-126.
[26]戴建平.略论胡塞尔的科学哲学思想[J].科学技术与辩证法.2005,1:51-54.
[27]顾速.评关于科学进步的三种主要观点[J].自然辩证法通讯.1994,6:1-9.
[28]胡光.科学理论发展模式的理性反思[J].大连理工大学学报.2003,2:42-46.
[29]李春泰.貌合神离的哥白尼与伽利略[J].自然辩证法研究.1992,6:31-39.
[30]李春泰.从必然性退却——波普的无逻辑可能世界[J].自然辩证法研究.2003,10:33-36.
[31]鲁兴启.科学革命:类型与本质[J].学术探索.2003,专辑,112-116.
[32]何兵.科学与人的此在——从库恩与海德格尔的科学观变革来看[J].自然辩证法研究.2005,10:55-58.
[33]J·厄尔曼.评库恩的科学进步观[J].世界哲学.1982,6:25-28.
[34]炎冰.20世纪科学进步问题研究的回顾与思考[J].扬州大学学报.1999,2:5-9.
[35]古祖雪、周视文.科学与宗教[J].衡阳师范学院学报,2005,1:1-5.
[36]周德海.科学革命是科学世界观的根本变革——爱因斯坦科学革命思想述评[J].自然辩证法研究.1996,10:14-17.
[37]毛健儒.牛顿的宗教观对他科学工作的影响[J].晋阳学刊.1995,4:56-58.
[38]李恒威.“生活世界”和胡塞尔的科学观[J].杭州师范学院学报.2004,3:23-27.
[39]洪晓楠、田甜.胡塞尔科学哲学思想评析[J].科学技术与辩证法.2007,3:45-48.
[40]艾战胜.科学革命的本质:科恩与库恩的比较[J].自然辩证法研究.2008,4:86-90.
[41]袁维新.简论科学本质观的类型与特征[J].科学技术与辩证法.2006,1:17-20.
[42]魏屹东.科学史研究的语境分析方法[J].科学技术与辩证法.2002,5:22-25.
[43]范莉、魏屹东.柯瓦雷与库恩科学观的哲学反思[J].山西大学学报.2007,6:20-24.
[44] B.拉尔沃.库恩的<科学革命的结构>为什么会引起惊异?[J].(刘刚译),原载:Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 34(2003).
[45]李三虎.当代建构主义研究述评[J].国外社会科学.1997,5:11-16.
[46]张玉平.关于建构主义的几个问题[J].现代教育科学.2004,6:39-41.
[47]金俊岐、胡笑雨.建构主义视野中的科学史[J].自然辩证法研究.2003,5:56-60.
[48]曹继东.现象学的技术哲学[J].中国知网.2006,10:7-8.
[49]王凤杰.库恩科学哲学思想评析[J].湘潭工学院学报.2002,3:25-28.
[50]山郁林.简论胡塞尔对柯瓦雷科学史篇史的影响[J].科学·经济·社会2006,1:77-80.
[51]王大明.关于科学进步问题的三个层次[J].汉中师院学报.1994,3:10-15.
[52]张立英.论失败的科学革命[J].自然辩证法研究.2003,9:45-49.
[1]袁江洋.柯瓦雷:描绘人类思想的统一画卷[N].中华读书报.2005-11-19.
[2]江晓原.哥白尼靠什么革命?——关于库恩的“哥白尼靠什么革命”[N].光明日报.2003-02-13.
[3]陈克艰.人类历史上科学的发生不是必然而是个“异数”[N].2005-03-31.
[1]Kuhn T.The Essential Tension.Chicago:university of Chicago Press,1977.
[2]Canguilhem.Ideology and Rationality in the History of the Life Sciences. The MIT Press, 1988.
[3]Lakatos.The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes .Cambridge University Press, 1978.
[4]Alistair C.Crombie.Alexandre Koyr′e and Great Britain :Galileo and Mersenne.History and Techology,1987(4).
[5]Gutting.French Philosophy in the twentith Century. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
[6]A.Rupert hall Alexandre Koyr′e and the scientific revolution. History and Techology,1987(4).
[7]T·S·Kuhn.The road since structure. Cambridge:The University of Cambridge Press, 2000.
