Lavelle Sylvain
69 bis rue Boucher de Perthes, 59000 Lille, France.
Ethical Theory Moral Pract. 2005 Jun;8(3):217-38. doi: 10.1007/s10677-005-2126-x.
It has been agreed upon, according to critical perspective, to distinguish the problems raised by scientific issues on the one hand and the problems raised by moral issues on the other. This distinction, at the genesis of theoretical ideology, postulates that experimental science is mere knowledge which, since it has nothing to do with action, cannot raise a moral problem. Yet the use of experimental techniques turns out to be a necessary means, although an insufficient one, to put to the test and to confirm the theoretical hypothesis of science. Thus, those techniques produce perceptible effects which can be assimilated to genuine transformation and are consequently capable of raising moral problems. It follows that the technical imperative of science can be conditioned by a moral imperative of technique, which leads to modification of the object of the research and dubs it, a dialectical object. It is, however, advisable to effect a demarcation between that which, within the frame work of research in experimental science, can pose a moral problem and which cannot. The criterion of refusability of practical projects, by analogy with Popper's criterion of refutability of theoretical conjectures, allows for this demarcation to be implemented. It postulates that only the technical projects of science, apart from scientific theories, can pose a moral problem or can be recognized as moral, providing that the conditions of a possible ethical refusal can be expressed. From the analysis and the synthesis of heterogeneous possibilities, dialectical perspective thus outlined represents an endeavour to go beyond critical perspective, while trying to seek an intermediary channel between the "progressist dogmatism" of science and the obscurantist scepticism" of morals.
从批判的角度来看,人们已经达成共识,要区分一方面由科学问题引发的问题和另一方面由道德问题引发的问题。这种区分在理论意识形态的起源时就假定,实验科学仅仅是知识,由于它与行动无关,所以不会引发道德问题。然而,实验技术的使用结果却是一种必要手段,尽管是一种不充分的手段,用于检验和证实科学的理论假设。因此,那些技术会产生可感知的效果,这些效果可以被等同于真正的变革,因而能够引发道德问题。由此可见,科学的技术指令可能会受到技术的道德指令的制约,这会导致研究对象的改变,并将其称为辩证对象。然而,明智的做法是在实验科学研究框架内能够引发道德问题的事物和不能引发道德问题的事物之间进行区分。通过类比波普尔的理论猜想可证伪性标准,实际项目的可拒绝性标准使得这种区分得以实施。它假定,除了科学理论之外,只有科学的技术项目能够引发道德问题或者能够被视为道德的,前提是能够表达出可能的伦理拒绝的条件。这样勾勒出的辩证视角,通过对异质可能性的分析和综合,代表了一种超越批判视角的努力,同时试图在科学的“进步主义教条主义”和道德的“蒙昧主义怀疑论”之间寻找一条中间渠道。