本文選題：羅伯特K.默頓 + 無私利性��； 參考：《河南大學》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：羅伯特K.默頓,被稱為“科學社會學之父”。1942年,他在《論科學與民主》一文中系統(tǒng)地闡述了科學活動的規(guī)范結構,無私利性是四種制度上的規(guī)范之一。從上世紀60年代后期,默頓規(guī)范引起學術界的廣泛爭論和引用,無私利性是遭受爭議最大的一條。中外學者對無私利性的研究已經取得了不少成果,但還缺乏比較全面系統(tǒng)的專題研究。我們試著努力推進這項工作。希望這一研究能使學界對無私利性有新的認識,并以此求教于師長。 本文分為五章。第一章《無私利性規(guī)范的由來》,首先考察了無私利性規(guī)范提出的理論前提:隱藏在清教教義中的心理學層面的“情感”實體是科學發(fā)展的一個強大動力的假設,科學被看作是一種社會體制的社會規(guī)定假說,以及科學由于制度和結構存在競爭現(xiàn)象的預示。其次考察了無私利性規(guī)范產生的歷史背景:20世紀三四十年代,德國法西斯政權妨礙科學活動,破壞科學內部運行秩序;現(xiàn)代科學體制化已經達到了非常發(fā)達的狀態(tài),科學的運行開始受到重視。 第二章《無私利性規(guī)范內涵的不同詮釋》,包括兩個內容。一是根據(jù)文獻調研,歸納出默頓對無私利性規(guī)范的釋義:科學家具有利己動機;無私利性規(guī)范通過對動機的制度性控制要求科學家的職業(yè)活動成為一種非謀利性的活動,無論利己還是利他;反對、禁止利用科學謀取任何利益;無私利性規(guī)范是懲戒性規(guī)范,違者要受到心理懲罰;科學家可以獲取營生方面的物質利益。二是試探性分析了國內外其他學者的闡釋,其中,巴伯把無私利性規(guī)范看作一種道德理想與默頓的思想相一致。 第三章《無私利性規(guī)范遭受的批評和得到的辯護及發(fā)展》,簡述了默頓規(guī)范遭受批評的社會背景和學術背景。對無私利性的批評和辯護集中歸納為主要兩點:實踐性(真實性)問題和完備性問題。英國愛丁堡學派的馬爾凱的批評具有獨特意義,他否定無私利性具有真實性。國內孫貴啟教授也對其真實性提出了質疑。面對批評,默頓學派一一進行了回應,進行辯護。巴伯提出“感情中立”的價值理想,斯托勒提出“商品交換論”發(fā)展了無私利性規(guī)范論。馬來平先生、徐夢秋和歐陽鋒教授都用“應然“和”實然“的關系論證了這一規(guī)范的真實性問題。馬來平先生還認為,無私利性規(guī)范設定的目標太高,為更加貼近實際,可以放寬理解,并提出了修正方向。 第四章《對無私利性規(guī)范所在系統(tǒng)的結構層次分析》,通過對科學精神的結構層次分析得知,無私利性規(guī)范位于其中的社會關系層次,在社會運行的動力和保障上,體現(xiàn)科學的精神價值。通過科學規(guī)范體系的層次分析得知,無私利性規(guī)范屬于社會規(guī)范,是“元規(guī)范”。因它缺乏操作層面的控制功能而批判它是對“科學精神氣質”的誤解,這種批評不得要領。 第五章《“無私利性”規(guī)范與現(xiàn)實差距的癥結》。內容主要有:1.簡述科學的建制使職業(yè)科學家得以產生,從事科研成為謀生的手段,科學的工具價值被發(fā)現(xiàn)。2.論述了功利性是科學的一個根本屬性,科學活動具有功利性的價值取向,科學家付出勞動、做出貢獻,自然會有利益訴求。3.運用馬斯洛的“基本需求層次理論”,對科學家謀取功利的正當性進行心理學分析。4.反面例證,科學家功利欲望十分強烈。5.通過科學家在科學活動各環(huán)節(jié)的謀利和違規(guī)情況分析,得知,科學家謀取正當利益不侵犯科學的客觀性。6.主要討論了,科學家獲取正當利益是自身發(fā)展的需要,是社會公平公正的需要,合情、合理、合法。7.“無私利性”規(guī)范過于理想化。主要論述了無私利性規(guī)范沒有考慮、照顧到科學家自身發(fā)展的需要,不符合人性;沒有考慮到科學家也是社會中平等的一員,不合理。
[Abstract]:Robert K. Merton, called the father of Sociology of science, was called the "father of Sociology of science", in which he systematically expounded the normative structure of scientific activities in the literature of science and democracy. No private interest is one of the norms on the four systems. From the late 60s of the last century, the Merton norms caused widespread controversy and citations in the academic circles, and the non private nature was the most controversial. The big one. The Chinese and foreign scholars have made a lot of achievements in the study of selflessness, but there is still a lack of a comprehensive and systematic special study. We try to push forward this work. It is hoped that this study can make the academic community have a new understanding of the non selfish nature and seek teaching to the teachers.