[8]P.Thagard,computational Philosophy of Science.The MIT Press, 1988.
[9]D.Gillies,Philosophy of Science in the Twentieth Century,Blackwell Publishers,1993.
[10]T·S·Kuhn.The Interpretive Turn.New York: Philosophy Science Culture Cornell University press,1991.
[11]Couvalis G.The Philosophy of Science: Science and Objectivity.London:Sage,1997.
[2]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学版社,2003: 2.
[3]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:1.
[1]转引自范莉·魏屹东.西方科学思想史哲学建构的成功范例[J].科学技术与辩证法.2007,2:88.
[2]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版,2003:2.
[3]Husserliana,BD,VI,1976,317.
[4]埃德蒙德·胡塞尔.经验与判断[M].(邓晓芒等译),北京:三联书店,1999:59.
[5]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:17.
[6]转引自山郁林.简论胡塞尔对柯瓦雷科学史篇史的影响[J].科学·经济·社会2006,1:80.
[7]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:4.
[8]埃德蒙德·胡塞尔.现象学与哲学的危机[M].(吕祥译),北京:国际文化出版公司,1988:174.
[9]转引自山郁林.简论胡塞尔对柯瓦雷科学史篇史的影响[J].科学·经济·社会2006,1:80.
[10]同上2006,1:80.
[11]埃德蒙德·胡塞尔.欧洲科学危机和超验现象学[M].(张庆熊译),上海:上海译文出版社,2005:7-8.
[12]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:17.
[13]埃德蒙德·胡塞尔.欧洲科学危机和超验现象学[M].(张庆熊译),上海:上海译文出版社,2005:7.
[14]同上2005:11.
[15]同上2005:12.
[16]同上2005:12.
[17]张庆熊.欧洲科学危机和超验现象学[M]. (译者的话),上海:上海译文出版社,2005:10.
[18]埃德蒙德·胡塞尔.欧洲科学危机和超验现象学[M].(张庆熊译),上海:上海译文出版社,2005:16.
[19]范莉?魏屹东.柯瓦雷与库恩科学观的哲学反思[J].山西大学学报.2007,6:21.
[20]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与规划[J].(孙永平译),1973,1.1.原载Etudes d’nistoire de la Pensee scientifigue,paris,1973.
[21]同上1973,1.
[22]Jorland(1981),P,28,original in English,partlally Yeproduced in spiegelberg(1960),p225.
[23]转引自范莉·魏屹东.西方科学思想史哲学建构的成功范例[J].科学技术与辩证法.2007,2:89.
[24]李创同.科学哲学思想的流变[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2006:65.
[25]Duhem:The Aim and structure of Physical Theory,(trans)by Philip Wiener,Princeton university Pass,1982,p.1.
[26]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:3.
[27]同上2002:6.
[28]同上2002:6
[1]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与规划[J].(孙永平译),1973,1.原载Etudes d’histoire de la pensee scientifique,Paris,1973.
[2]同上1973,1.
[3]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[4]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:202.
[5]同上2002:170.
[6]同上2002:171.
[7]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:63.
[8]同上2003:64.
[9]同上2003:65.
[10]同上2003:67.
[11]同上2003:67.
[12]同上2003:111.
[13]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:1-2.
[14]同上2003:2.
[15]同上2003:6.
[16]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:10.
[17]同上2003:11.
[18]同上2003:24-25.
[19]同上2003:30.
[20]同上2003:32.
[21]同上2003:226.
[22]柯巴.科学革命与上帝之死[J].科学与民主.2007,3:3.
[23]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:17.
[24]转引自林成滔.科学简史[M].北京:中国友谊出版公司,2004:266.
[25]同上2004: 266.
[26]刘魁.当代科学与宗教关系研究述评[J].国外社会科学.2000,5:35.
[27]杜红燕.科学与宗教关系五论[J].世界宗教文化.2003,2:7.
[28]丹皮尔.科学史与哲学和宗教的关系[M].北京:商务印书馆,1997:109.
[29]恩格斯.自然辩证法[M].北京:人民出版社,1984:305.
