Review and Prospect of China's Philosophy of Science and Technology
The original periodical Dialectics of Nature, No.6, 200 1
Wu Guosheng [1]
(Philosophy Department of Peking University, Beijing 10087 1)
Philosophy of science and technology (dialectics of nature) is called two disciplines, but it covers everything. For a long time, there has been a serious conflict between the name and the reality of the discipline, which makes the discipline construction difficult. The reason is that this discipline is a mixture of three unrelated historical origins and constituent factors, which makes it impossible to make a simple discipline orientation: first, it comes from German classical natural philosophy, especially Hegel's natural philosophy, which is an outdated academic paradigm; Second, its Marxist background determines its political role and function in China, and it should guide the scientific and scientist policies of the China Production Party and the China government; Third, the integration of interdisciplinary, marginal, emerging and interdisciplinary research in a specific historical period. Generally speaking, there are two groups in this discipline, namely, philosophy group and sociology group, and the two positions are teaching posts (mainly political compulsory courses for graduate students of science, engineering, agriculture and medicine) and scientific research posts. The two groups are being divided, so it is necessary to build disciplines separately; The weakening of political function should focus on the transformation to the function of quality education.
Keywords: philosophy of science and technology, philosophy group, sociology group, quality education
First, the discipline orientation: the conflict between name and reality
In the discipline classification system of China the State Council Academic Degree Committee, the philosophy of science and technology (abbreviated as philosophy of science and technology) is the two disciplines of philosophy. 1978 professor Yu Guangyuan and others enrolled the master of dialectics of nature in the graduate school of China university of science and technology for the first time, 1984 professor Shu Weiguang enrolled the doctor of dialectics of nature in Jilin university for the first time. By the end of 2000, there were 1 1 doctoral degree awarding points in China, and 46 master's degree awarding points enrolled students that year (the actual master's degree should be greater than this number). Of all the eight disciplines of philosophy, this discipline is probably the most prosperous.
Although it is located in a branch of philosophy, the actual research content of philosophy of science and technology is far greater than philosophy. It is no exaggeration to say that the research content of the workers of philosophy of science and technology (dialectics of nature) involves almost all 12 disciplines: philosophy (0 1), economics (02), law (03), education (04), literature (05), history (06) and science (07). In the name of "science, technology and society", it can invade all social science fields, in the name of "science and humanities", in the name of "philosophical problems of natural science", it can invade all fields of science, engineering, agriculture and medicine. Due to the boundless research field, this discipline lacks general academic identity and peers have no sense of peers; Due to the diversification of research directions, there is no unified postgraduate training program and required reading list; Due to the lack of a clear definition of the research object, students can't receive systematic "professional" training, so they can't train excellent professionals. Without the emergence of outstanding professionals from generation to generation, the discipline will stagnate forever.
There is a serious conflict between the name and the reality of philosophy of science and technology, which makes the discipline construction never put on the agenda, so that many people think that it is not a discipline at all, but an interdisciplinary marginal research field. Graduate students from all corners of the country are often at a loss about the vast field of dialectics of nature and are inevitably dissatisfied with the anomie of the discipline. Since 1980s, every gathering of young students will take "what is dialectics of nature" or "what is philosophy of science and technology" as an important discussion topic. [2] Now many former graduate students have become graduate tutors. Unfortunately, this situation has not changed much.
Second, history: triple sources
The formation of this situation has its historical basis. China's philosophy of science and technology (dialectics of nature) actually has three components and three historical sources.
The first source is German classical natural philosophy. The name Dialectics of Nature comes from an unfinished manuscript by Engels, which was published by the Soviet Union in 1925, with the title Dialectics of Nature. In fact, Engels himself hasn't had time to give a name to his future works. If we consider the controversy caused by the word "dialectics of nature" in the future, it may be more appropriate to call this unfinished work Manuscripts of Natural Philosophy 1873- 1883. Engels' natural philosophy is an inverted version of Hegel's natural philosophy, so it belongs to the same tradition in essence, that is, the German classical natural philosophy tradition. This tradition advocates the view of organic nature and opposes the narrow view of mechanical nature; Advocate dialectical thinking and oppose narrow empiricism. In addition, Engels' manuscripts cover a wide range, including a history of science, a view of nature, a scientific methodology, and a large number of philosophical explanations of various natural sciences. Therefore, taking Engels' works as the research field and direction opened by Lanben has the following two characteristics: first, it belongs to the German natural philosophy tradition, which is obviously different from the twentieth century scientific philosophy tradition initiated by the Vienna School, and it pays attention to its own philosophical history and the history of scientific thought since Greece; Second, it pays attention to the combination with specific natural sciences, so it has the characteristics of encyclopedia. These two characteristics are fully reflected in the works and research work of the older generation of dialectics of nature workers. Their professional division of labor is often "so-and-so dialectics" or "so-and-so philosophy" (such as philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of physics, philosophy of astronomy, etc. ); They often engage in historical research and philosophical generalization of a certain subject. The first batch of "professional committees" established by China Dialectics of Nature Research Association were established according to this idea.