This article is divided into five chapters. The first chapter, "the origin of the non selfish norms", first inspects the theoretical premise of the non selfish norms: the "emotional" entity, which is hidden in the doctrines of Puritanism, is a powerful motive force of scientific development, and science is regarded as a social regulation hypothesis of social system, and science because of it. There is a foretaste of the competition phenomenon in the system and structure. Secondly, it examines the historical background of the non selfish norms: in 30s and 40s twentieth Century, the German fascist regime hinders scientific activities and destroys the internal operation order of science; the institutionalization of modern science has reached a very developed state, and the operation of science has begun to be emphasized.
The second chapter, the different interpretation of the connotation of the normative connotation of the non selfish nature, includes two contents. First, according to the literature survey, it concludes Merton's interpretation of the non selfish norms: the scientist has a selfish motivation, and the non selfish norm requires the institutional control of the motivation to become a non profit making activity, regardless of egoism. It is altruism; against and prohibiting the use of science for any benefit; non selfish norms are disciplinary norms, violators have to be punished by psychological punishment; scientists can gain material interests in the field of life. Two is an exploratory analysis of the interpretation of other scholars at home and abroad, of which Barber regards the non selfish norms as a moral ideal and Merton's thought. It is the same.
The third chapter, "the criticism and the defense and development of the non selfish norms", describes the social and academic background of the criticism of Merton's norms. The criticism and defense of the selflessness are mainly divided into two main points: practical (authenticity) and completeness. The criticism of the British Edinburgh School of markai is unique. In the face of criticism, the Merton school responded and defended the criticism. Barber put forward the value ideal of "emotional neutrality". Barber proposed the "commodity exchange theory" to develop the non private normative theory. Mr. maleping, Xu Mengqiu and Prof. Ouyang Feng demonstrated the authenticity of the norm with the relationship between "deserved" and "true". Mr. maleping also believed that the goal set by the non selfish norms was too high to be more close to reality and to broaden the understanding and put forward the correction direction.
In the fourth chapter, the analysis of the structure level of the system of non selfish norms lies in the analysis of the structural level of the scientific spirit. It is found that the non selfish norms are located in the social relations level in which the spiritual value of the science is embodied in the motive force and guarantee of the social operation. The social norm is a "meta standard". It is a misconception that it is a misunderstanding of "scientific spirit" because it lacks the control function of the operational level, and this criticism is not necessary.
The fifth chapter is the crux of the gap between the "non selfish" norms and the reality gap. The main contents are as follows: 1. a brief description of the establishment of the scientific system makes the professional scientists able to produce, to engage in scientific research and become a means of making a living. The value of the scientific tool has been discovered by.2. that utilitarianism is a fundamental attribute of science, and the scientific activity has a utilitarian value orientation, a scientist Labor, make contributions, and make contributions, naturally there will be interest appeals.3. use of Maslow's "basic demand level theory", the legitimacy of the scientists to make utilitarianism in psychological analysis.4. example, the scientist's utilitarian desire is very strong.5. through the scientists in the scientific activities of the ring of profit and violation of the situation analysis, learned that scientists, scientists To seek legitimate interests and not to infringe on the objectivity of science,.6. mainly discusses that scientists' gain of legitimate interests is the need for their own development, is the need for social fairness and justice, and is reasonable and reasonable, and the legal.7. "non selfish" standard is too idealized. It is mainly discussed that the non selfish norms have not been considered and take care of the needs of the development of scientists themselves. Conforms to human nature; without considering that scientists are also equal members in society, it is unreasonable.
【學位授予單位】：河南大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：G301

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 周學政,王文s，

本文編號：2032151