[30]丹皮尔.科学史与哲学和宗教的关系[M].北京:商务印书馆,1997:12.
[31]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与规划[J].(孙永平译),1973,2.原载Etudes d’histoire de la pensee scientifique,Paris,1973.
[32]菲利普·弗兰克.科学的哲学──科学和哲学之间的纽带[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1985:55.
[33]袁江洋.柯瓦雷:描绘人类思想的统一画卷[N].中华读书报,2005-1-19.
[34]丹皮尔.科学史[M].南宁:广西大学出版社,2001:173.
[35]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:317.
[36]转引自袁江洋.牛顿炼金术:高贵的哲学?[J].自然科学史研究,2004,23:291.
[37]同上2004,23:286.
[38]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:317.
[39]转引自袁江洋.牛顿炼金术:高贵的哲学?[J].自然科学史研究.2004,23:284.
[40]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:23.
[1]转引自袁伟新.简论科学的本质观的类型与特征[J].科学技术与辩证法.2006,1:18.
[2]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[3]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:14.
[4]同上2003:24.
[5]同上2003:48-49.
[6]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:34.
[7]同上2003:35.
[8]同上2003:35.
[9]同上2003:1.
[10]同上2003:70.
[11]孔德.实证哲学概观[M].北京:商务印书馆,1938:25.
[12]西方现代资产阶级哲学著作选辑[M].北京:商务印书馆,1964:30.
[13]洪谦主编.逻辑经验主义[M].北京:商务印书馆,1989:69.
[14]同上1989: 31.
[15]拉卡托斯.科学研究纲领方法论[M].北京:商务印书馆,1992:31.
[16]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:62.
[17]同上2002:64.
[18]同上2002:77.
[19]同上2002:80.
[20]同上2002:81.
[21]同上2002:90.
[22]同上2002:60.
[23]同上2002:130.
[24]同上2002:130.
[25]同上2002:3.
[26]同上2002:64.
[27]同上2002:72.
[28]同上2002:76-77.
[29]同上2002:80.
[30]同上2002:83.
[31]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:300.
[32]同上2003:297.
[33]同上2003:41.
[34]同上2003:42.
[35]转引自林成滔.科学简史[M].北京:中国友谊出版公司,2004:221.
[36]爱因斯坦、英费尔德.物理学的进化[M].湖南教育出版社,1999:185.
[1]R Hareed.The science,their origin and Metheod.Glasgow,Beackie,1976,145 .
[2]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002: 8.
[3]吴国盛.反思科学[M].北京:新世界出版社,2004:57.
[4]爱因斯坦文集(第一卷)[M].(许良英、范岱年译),北京:商务印书馆,1976: 211.
[5]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与规划[J].(孙永平译),原载Etudes d’histoire de la pensee scientifique,Paris,1973.
[6]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M]. (张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:1.
[7]转引自范莉、魏屹东.西方科学思想史哲学建构的成功范例[J].科学技术与辩证法.2007,2:87.
[8]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:55.
[9]同上2002: 42.
[10]同上2002: 52.
[11]同上2002: 52.
[12]同上2002: 55.
[13]同上2002: 206.
[14]吴国盛.反思科学[M].北京:新世界出版社,2004:51.
[15]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:3.
[16]托马斯·库恩.必要的张力[M]. (范岱年、纪树立译),北京:北京大学出版社,2004:236.
[17]同上2002:239.
[18]史蒂文·夏平.科学革命──批判性的综合[M]. (徐国强等译),上海:上海科技教育出版社,2004:2.
[19]科恩.科学革命史[M].军事科学出版社,1992:28.
[20]转引自李创同.科学哲学思想的流变[M].高等教育出版社,2006:80.
[21]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M]. (张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[22]同上2003: 3.
[23]转引自蔡贤浩.试论柯瓦雷的科学史观[J].长江大学学报,2005,2:72.
[24]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M]. (张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[25]吴国盛.反思科学[M].北京:新世界出版社,2004: 112.
[26]转引自蔡贤浩.试论柯瓦雷的科学史观[J].长江大学学报,2005,2:73.
[27]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:6.
