Jeszke J
Kwart Hist Nauki Tech. 1998;43(2):45-62.
In the approach taken by Jerzy Kmita, the theoretical history of science is such reflexion on the history of scientific praxis that recognizes as its point of departure the technological role of that praxis as its defining function, while at the same time recognizing that such praxis is regulated in subjective-rational terms by the specific domain of modern European culture which is symbolically described as science. In this understanding science is social methodological awareness, i.e. the whole of norms and directives that are respected by the research community and which universally regulate scientific praxis in rational-subjective terms. The theoretical history of science takes account of two kinds of considerations, treating science as (1) the subjective-rational source of scientific praxis, and thus indirectly also of scientific knowledge (which is true, probably true, or coming closer to the truth than the already existent scientific knowledge); (2) a subjective-rational cultural regulator of scientific praxis and knowledge that is functionally determined by the needs of technological effectiveness, and possibly also evaluate-religious and educational effectiveness, and that is capable of satisfying such needs. Following the historical changes of those aspects is not subject to evaluative judgements relating to the plausibility of the emerging scientific knowledge, the developmental phases of science or the ideals of truth. The proposed theoretical history of science constitutes only an attempt to reconstruct the said phenomena in subjective-rational terms, and hence has a culture-descriptive character. The aim of the article is to present the potential and limitations of using this conception for the study of the history of medical sciences.
在耶日·克米塔所采用的方法中,科学的理论史是对科学实践历史的反思,这种反思将该实践的技术作用视为其定义功能的出发点,同时认识到这种实践在主观理性方面受到现代欧洲文化特定领域的规范,这种文化被象征性地描述为科学。在这种理解中,科学是社会方法意识,即研究群体所尊重的、以理性主观方式普遍规范科学实践的所有规范和指令。科学的理论史考虑两种因素,将科学视为:(1)科学实践的主观理性来源,因此也间接是科学知识的来源(这种知识是真实的、可能真实的,或者比已有的科学知识更接近真理);(2)科学实践和知识的主观理性文化调节器,其功能由技术有效性的需求决定,也可能由评价宗教和教育有效性的需求决定,并且能够满足这些需求。遵循这些方面的历史变化不受与新出现的科学知识的合理性、科学的发展阶段或真理理想相关的评价性判断的约束。所提出的科学理论史仅仅是试图以主观理性的方式重构上述现象,因此具有文化描述的性质。本文的目的是展示使用这一概念研究医学科学史的潜力和局限性。