类比推理辩护的常识模型困境及其解决策略

发布时间：2018-04-18 23:12

  本文选题：类比推理辩护 + 常识模型　； 参考：《云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2017年03期

【摘要】：20世纪60年代玛丽·赫西对类比推理辩护问题进行的探讨逐渐形成常识模型。但这一模型和规则存在难以解决的困难。哲学家巴萨反思常识模型,从而提出自己的模型,为类比进行辩护。但巴萨仅仅将类比论证的问题限定在逻辑的构建之上加以辩护是不恰当的。这样辩护的哲学基础既不充分也不牢靠。类比推理是逻辑与心理交叉研究的模糊地带,需要将其放在更加深刻的逻辑哲学问题背景中,才能看到这一问题的实质。我们不仅需要从逻辑的角度,从技术上做出一个合理的辩护,也需要从哲学上对其背后所隐藏的哲学问题做出系统解答。一种更为合理的辩护策略是:关于类比论证的辩护需要从两方面进行,首先要建立合理的类比论证模型,并为这一模型进行哲学辩护。然后为其背后的逻辑与心理关系问题做出合理的哲学解答,从而支撑所建立的模型。
[Abstract]:In the 1960 s, Mary Hersey's discussion on analogical reasoning defense gradually formed a common sense model.However, this model and rules are difficult to solve.The philosopher Bassa reflected on the common sense model and put forward his own model to defend the analogy.But it is inappropriate for Barca to limit the analogical argument to the construction of logic.The philosophical basis for such a defence is neither adequate nor firm.Analogical reasoning is a fuzzy zone in which logic and psychology are intersected. It needs to be placed in a more profound background of logic philosophy in order to see the essence of this problem.We not only need to make a reasonable defense from the angle of logic and technology, but also need to make a systematic solution to the hidden philosophical problems from the philosophical point of view.A more reasonable defense strategy is that the defense of analogical argumentation should be carried out from two aspects. Firstly, a reasonable model of analogical argumentation should be established and the model should be defended by philosophy.Then the logical and psychological relationship behind the reasonable philosophical solution, so as to support the established model.
【作者单位】： 南开大学哲学院;
【基金】：国家社科基金重大项目“现代归纳逻辑的新发展、理论前沿与应用研究”(2015ZDB018)
【分类号】：B81-05
，

本文编号：1770503