[28]刘钝、王扬宗主编.中国科学与科学革命──李约瑟难题及其相关问题研究论著选[M].沈阳:辽宁教育出版社,2002:812-813.
[29]同上2002:813-814.
[30]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:5.
[31]同上2003:6.
[32]范莉、魏屹东.语境分析方法在科学史研究中的作用[J].自然辩证法通讯,2007,4:58-59.
[33]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M]. (张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:3.
[34]同上2003:3.
[35]范莉、魏屹东.语境分析方法在科学史研究中的作用[J].自然辩证法通讯,2007,4:59.
[1]转自舒伟光、邱仁宗.当代西方科学哲学评述(第二版)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007:33.
[2]洪谦.纳也纳学派哲学[M].北京:商务印书馆,1989:27.
[3]同上1989: 9.
[4]孟建伟.从科学主义走向后现代主义——当代西方哲学的命运[J].自然辩证法研究.1996,2:98.
[5]劳丹.分界问题的消逝[J].自然哲学问题.1988,3:20.
[6]胡塞尔.欧洲科学危机和超验现象学[M].(张庆熊译),上海:上海译文出版社,2005:5.
[7]同上2005:12.
[8]柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与计划[J].(孙永平译),原载Etudesd histore de la pensee scientifique ,paris,1973.
[9]卡尔纳普.通过语言的逻辑分析清除形而上学[M].北京:商务印书馆,1984:32.
[10]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].(李艳平等译),南昌:江西教育出版社,2002:4.
[11]同上2002: 163.
[12]库恩.必要的张力[M].(范岱年等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2004:111.
[13]袁江洋.柯瓦雷:描绘人类思想的统一画卷,中华读书报[N].2005-11-19.
[14]见网络“逸仙时空”Yat-sen Channel (Sat Jun 24 12:58:33 2000).
[15]转引自范莉、魏屹东.语境分析方法在科学史研究中的应用[J].自然辩证法通讯.2007,4:61.
[16]库恩.科学革命的结构[M].(金吾仑等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[17]同上2003:3.
[18]同上2003:3.
[19]B.拉尔沃.库恩的<科学革命的结构>为什么会引起惊异?[J].(刘刚译),原载:Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 34(2003).369—370.
[20]柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与计划[J].(孙永平译),原载Etudesd histore de la pensee scientifique ,paris,1973.
[21]B.拉尔沃.库恩的<科学革命的结构>为什么会引起惊异?[J].(刘刚译),原载:Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 34(2003).368.
[22]库恩.科学革命的结构[M].(金吾仑等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[23]李创同.科学哲学思想的流变[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2006:79.
[24]库恩.哥白尼革命[M].(吴国盛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:1.
[25]同上2003:1.
[26]同上2003:131.
[27]库恩.科学革命的结构[M].(金吾仑等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:2.
[28]库恩.哥白尼革命[M].(吴国盛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:93.
[29]库恩.必要的张力[M].(范岱年等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2004:236.
[30]库恩.哥白尼革命[M].(吴国盛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:1.
[31]同上2003:4.
[1]舒伟光、邱仁宗.当代西方科学哲学评述(第二版)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007:30.
[2]波普尔.无穷的探索[M].福州:福建人民出版社,1984:139.
[3]库恩.必要的张力[M].(纪树立等译),福州:福建人民出版社,1981:12.
[4]转引自袁江洋:http://www.ihns.ac.cn/members/liud/doc/ldjy.htm
[5]舒伟光、邱仁宗.当代西方科学哲学评述(第二版)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007:4.
[6]吴国盛.让科学回归人文[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2003:226.
[7]同上2003:227.
[8]诸大建.科学革命研究的十个问题[J].科学技术与辩证法.1997,6:1.
[9]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:270.
[10]同上2003:7.
[11]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].(邬波涛等译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:1.
[12]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].(张卜天译),北京:北京大学出版社,2003:70.
[1]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.伽利略研究[M].南昌:江西教育出版社,2002.
[2]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.牛顿研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003.
[3]亚历山大·柯瓦雷.从封闭世界到无限宇宙[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003.
[4]赫尔奇·克拉夫.科学史导论北[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[5]爱德文·阿瑟·伯特.近代物理科学的形而上学基础[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003.