The second source is Marxist ideology. After the China * * production party seized the national political power, Marxism became the dominant ideology, and Engels' Dialectics of Nature began to become the guiding document of China's scientific policy and scientist policy; The social research based on dialectics of nature developed by Lamben Institute has begun to play a certain political role and exercise a certain political function, so it has received special attention. 1956, when the state formulated the 12-year long-term plan for scientific development, Dialectics of Nature was planned independently. The planning book says: "There is such a science between philosophy and natural science, just as there is historical materialism between philosophy and social science. This science is tentatively named Dialectics of Nature, because it directly inherits the research conducted by Engels in Dialectics of Nature. " In order to make this part of the plan, some of the most famous scientists in China were mobilized at that time. Scientists enthusiastically participate in this field because they believe that natural science should be guided by Marxist philosophy. 198 1 China Dialectics Research Association was formally established. Zhou Peiyuan, Lu Jiaxi, Qian Sanqiang and Qian Xuesen, the leading figures in China's scientific community, all served as vice presidents. Although the Institute was attached to the China Association for Science and Technology, Zhou Peiyuan, then chairman of the China Association for Science and Technology, was only the vice-chairman, showing its special status. For decades, China dialectics of nature workers have actually played the role of "united front" for scientists: educating them, guiding them to take the correct route and criticizing their wrong ideas. Since the large-scale enrollment of graduate students began in 1980s, Dialectics of Nature has been regarded as a required course of politics for graduate students majoring in science, engineering, agriculture and medicine. This compulsory course system comes from the thought of dialectics of nature.
The third source is the "big pocket" comprehensive new discipline since the reform and opening up. Since the 1980s, the country has opened wide, new knowledge, new ideas and new disciplines have swarmed in, and all kinds of interdisciplinary, marginal, emerging and interdisciplinary research are in the ascendant, taking refuge under the tree of dialectics of nature. From "potential science", "Science of Science", "Talents" and "Creativity" in 1980s to the old three theories (cybernetics, system theory and information theory) and new three theories (dissipative structure, catastrophe theory and synergetics) in 1990s, western philosophy of science, sociology of science, science and technology policy and management, and then to STS, information superhighway and knowledge in 1990s. In recent 20 years, the encyclopedic style of Dialectics of Nature has become more prominent. From South-to-North Water Diversion, coal economy to Godel's theorem, the measurement of quantum mechanics, and then to Wittgenstein and Heidegger, it has become a legitimate research topic of China's dialectics of nature. This factor highlights the realistic sensitivity of dialectics of nature, but downplays its academic and disciplinary nature.
Third, the status quo: two groups, two positions
I sum up the present situation of China's dialectics of nature (philosophy of science and technology) into two groups: philosophy group and sociology group, and two positions: teaching (compulsory course) position and research position.
Due to specific historical reasons, in the past 20 years, the field of dialectics of nature has been like a temporary free market, with many people coming in and out and countless topics, and some disciplines entrusted here have also lost their scenery, such as potential science and Talent Studies. Some disciplines are self-contained, while others are more powerful than dialectics of nature. For example, science of science, history of science and technology and soft science all have their own national societies. So far, people who stay in the field of dialectics of nature can be roughly divided into two categories: philosophical groups with partial philosophical interests and sociological groups with partial sociological interests. The former likes to call himself engaged in natural philosophy, scientific philosophy, technical philosophy, history of scientific thought, philosophical problems of natural science and so on. , while the latter likes to call himself engaged in STS, scientific social research, scientific social history, etc.
There are clues to the differences between the two groups. Dialectics of Nature Newsletter has long defined the supplement as "a comprehensive and theoretical magazine about philosophy, history and sociology of natural science". The history of science and technology has long been an independent first-class discipline of Neo-Confucianism. People who stay in the field of dialectics of nature are either engaged in the history of ideas or social history, so they belong to different groups. At first, the subtitle of Research on Dialectics of Nature was "Natural Philosophy, Philosophy of Science and Philosophy of Technology", which indicated that it was two disciplines of philosophy. However, people engaged in sociology are becoming more and more opinionated, thinking that it does not reflect their existence, so last year it was changed to "natural philosophy, philosophy of science and technology, science and technology and society".
