Nassar Dalia
Philosophy Department, University of Sydney, Australia.
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2016 Aug;58:57-66. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2016.03.008. Epub 2016 Jun 14.
In contrast to the previously widespread view that Kant's work was largely in dialogue with the physical sciences, recent scholarship has highlighted Kant's interest in and contributions to the life sciences. Scholars are now investigating the extent to which Kant appealed to and incorporated insights from the life sciences and considering the ways he may have contributed to a new conception of living beings. The scholarship remains, however, divided in its interest: historians of science are concerned with the content of Kant's claims, and the ways in which they may or may not have contributed to the emerging science of life, while historians of philosophy focus on the systematic justifications for Kant's claims, e.g., the methodological and theoretical underpinnings of Kant's statement that living beings are mechanically inexplicable. My aim in this paper is to bring together these two strands of scholarship into dialogue by showing how Kant's methodological concerns (specifically, his notion of reflective judgment) contributed to his conception of living beings and to the ontological concern with life as a distinctive object of study. I argue that although Kant's explicit statement was that biology could not be a science, his implicit and more fundamental claim was that the study of living beings necessitates a distinctive mode of thought, a mode that is essentially analogical. I consider the implications of this view, and argue that it is by developing a new methodology for grasping organized beings that Kant makes his most important contribution to the new science of life.
与先前广泛流传的观点,即康德的著作主要是与物理科学进行对话不同,最近的学术研究突出了康德对生命科学的兴趣及其对生命科学的贡献。学者们现在正在研究康德在何种程度上借鉴并融入了生命科学的见解,并思考他可能以何种方式促成了对生物的一种新观念。然而,学术研究在兴趣方面仍然存在分歧:科学史家关注康德主张的内容,以及这些主张对新兴生命科学可能产生或未产生贡献的方式,而哲学史家则专注于康德主张的系统论证,例如,康德关于生物无法用机械论解释这一陈述的方法论和理论基础。本文的目的是通过展示康德的方法论关切(具体而言,他的反思判断力概念)如何促成了他对生物的观念以及对将生命作为一种独特研究对象的本体论关切,使这两种学术研究思路展开对话。我认为,尽管康德明确表示生物学不可能成为一门科学,但他隐含的且更为根本的主张是,对生物的研究需要一种独特的思维方式,一种本质上是类比性的思维方式。我思考了这一观点的影响,并认为正是通过发展一种把握有机生物的新方法论,康德才对新兴的生命科学做出了最重要的贡献。