[6]托马斯·库恩.哥白尼革命[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003.
[8]托马斯·库恩.必要的张力[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
[9]欧内斯特·内格尔.科学的结构[M].上海:上海译文出版社,2002.
[10]史蒂文·夏平.科学革命——批判性的综合[M].上海:上海科技教育出版社,2004.
[11]埃德蒙德·胡塞尔.欧洲科学危机和超验现象学[M].上海:上海译文出版社,2005.
[12]海德格尔.海德格尔选集(下)[M].上海:生活·读书·新知上海三联书店,1996.
[13]海德格尔.演讲与论文集[M].上海:生活·读书·新知上海三联书店,2005.
[14]瓦托夫斯基.科学思想的概念基础——科学哲学导论[M].北京:求实出版社,1982.
[15]拉卡托斯.科学研究纲领方法论[M].北京:商务印书馆,1992.
[16]保罗·费耶阿本德.告别理性[M].南京:江苏人民出版,2002.
[17]保罗·费耶阿本德.知识、科学与相对主义[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2006.
[18]保罗·费耶阿本德.自由社会中的科学[M].上海:上海译文出版社,1990.
[19]弗里德里希·A·哈耶克.科学的反革命[M].南京:译林出版社,2003.
[20]汉斯·波塞尔.科学:什么是科学[M].上海:上海三联书店,2002.
[21]柯林武德.自然的观念[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2006.
[22]亚历克斯·罗森堡.科学哲学[M].上海:上海科技教育出版社,2004.
[23]H·赖欣巴哈.科学哲学的兴起[M].北京:商务印书馆,1984.
[24]R·H·默顿.十七世纪英国科学、技术与社会[M].北京:人民出版社,1987.
[25]R·霍伊卡.宗教与现代科学的兴起[M].成都:四川人民出版社,1991.
[26]约翰·H·布鲁克.科学与宗教[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2000.
[27]W·C·丹皮尔.科学史[M].桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2001.
[28]安德鲁·芬伯格.可选择的现代性[M].北京:中国社会科学出版,2003.
[29]亚·沃尔夫.十六十七世纪科学、技术和哲学史[M].北京:商务印书馆,1985.
[30]I·伯纳德·科恩.科学革命史普及[M].北京:科学出版社,1992.
[31]怀特海.科学与近代世界[M].北京:商务印书馆,1959.
[32]贝尔纳.科学的社会功能[M].北京:商务印书馆,1982.
[33]贝尔纳.历史上的科学[M].北京:科学出版社,1959.
[34]丹皮尔.科学史[M].北京:商务印书馆,1975.
[35]艾耶尔.语言、真理与逻辑[M].上海:上海译文出版社,1981.
[36]查尔默斯.科学究竟是什么[M].北京:商务印书馆,1982.
[37]戈兰.科学与反科学[M].北京:中国国际广播出版社,1988.
[38]弗兰克.科学的哲学——科学与哲学之间的纽带[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1985.
[39]拉卡托斯.批判与知识的增长[M].北京:华夏出版社,1987.
[40]科恩.当代哲学思潮比较研究[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,1988.
[41]齐曼.真科学[M].上海:上海科技教育出版社,2002.
[42]哈耶克.经济、科学与政治[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2000.
[43]劳丹.进步及其问题[M].北京:华夏出版社,1999.
[44]皮尔逊.科学的规范[M].北京:华夏出版社,1999.
[45]怀特海.思想方式[M].北京:华夏出版社,1999.
[46]波普尔.开放社会及其敌人[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1999.
[47]波普尔.二十世纪的教训[M].桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2004.
[48]罗素.西方的智慧[M].北京:文化美术出版社,1997.
[49]孔德.论实证精神[M].北京:商务印书馆,1996.
[50]沃克迈斯特.科学的哲学[M].北京:商务印书馆,1996.
[51]罗森堡.科学哲学[M].上海:上海科技教育出版社,2004.
[52]格里芬编.后现代科学——科学魅力的再现[M].北京:中央编译出版社,1995.
[53]萨顿.科学的历史研究[M].北京:科学出版社,1990.