Generally speaking, philosophical groups tend to shrink, the older generation has turned to silence, and the younger generation is becoming more and more interested in scientific and social research. Sociological groups are closely combined with practical problems, and it is easy to produce results and get project fees. Judging from the current research direction of masters and doctors, sociological groups also account for the majority. [4] This trend is the inevitable result of market transformation, and this problem also exists in western developed market countries. The expansion of sociological groups and the shrinking of philosophical groups make "philosophy of science and technology" more and more unworthy of its name. In order to be worthy of the name, two sociology of science disciplines should be established under the first-level discipline of sociology, or one first-level discipline of sociology of science should be established under the category of Neo-Confucianism. At present, most people in the field of dialectics of nature can move to the name of sociology of science.
Since the situation of division is so deep, why are there so-called "dialectics of nature" or "philosophy of science and technology"? What unites them is a compulsory political course called Dialectics of Nature, which means that there are two positions in the field of Dialectics of Nature: teaching position and research position. The compulsory course system supports a huge team of dialectics of nature, second only to the team of Marxist philosophy. Because most people work in teaching posts, research is only an "amateur" activity. Therefore, no matter how divided and misnamed "dialectics of nature" or "philosophy of science and technology" is from the research point of view, as long as the compulsory course of "unification" exists, this "boundary" will still exist.
Four. Outlook: Basic Situation and Basic Countermeasures
To estimate the basic situation of China's dialectics of nature (philosophy of science and technology), we should first consider the weakening of its political function. The political shackles on scientists have been completely lifted, so not many scientists are willing to listen to the "preaching" of "philosophers of science and technology". As can be seen from the list of previous leaders of China Dialectics Research Association, the prosperity that the first scientists jumped into has disappeared, and the frontline scientists basically no longer care about the problems here. If it is necessary to carry out United front work for scientists, dialectics of nature is no longer a useful tool for United front work-scientists at the vice-chairman level of dialectics of nature research society can now directly become vice-chairmen of the National People's Congress and the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference. Due to the weakening of this political function, the external resources for the further development of dialectics of nature are greatly reduced. For "long-term stability", it is necessary to tap the potential from the inside, that is, to engage in discipline construction.
Of course, another major external resource as a political role, the compulsory course system, still exists, which is also the basic external resource to maintain the survival of the whole field of dialectics of nature at present. Because this resource belongs to ideology, it is uncertain. The reliable way is to gradually transform this ideological and political education function into scientific and humanistic quality education function as soon as possible, so that this part of uncertain resources can be transformed into stable educational resources.
How to build a discipline? How to change the educational function of compulsory courses?
To build disciplines, we must first conform to the trend of discipline differentiation and build disciplines in the direction of philosophy and sociology respectively. It is a common practice to further divide the research direction into two disciplines, such as western philosophy and eastern philosophy under foreign philosophy and Christianity, Buddhism and Taoism under religion. However, the direction should not be too thin. There are dozens of branches in the professional committees of research associations, which do not reflect the comprehensive characteristics of this profession. If there are no * * * required courses for graduate students in both directions, then they are two research directions that can be truly separated. I think it is feasible to divide the philosophical direction and the sociological direction. For a student who will be engaged in scientific and social research in the future, it seems too much to study Plato and Aristotle's works on natural philosophy, mathematical logic and analytical philosophy, and Husserl and Heidegger's works. Philosophy and sociology should design a set of enrollment and training programs, especially compulsory courses. I guess, sociology graduate students should have the following compulsory courses: Selected Readings of Famous Works of Social History of Science, Selected Readings of Original Works of Sociology of Science, Research on Social Statistical Methods, Case Study of Science and Technology Policy and Scientific Research Management, STS Case Study, etc.
The entrance examination I designed for graduate students majoring in philosophy consists of three courses: basic courses of natural science (conjunction or disjunction of advanced mathematics, general physics, general chemistry, general biology, general psychology, mathematical logic, etc. ), basic courses of philosophy (conjunction or disjunction of general philosophy, history of western philosophy, history of China philosophy, etc. ) and professional basic courses (the conjunction or disjunction of philosophy of science and general history of science). There are four compulsory courses: selected reading of natural philosophy, selected reading of famous works in the history of scientific thought, selected reading of scientific philosophy and selected reading of technical philosophy. In addition, you can take sociology courses, as well as physical philosophy, biological philosophy, science, religion and other courses. [5] It must be noted that even in the direction of philosophy, there is a broad research field, but if students in this direction have a good foundation in the history of philosophy and science, then no matter what problems they study, their horizons and ideas will have philosophical implications.
