【作者】 黄思樱；

【导师】 黄瑞雄；

【作者基本信息】 广西师范大学 ， 科学技术哲学， 2009， 硕士

【摘要】 “判决性实验”(crucial experiment)是指能够决定性地判决相互竞争假说或理论“真”“假”的实验,它涉及到实践对理论检验的问题。作为一种科学方法,“判决性实验”的可行性在科学史和科学哲学史上曾倍受争议。直到现在,它仍然是科学哲学界经常讨论的话题。所以,我们也很有必要对此作更进一步的研究。不可否认,“判决性实验”作为科学实验中的一种独特形式,其对假说或理论的检验的可靠性比起普通的科学观察记录更有优势。特别是对于与之相背离的假说可以提供一种有力的反驳,深刻揭露其内在的缺陷和矛盾,而对于与之相容的假说则提供有力的支持,增强其确证程度。在科学史上,“判决性实验”的强大功能有目共睹。1957年初,华人女性物理学家吴健雄(1912-1997)与美国国家标准局的科学家就是通过设计互为镜像且包含弱相互作用的两套实验装置,利用有关粒子衰变特征的“判决性实验”,检查两套装置中粒子衰变的宇称结果是否总是相同,并最终成功得出在这样的弱相互作用中宇称守恒不成立的结论。又如,1887年,迈克耳逊(A?A?Michelson,1852-1931)和物理学家莫雷(E.W.Morley,1838-1923)在麦克斯韦(James Clerk Maxwell ,1831-1879)研究的基础之上,运用超高精度的实验设计得出了以太并不存在的结论。可以说,这些都是物理学上经典的“判决性实验”。当然,任何科学实验都很难超越当时的社会历史条件,其某些时候出现一定的误差也在所难免。如在光的波粒之争的实验判决中,“判决性实验”并没有获得令人满意的结果。但作为科学研究的重要工具,对于“判决性实验”,我们绝不能武断地将其抛弃。我们要创造有利条件,科学地设定其应用维度,把“判决性实验”的功能发挥到最佳状态。客观地说,“判决性实验”在科学研究领域的应用的确也应当是一个长期而又复杂的过程。我们不同意学界一些观点,他们在看到“判决性实验”出现判决失误时便否定这种实验的判定意义,这种做法终将会把理论评价引入相对主义的泥塘。因此,本文认为“判决性实验”在科学研究的特定历史时期,有其存在的合理性。目前我们需要做的就是,尝试针对“判决性实验”内在机制的一些可能的弱点,提出一些改良的措施,尽力使其判决功能达到一种最佳的状态,以期达到对科学方法论在一定程度上的丰富和发展。为此,本文主要从科学史和科学哲学的角度深层次地挖掘“判决性实验”的内在机制,并运用马克思主义的实践观重新审视“判决性实验”曾取得的成功及其可能面临的困境。本文的主旨在于尝试探寻合理运用“判决性实验”的空间及方法,为将来更好地从事科学研究工作提供方法论支持。本论文主要分三个部分。在第一部分中,对“判决性实验”进行概述,主要探讨“判决性实验”的提出背景、逻辑结构、基本要素、基本类型,同时结合科学实例分析其在科学史上被运用所获得的成功及遇到的困难。第二部分主要探讨“判决性实验”存在与否的争议及启示,并从“判决性实验”的机制层面分析其可能受到挑战的原因,如“迪昂-奎因”命题带来的挑战、“范式”之间“不可通约”对“判决性实验”的挑战、纯粹中性证据难寻带来的挑战等,使这一看似矛盾的现象获得合理的解释。第三部分则建设性地重点探讨如何运用互补方法论思维实现对“判决性实验”的有效利用,即既承认实践是检验真理的唯一标准,又不把“判决性实验”绝对化;既看到竞争理论之间的对立,又重视其中的互补效应;既客观地看待科学实验本身的结果,又充分重视科学研究之外的社会因素;既善于突破传统科学观的科学神秘化思维,又充分尊重和保护科学中的“未知”。此外,在这一部分中,本文还提出在合适维度上运用“判决性实验”的构想。最后,本文提出运用定量研究和定性研究相结合的思想解决“判决性实验”的判决效力如何最大程度实现的难题,并且探讨了社会科学中“判决性实验”的运用策略等问题。更多还原