[54]萨顿.科学史和新人文主义[M].北京:华夏出版社,1989.
[55]萨顿.科学的生命[M].北京:商务印书馆,1987.
[56]里吉斯.科学也疯狂[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,1994.
[57]维科.新科学[M].北京:商务印书馆,1989.
[58]桑迪拉纳编著.冒险的时代——文艺复兴时期的哲学家[M].北京:光明日报出版社,1989.
[59]伽达默尔.科学时代的理性[M].北京:国际文化出版公司,1988.
[60]拉德纳.科学与谬误[M].上海:生活·读书·新知上海三联书店,1987.
[61]罗素.宗教与科学[M].北京:商务印书馆,1999.
[62]卢梭.论科学与艺术[M].北京:商务印书馆,1963.
[63]培根.新工具[M].北京:商务印书馆,1981.
[64]波珀.科学发现的逻辑[M].北京:科学出版社,1986.
[65]普特南.理性、真理与历史[M].沈阳:辽宁教育出版社,1988.
[66]邦格.科学的唯物主义[M].上海:上海译文出版社,1989.
[67]莫泽克.论科学[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1997.
[68]约翰·西克.上帝与信仰的世界[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.
[69]罗杰·G·牛顿.何为科学真理——月亮在无人看时是否在那儿[M].上海:上海科技教育出版社,2001.
[70]戴维·林德伯格.西方科学的起源[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,2001.
[71]王天成.直觉与逻辑[M].长春:长春出版社,2000.
[72]江天骥.当代西方科学哲学[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1984.
[73]夏基松.现代西方哲学教程[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1985.
[74]林定夷.科学研究方法论[M].杭州:浙江人民出版社,1986.
[75]周昌忠.西方科学方法论史[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1986.
[76]黄顺基、刘大椿.科学的哲学反思[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1987.
[77]舒炜光、邱仁宗主编.当代西方科学哲学述评(第二版)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007.
[78]舒炜光主编.科学认识论[M].长春:吉林人民出版社,1990.
[79]洪谦主编.逻辑经验主义[M].北京:商务印书馆,1989.
[80]洪谦.维也纳学派哲学[M].北京:商务印书馆,1989.
[81]李克特.科学是一种文化过程[M].北京:三联书店,1989.
[82]李创同.科学哲学思想的流变[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2006.
[83]江天骥主编.科学哲学与科学方法论[M].北京:华夏出版社,1990.
[84]孙小礼.科学方法论史纲[M].北京:北京出版社,1988.
[85]姚大志.现代之后[M].北京:东方出版社,2000.
[86]王大珩、于光远.论科学精神[M].北京:中央编译出版社,2001.
[87]郭贵春.当代科学实在论[M].北京:科学出版社,1991.
[88]刘放桐等编.现代西方哲学[M].北京:人民出版社,1991.
[89]黄顺基等编.科学技术哲学引论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1991.
[90]王岳川.后现代主义文化研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1992.
[91]肖峰.科学精神与人文精神[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1994.
[92]张华夏、叶侨健编著.现代自然科学与科学哲学[M].广州:中山大学出版社,1996.
[93]陈嘉映.哲学科学常识[M].北京:东方出版社,2007.
[94]陈健.科学划界——论科学与非科学及伪科学的区分[M].北京:东方出版社,1997.
[95]孙正聿.哲学通论[M].沈阳:辽宁人民出版社,1998.
[96]孙正聿.哲学导论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2000.
[97]孙正聿.思想中的时代[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
[98]邹铁军等.现代西方哲学[M].长春:吉林大学出版社,2001.
[99]周昌忠.西方科学的文化精神[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1995.
[100]郑福祥等.科学的精神[M].上海:上海三联书店,2001.
[101]林德宏.科技哲学十五讲[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
[102]吴国盛.科学的历程(第二版)[M].北京:北京大学出版,2002.
[103]吴国盛.追思自然[M].沈阳:辽海出版社,1998.
[104]吴国盛.现代化之忧思[M].北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1999.
[105]吴国盛.反思科学[M].北京:新世界出版社,2004.
[106]吴国盛.让科学回归人文[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2003.
[107]吴国盛.科学思想史指南[M].成都:四川教育出版社,1994.
