竺可桢与彭加勒科学方法论的三重比较

A Threefold Comparison of Scientific Methodologies: Zhu Kezhen and Henri Poincaré

摘要: 竺可桢与彭加勒均是中国和法国科学史研究的代表人物。虽然两人在研究的侧重点上有差异，但从科学方法论的角度去审视，他们之间透露出一定的趋同迹象。这体现在两人都极为看重假设方法以及科学史的研究，并主张于经验主义和理性主义之间探求一条科学发展的中间路径。需要说明的是，彭加勒被其所处时代背景以及个人思想条件所制约，其观点的说服力不如竺可桢那般充分。但无可辩驳的是，他们都为世界科学的进步做出了不可磨灭的功绩。针对两位思想家的科学方法论进行比较，不仅有益于强化我们对科学本质的领悟，还能为当代科学研究提供宝贵的理论资源。

Abstract: Zhu Kezhen and Henri Poincaré are emblematic figures in the history of science in China and France respectively. Although their research foci diverged, a methodological lens reveals a striking convergence: both assigned paramount importance to the method of hypothesis and to the study of the history of science, and each sought a middle path between empiricism and rationalism for scientific advance. It must be noted that Poincaré, constrained by the intellectual climate and personal pre-suppositions of his era, articulated his views with less persuasive force than Zhu. Nonetheless, it is beyond dispute that both made indelible contributions to the progress of world science. Comparing the scientific methodologies of these two thinkers not only deepens our grasp of the nature of science but also furnishes contemporary research with invaluable theoretical resources.