摘要
知识论的主流观点认为,“理解”是有程度之别的,从不理解到彻底理解,可用[0,1]区间的理解度表示。理解度是一种精细理解,可被语言层面的证据所支持。理解绝对主义者则主张,“理解”没有程度之分,只有“理解”与“不理解”的二值判断,且只有达到彻底理解,认知者才拥有理解,因而语言层面的论证是无效的。内部程度性与外部程度性的区分表明,现有的观点分别支持彻底绝对主义和彻底程度主义。前者为理解设置了过高的标准,后者则误以为理解与不理解之间的阈值不明。外部绝对主义加上内部程度主义的部分程度主义立场才是合理的。在理解的外部,“最小理解”是理解与不理解之间的阈值。在理解的内部,理解的质量可通过丰富性与深刻性来刻画。
The mainstream view of epistemology holds that there are degrees for understanding,ranging from“not understanding”to thorough understanding,which can be expressed as degrees of understanding in the interval[0,1].The degree of understanding is a fine-grained understanding that can be supported by evidence at the linguistic level.Absolutists on understanding claim that there are no degrees for understanding,only the binary judgments of“understanding”and“not understanding”.The agent has understanding only when he gains thorough understanding,so the linguistic level argument is invalid.The distinction between internal degree and external degree shows that the existing views support radical absolutism and radical degreeism respectively.The former sets too high standards for understanding,while the latter mistakenly assumes that the threshold between understanding and non-understanding is unclear.It is the position of external absolutism coupled with internal gradualism that is reasonable.On the outside of understanding,the threshold between understanding and non-understanding is minimal understanding.Inside understanding,the quality of understanding can be represented by richness and profundity.
作者
郑辉荣
ZHENG Hui-rong(STS center,School of Marxism,Zhejiang University of Technology,Hangzhou 310023,China)
出处
《自然辩证法研究》
北大核心
2025年第2期60-66,共7页
Studies in Dialectics of Nature
基金
浙江省哲学社会科学规划课题“分析哲学视阈下的兼容德性理解论研究”(24NDQN083YB)。
关键词
认知程度主义
理解
理解度
最小理解
高阶理解
epistemic gradualism
understanding
degree of understanding
minimal understanding
higher-order understanding
作者简介
郑辉荣(1991-),浙江温州人,哲学博士,浙江工业大学马克思主义学院STS中心讲师,主要研究方向:知识论。