[108]张之沧.科学哲学导论[M].北京:人民出版社,2004.
[109]王巍.科学哲学问题研究[M].北京:清华大学出版,2004.
[110]杨庆峰.技术现象学初探[M].上海:上海三联学术文库,2005.
[111]李建华.科学哲学[M].北京:中共中央党校出版社,2004.
[112]刘大椿.科学哲学通论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1998.
[113]刘大椿.科学哲学[M].北京:人民出版社,1998.
[114]林成滔.科学简史中[M].北京:国友谊出版公司,2004.
[115]钱时惕.科学与宗教——关系及其历史演变[M].北京:人民出版社,2002.
[116]章士荣.科学发现的逻辑[M].北京:人民出版社,1986.
[117]樊洪业.科学业绩的辨伪[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1982.
[118]赵鑫珊.科学·艺术·哲学断想[M].北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1985.
[1]柯瓦雷.我的研究倾向与计划[J]. (孙永平译),原载Etudes d’histoire de la Pensee scientifique,Paris,1973,1:1-3.
[2]倪梁康.现象学的动态意向分析及其问题[J].江苏社会科学.2004,1:80-86.
[3]江晓原.到底有没有科学革命[J].上海交通大学学报.2003,2:16-17.
[4]袁江洋.牛顿炼金术手稿的历史境遇[J].自然辩证法通讯.1990,2:56-61.
[5]袁江洋、王迪克.论牛顿的宇宙论思想[J].自然辩证法通讯.2001,5:26-29.
[6]袁江洋.探索自然与颂扬上帝:波义耳的自然哲学与自然神学思想[J].自然辩证法通讯.1991,6:34-42.
[7]袁江洋.牛顿炼金术:高贵的哲学?[J].自然科学史研究.2004.4:283-298.
[8]袁江洋.“自然哲学之数学原理”‘总释’的史境诠释[J].华中师范大学学报.1994,1:133-137.
[9]王天成.感知、想象力与本质直观[J].长白学刊.2003.1:45-48.
[10]王天成.黑格尔概念辩证法中个体生命原则[J].天津社会科学.2005,2:19-22.
[11]王天成.辩证法的三种形态[J].社会科学战线.2007,7:28-33.
[12]刘魁.当代科学与宗教关系研究述评[J].国外社会科学.2004,4:32-37.
[13]王云霞、李建珊.试论库恩科学史观[J].北京理工大学学报.2007,2:92-95.
[14]刘魁.揭开牛顿的异端神学与科学研究之谜[J].南京理工大学学报.2004,3:5-9.
[15]胡海波.科学的创造精神与科学的批判精神——波普尔科学发展模式理论解读[J].学术交流.2006,6:25-27.
[16]刘凤朝.科学史的层次划分及其编史学意义[J].自然辩证法研究.2002,1:152.
[17]刘凤朝.历史主义学派对科学编史学的贡献[J].自然辩证法通讯.2003,2:63-66.
[18]曹志平.科学与宗教关系的三个层次[J].自然辩证法研究.2002,10:62-65.
[20]E·D·克雷克.科学的本质[J].世界哲学.1982,6:37-40.
[21]刘晓峰.试析伽利略运用数学工具研究自然的原因[J].自然辩证法研究.1999,4:4-8.
[22]诸大建.科学革命研究的十个问题[J].科学技术与辩证法.1997,6:1-6.
[23]李醒民.略论迪昂的编史学纲领[J].自然辩证法通讯. 1997,2:38-46.
[24]李醒民.迪昂科学成就与哲学思想[J].哲学动态.1999,1:42-45.
[25]李醒民.评库恩的科学史观[J].大自然探索.1991,2:119-126.
[26]戴建平.略论胡塞尔的科学哲学思想[J].科学技术与辩证法.2005,1:51-54.
[27]顾速.评关于科学进步的三种主要观点[J].自然辩证法通讯.1994,6:1-9.
[28]胡光.科学理论发展模式的理性反思[J].大连理工大学学报.2003,2:42-46.
[29]李春泰.貌合神离的哥白尼与伽利略[J].自然辩证法研究.1992,6:31-39.
