“李约瑟难题”的前提反思与理论重构

The Premise Reflection and Theoretical Reconstruction of the “Needham Puzzle”

摘要: “李约瑟难题”自提出以来，长期是中国科技史领域的核心议题。然而“难题”实为立论前提与设问形式皆存疑的伪问题。从立论前提看，其所指向的中国古代科技优势更多体现在技术层面，与现代科学所需的理论体系有本质不同，而库恩的“范式革命”理论揭示了科学演进中的非连续性，也动摇了“难题”赖以成立的科学连续发展观。从设问形式看，李约瑟试图探究一个“未发生”的历史事件之原因，也使其难以获得确凿的答案。尽管如此，“李约瑟难题”仍有重要的学术意义：它打破了科学史研究中的西方中心论，也促使学界关注科学与社会之间的复杂关系，推动了科学社会学的发展。“李约瑟难题”无法从文明之间的外部比较中得到回答，只有将其转为对文明内生机制的考察即“现代科学为何在西方诞生”这一问题，才能得到具有历史必然性的解答。西方之所以能诞生现代科学，虽然得益于其文明中延续的理性主义传统，但更本质的因素是资本主义生产方式下，资本增殖、技术与科学理论的相互协作。随着时间进入二十一世纪，中国科技发展所取得的傲人成就已经超越了任何在文明比较中对中国科技基因的历史诘问。

Abstract: The “Needham Puzzle” has long been a core issue in the field of Chinese science and technology history since its proposal. However, the “Puzzle” is actually a pseudo-question that both the premise and the form of the question are invalid. From the perspective of the premise of the argument, the technological advantages of ancient China that it points to are more reflected in the technical level, which is fundamentally different from the theoretical system required by modern science. Kuhn’s “paradigm revolution” theory reveals the discontinuity in the evolution of science and also shakes the scientific concept of continuous development that “Needham Puzzle” relies on. From the perspective of form of the question, Joseph Needham’s attempt to explore the reasons for a historical event that did not occur also made it difficult to obtain a definitive answer. However, the “Needham Puzzle” still has important academic significance: it breaks the Western centric view in the study of the history of science, and also prompts the academic community to pay attention to the complex relationship between science and society, promoting the development of sociology of science. The “Needham Puzzle” cannot be answered from external comparisons between civilizations. Only by turning it into an examination of the endogenous mechanisms of civilizations, namely the question of “why modern science emerged in the West”, can a historically inevitable answer be obtained. The reason why the West was able to give birth to modern science, although benefiting from the rationalist tradition that continues in its civilization, is more fundamentally due to the mutual cooperation between capital proliferation, technology, and scientific theory under the capitalist mode of production. Entering the 21st century, the impressive achievements of China’s technological development have surpassed any historical questioning of China’s technological genes in the comparison of civilizations.