【Abstract】 "Crucial experiment" is able to adjudge the hypothesis or theory crucially "correct" and "wrong", if the hypothesis or theory is to compete mutually. It relates to a problem that use practice to check theory.The feasibility of "Crucial experiment" once aroused dispute on history of science and philosophy of science history. Until now, it is still the topic which the scholars of scientific philosophy discuss frequently. Therefore, we have the necessity to make the further regarding the research. Being not allowed to deny, the reliability of "Crucial experiment" have advantage more comparing with average science observation. It can provide one kind of forceful counterplea for hypothesis. It is able to bring the inherent defect and contradiction of hypothesis deeply. At the same time, it can provide forceful support then to hypothesis compatible with that, and strengthen whose ironclad proof degree. On history of science, the powerful function of " Crucial experiment " is universally recognized, beginning of the year 1957, Chinese female physicist jianxiong Wu (1912-1997) and scientists of USA National Bureau of Standards make arrangements for being each other’s a mirror resembling the two set of experiment device containing weak coactions at present ,They examine the results that the two set of device is hit by the particle decay and reach the conclusion conserving in such a weak coactions not to be founded ultimately successfully. Besides, in 1887, A?A?Michelson(1852-1931)and E. W. Morley (1838 - 1923)are based on the experiment basis of James Clerk Maxwell (1831—1879) ,they apply to surpass high-accuracy designs that having reached an aether not the existence conclusion. This is also a successful crucial experiment. We can say these all are that the physics mounts the classical court decision experiment. Of course, any society of scientific experiment are all very difficult to exceed that time historical condition, it’s moment certain error are also unavoidable. In the judging of argument of wave and particle, "Crucial experiment" does not gain another satisfied result. But as an important study implement of science, we definitely cannot abandon "Crucial experiment" assertively. We must create favourable conditions and sets up the right field for applying it, Function of "Crucial experiment" should be brought into optimum state. Generally speaking, "Crucial experiment" is one kind of long range and complicated process as well in study of science field application. Therefore, we do not agree with a few viewpoints. After seeing "Crucial experiment" fault, they deny the experiment decision significance. This method of work finally will be able to lead theory valuation into a relativism. Therefore, We think that " Crucial experiment " have its rationality of existence in the specially appointed study of science history period .We need to overcome the measure attempting to suggest that some ameliorate to some possible weakness of " Crucial experiment " at present. We need to set the function of adjugement to reach optimum state, and to look forward to develop the methodology of science.For this purpose, We analyze it deeply from the science history and scientific philosophy angle. We apply Marxist practice to scan "Crucial experiment" success having got and their difficult position facing the possibility. We want to seek wields space and wields method of "Crucial experiment ". Our purpose is to provide methodology support to being engaged in the study of science job much better in the future.The thesis divides into three parts mainly. In Part I, we carry out a summary on "court decision experiment", discuss "court decision experiment " put forward background , logic structure , basic key element , fundamental type mainly. At the same time we analyses it’s success and the difficulty by history of science. In Part II, we discuss "court decision experiment " dispute and enlightenment mainly, and analyses the cause may accept challenge , such as challenge of“Duhem-Quine Thesis”, No coherent appointment between the canonical form, Pure neuter evidence is difficult to search,etc. We want to make this phenomenon once look like contradictious gaining rational making an explanation. In Part III , We constructively have the effect to make use of "Crucial experiment "by Complementary methodology thought. Admit Practice is the sole criterion for testing truth,do not make "Crucial experiment " absolutize; See the effect competing for countering against between theory , take complementation among them seriously; Treat a scientific experiment result objectively, take the social factor besides study of science seriously also sufficiently.Be good at breaking tradition view of science science making a mystery of thought, Respect and protect "unknown" to hit the target science sufficiently. Besides, We bring forward idea wielding the court decision experiment in right range. At last , We bring forward the thought applying quantitative analysis qualitative analysis to be tied in wedlock each other , we want to resolve the problem how to make the effect of "Crucial experiment " maximal . Besides, we discuss the tactics of "Crucial experiment "in social sciences problem.更多还原