[30]李春泰.从必然性退却——波普的无逻辑可能世界[J].自然辩证法研究.2003,10:33-36.
[31]鲁兴启.科学革命:类型与本质[J].学术探索.2003,专辑,112-116.
[32]何兵.科学与人的此在——从库恩与海德格尔的科学观变革来看[J].自然辩证法研究.2005,10:55-58.
[33]J·厄尔曼.评库恩的科学进步观[J].世界哲学.1982,6:25-28.
[34]炎冰.20世纪科学进步问题研究的回顾与思考[J].扬州大学学报.1999,2:5-9.
[35]古祖雪、周视文.科学与宗教[J].衡阳师范学院学报,2005,1:1-5.
[36]周德海.科学革命是科学世界观的根本变革——爱因斯坦科学革命思想述评[J].自然辩证法研究.1996,10:14-17.
[37]毛健儒.牛顿的宗教观对他科学工作的影响[J].晋阳学刊.1995,4:56-58.
[38]李恒威.“生活世界”和胡塞尔的科学观[J].杭州师范学院学报.2004,3:23-27.
[39]洪晓楠、田甜.胡塞尔科学哲学思想评析[J].科学技术与辩证法.2007,3:45-48.
[40]艾战胜.科学革命的本质:科恩与库恩的比较[J].自然辩证法研究.2008,4:86-90.
[41]袁维新.简论科学本质观的类型与特征[J].科学技术与辩证法.2006,1:17-20.
[42]魏屹东.科学史研究的语境分析方法[J].科学技术与辩证法.2002,5:22-25.
[43]范莉、魏屹东.柯瓦雷与库恩科学观的哲学反思[J].山西大学学报.2007,6:20-24.
[44] B.拉尔沃.库恩的<科学革命的结构>为什么会引起惊异?[J].(刘刚译),原载:Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 34(2003).
[45]李三虎.当代建构主义研究述评[J].国外社会科学.1997,5:11-16.
[46]张玉平.关于建构主义的几个问题[J].现代教育科学.2004,6:39-41.
[47]金俊岐、胡笑雨.建构主义视野中的科学史[J].自然辩证法研究.2003,5:56-60.
[48]曹继东.现象学的技术哲学[J].中国知网.2006,10:7-8.
[49]王凤杰.库恩科学哲学思想评析[J].湘潭工学院学报.2002,3:25-28.
[50]山郁林.简论胡塞尔对柯瓦雷科学史篇史的影响[J].科学·经济·社会2006,1:77-80.
[51]王大明.关于科学进步问题的三个层次[J].汉中师院学报.1994,3:10-15.
[52]张立英.论失败的科学革命[J].自然辩证法研究.2003,9:45-49.
[1]袁江洋.柯瓦雷:描绘人类思想的统一画卷[N].中华读书报.2005-11-19.
[2]江晓原.哥白尼靠什么革命?——关于库恩的“哥白尼靠什么革命”[N].光明日报.2003-02-13.
[3]陈克艰.人类历史上科学的发生不是必然而是个“异数”[N].2005-03-31.
[1]Kuhn T.The Essential Tension.Chicago:university of Chicago Press,1977.
[2]Canguilhem.Ideology and Rationality in the History of the Life Sciences. The MIT Press, 1988.
[3]Lakatos.The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes .Cambridge University Press, 1978.
[4]Alistair C.Crombie.Alexandre Koyr′e and Great Britain :Galileo and Mersenne.History and Techology,1987(4).
[5]Gutting.French Philosophy in the twentith Century. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
[6]A.Rupert hall Alexandre Koyr′e and the scientific revolution. History and Techology,1987(4).
[7]T·S·Kuhn.The road since structure. Cambridge:The University of Cambridge Press, 2000.
[8]P.Thagard,computational Philosophy of Science.The MIT Press, 1988.
[9]D.Gillies,Philosophy of Science in the Twentieth Century,Blackwell Publishers,1993.
[10]T·S·Kuhn.The Interpretive Turn.New York: Philosophy Science Culture Cornell University press,1991.
[11]Couvalis G.The Philosophy of Science: Science and Objectivity.London:Sage,1997.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |