Bach Theodore
Firelands College, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH United States.
Synthese. 2022;200(2):118. doi: 10.1007/s11229-022-03521-4. Epub 2022 Apr 8.
The kinds of real or natural kinds that support explanation and prediction in the social sciences are difficult to identify and track because they change through time, intersect with one another, and they do not always exhibit their properties when one encounters them. As a result, conceptual practices directed at these kinds will often refer in ways that are partial, equivocal, or redundant. To improve this epistemic situation, it is important to employ open-ended classificatory concepts, to understand when different research programs are tracking the same real kind, and to maintain an ongoing commitment to interact causally with real kinds to focus reference on those kinds. A tempting view of these non-idealized epistemic conditions should be avoided: that they signal an ontological structure of the social world so plentiful that it would permit ameliorated (norm-driven, conceptually engineered) classificatory schemes to achieve their normative aims regardless of whether they defer (in ways to be described) to real-kind classificatory schemes. To ground these discussions, the essay appeals to an overlooked convergence in the systematic naturalistic frameworks of Richard Boyd and Ruth Millikan.
在社会科学中,那些能够支持解释和预测的真实种类或自然种类很难被识别和追踪,因为它们会随时间变化,相互交叉,而且人们遇到它们时,它们并不总是展现出自身的属性。因此,针对这些种类的概念实践往往会以片面、含糊或冗余的方式来指称。为了改善这种认知状况,采用开放式分类概念、理解不同研究项目何时在追踪同一种真实种类,以及持续致力于与真实种类进行因果互动,以便将指称聚焦于这些种类,是很重要的。应该避免对这些非理想化认知条件的一种诱人观点:即它们标志着社会世界的一种本体论结构,这种结构非常丰富,以至于改良后的(规范驱动、概念设计的)分类方案无论是否(以将被描述的方式)遵循真实种类分类方案,都能实现其规范性目标。为了为这些讨论奠定基础,本文诉诸于理查德·博伊德和露丝·米利肯的系统自然主义框架中一个被忽视的趋同点。