In fact, the philosophical direction during the master's period should be subdivided during the doctoral period. At this time, it can be divided into some details, "being a doctor without learning and skills." Those who do historical research and those who do philosophical research are not exactly the same in terms of literature requirements and quality requirements. I now enroll doctoral students in two directions: "natural philosophy and the history of scientific thought" is one direction, and "philosophy of science and technology" is the other. These two directions are different except for foreign languages and the history of western philosophy.
There are many textbooks on dialectics of nature published in China for more than ten years, but they are all required courses for graduate students of science and engineering. There are not many textbooks for graduate students in this major, let alone systematic ones. To do a good job in the discipline construction of this major, we need a set of relatively systematic teaching materials and reference books. We will soon launch a series of Peking University Philosophy of Science and Technology in cooperation with Peking University Publishing House. According to the idea of "building philosophy of science and technology into a philosophical discipline", we systematically accumulate basic documents of disciplines and compile teaching materials and reference books at undergraduate and graduate levels. Naturally, I also hope that more people will put forward more ideas and carry out the professional construction of this discipline.
Another basic countermeasure besides discipline construction is to moderately reform the "political compulsory course" system, and gradually transform its ideological and political education function into a scientific-humanistic quality education function. I once pointed out that "ideological and political education should be combined with humanistic education ... some mistakes or failures in ideological education may be related to their separation from the traditional ties with humanistic education." [6] For science, engineering, agricultural and medical students (not just graduate students), it is the best ideological and political education to carry out scientific and humanistic quality education.
Quality education should first improve students' learning enthusiasm and encourage their creative spirit. Therefore, the "three rules" compulsory course system of "listening to the teacher at the specified time and place" can be changed to: within the time specified by the academic system (for example, four years for undergraduate students and three years for graduate students). ), science and humanities courses must be completed with certain credits. As for the specific time, which class to listen to, which class to listen to,
Another advantage of this reform is to encourage teachers to combine teaching with scientific research, open their own best courses and teach themselves the most familiar problems. Over the years, teachers who teach public courses have always been "shorter" than other teachers. They usually have a large amount of teaching and monotonous teaching content, so they have no time to engage in scientific research, and their innovation ability is weak over time. Therefore, when evaluating professional titles, I always take care of them. If public compulsory courses can be converted into restricted elective courses, it will be of great benefit to improve teachers' scientific research and teaching level and open up teaching and research positions in the field of dialectics of nature.
A single course of Dialectics of Nature can't tell anything and learn nothing, especially for graduate students, who usually only hear some popular science knowledge and can't feel the depth and charm of science-humanities. In order to realize the gradual transition from a single compulsory course to a restricted elective course, a large number of courses are needed. In fact, this course can be divided into many special courses in philosophy and sociology. Take Beida as an example, we intend to introduce it in recent years: natural philosophy, scientific philosophy, technical philosophy, environmental philosophy, history of scientific thought, physics (history) philosophy, mathematics (history) philosophy, medical (history) philosophy, ecological ethics, medical ethics, social history of science, sociology of science, science and technology and society, science communication, science and religion, and China's science and technology policy.
China's philosophy of science and technology (dialectics of nature) will still have a bright future through discipline construction, "improving internal strength", changing educational functions and expanding external sources.
-
[1] About the author: Wu Guosheng (1964-), male, doctor of philosophy, professor, deputy director of philosophy department of Peking University, and doctoral supervisor of philosophy of science and technology.
[2] See my Dialectics of Nature, Research on Dialectics of Nature, No.2, 1989.
[3] In the early 1990s, the State Education Commission changed "dialectics of nature" to "philosophy of science and technology" when revising the subject catalogue. The new name is more commensurate with its status as a philosophical two disciplines, and it is easier to be understood by foreign counterparts, and it has been recognized by everyone at present. However, it should be pointed out that the change of the name has not changed the various phenomena and characteristics in the field of dialectics of nature that I described in this paper, and has not actually affected the discipline construction of our major. However, after the name change, the historical background implied by the original name was concealed, which made many latecomers more puzzled about the conflict between the name and reality of "philosophy of science and technology" and "discipline". Therefore, as a historical retrospective work, this paper treats "dialectics of nature" and "philosophy of science and technology" as the subject names completely equally.
[4] See my On Dialectics of Nature, Dialectics of Science and Technology, No.4, 1993.
[5] See my "Building Philosophy of Science and Technology into a Philosophy Discipline", "Research on Dialectics of Nature",No. 1999,No. 10.
[6] See my "Attaching Importance to Humanistic Quality Education", Guangming Daily 200 1 1 4.