【作者】 陈文荣；

【导师】 陈维振；

【作者基本信息】 福建师范大学 ， 英语语言文学， 2015， 博士

【摘要】 文章系统考察了人性概念以及乔姆斯基的语言观和社会观,并分别把其语言观和社会观与柏拉图问题和奥维尔问题联系起来。文章认为人性概念是乔姆斯基语言观和社会观的基础,因此也构成了统一柏拉图问题与奥维尔问题的基础。柏拉图问题是,人为什么知之甚多,而他的经验却是如此贫乏?而奥维尔问题是：人为什么知之甚少,而他的经验却是如此丰富?在语言研究中,乔姆斯基发现了柏拉图问题,语言认知系统中许多复杂特征,以及儿童能够自由地运用和理解语言的能力,无法用儿童语言习得时所接触的少量且零星的语言材料来解释。乔姆斯基因此提出了“语言先天假说”,认为正是依靠先天的本能知识,儿童才能从零星的材料中推导出复杂而精致的知识系统。这种本能或先天知识的模式,是人性的基本构成部分。推而广之,乔姆斯基相信在人类其它认知和行为领域,也存在着类似的模式,这些模式是人们个人行为、社会行为、以及智力行为的指导原则,它们同样也是人性的重要构成部分。乔姆斯基相信,先天知识具有一定的生理物质基础,随着科学的发展,人们终究能够辨识这些生理物质基础。正如笛卡尔和牛顿试图把某些显奥的概念形式化、数学化,从而把它们纳入科学的范畴,乔姆斯基也努力把先天知识形式化、数学化,试图使得人性这个抽象的形而上学概念能够纳入到科学的概念范畴之内。诚然,乔姆斯基不否认社会因素在塑造人的行为过程中的重要作用,但是他认为,人的生物性不但规定了人的知识范围,而且还规定了社会因素作用下的人的可塑性的范围。但由于生物性的限定是无意识的,人仍然能够感受和享受到自由选择和自由创造的可能性,这就解释了为什么乔姆斯基在谈论人性时不断强调和突出自由和创造。与柏拉图问题紧密相关的是奥维尔问题。乔姆斯基认为,如果不解决奥维尔问题,柏拉图问题也难以解决。奥维尔所刻画的专制社会中诸如思想控制和剥夺自由等现象,同样存在于美国社会,但人们对此却采取了非理性的顺服态度。乔姆斯基认为他的任务就是揭示这种非理性的态度及其产生机制。因此,他从不同角度深刻批评美国社会,揭示人性是如何得到压制,从而迫使民众放弃政治参与以及对真理和真相的追求。为解决奥维尔问题,乔姆斯基设想了一个无政府工团主义组织,它是一个松散的联邦式的自由协会,在这个组织中,人性遭受压制的问题能够得以克服,人性固有的创造冲动能够在生物性规定的范围内得以充分的发挥。必须承认,乔姆斯基并没有详细地描绘出以人性为基础的理想社会模式,更无法具体地说明如何才能够成功地构建这样的社会模式。尽管这一模式和他的人性概念必定充满争议,但其中所蕴含的价值观意义却不容忽视。乔姆斯基研究的启发意义在于,我们应该明确人和社会的发展目标,无论它是如何难以企及。我们相信,一个理想的社会必须能为批评和改革留下余地,因此,我们的首要任务就是在批评中建立起健康的批评和对话环境,并提出可能的社会改革或社会变革理论。更多还原

【Abstract】 This dissertation, based on a systematical study of the concept of human nature, Chomsky’s linguistic ideas and his social views, claims that it is the concept of human nature that underlines Chomsky’s linguistic ideas and social views, thus relating them to the Platonic Problem and the Orwellian Problem that Chomsky tries to answer in his linguistic and social studies, namely, "Why does man know so much while his experience is so poor"? and "Why does man know so little while his experience is so rich"?Chomsky finds that the Platonic Problem arises in language acquisition as there are many complicated linguistic features and the creative use of language demonstrated by a child that cannot be explained with the scattered linguistic data that he has encountered. He therefore proposes the concept of "innate knowledge" or" innate structure" to bridge the gap between the highly articulated and organized linguistic system a person has acquired and the limited amount of data that he has been exposed to. He believes that the "innate knowledge" is the basic component of human nature that enables a child to derive his language from the limited amount of linguistic data. What is more, Chomsky suggests that there are similar innate principles guiding human behavior, individual, social or intellectual. They are also the basic parts of human nature.More interestingly, Chomsky believes that these biologically constrained principles are likely to be found some day in the future with the advance of science. And he strives to formalize these principles, in an attempt to transform the concept of human nature into a scientific concept, as what Descartes and Newton did. True, Chomsky doesn’t deny the role that social factors play in shaping human behavior, but he insists that these biological foundations not only delimit the scope of human knowledge, but also the range of variation under the influence of social factors. But as these biological constraints go unconsciously, human beings can still experience and enjoy the access to free choice and creation. This is why he highlights freedom and creativity in his discussion of human nature.Closely related to the Platonic Problem is the Orwellian Problem. For Chomsky, problems like ideological control and deprivation of freedom, as described by Orwell, exist in America as well. In face of the obedient public, Chomsky believes that his mission is to reveal this irrationality and the mechanism that has produced it. Consequently, he exposes from different angles how American society suppresses human nature and keeps the public from pursuing the truth and participating in politics in the real sense. To solve the Orwellian problem, Chomsky pictures an anarcho-syndicalism, a decentralized federated free association, in which the intrinsic creativity of human nature can be brought to full play within the scope determined by its biological foundations.True, this picture of an ideal society based on Chomsky’s concept of human nature is still vague and controversial, but the attempt itself is intrinsically valuable. Remote as the goal might seem from us, we shoud make for a robust public discourse open to criticism and conducive to the birth of theories of social reforms and transformations.更多还原