因果机制与解放旨趣:批判实在论对社会科学二元对立的超越
Causal Mechanisms and Emancipatory Interests: Critical Realism’s Transcendence of Binary Oppositions in Social Sciences
摘要: 自社会科学诞生以来,实证主义与解释主义的分立对峙便贯穿其发展内部的各个领域。一般来说,前者追求客观、普遍的因果法则,却常因其扁平化的实在论与自然主义立场引发争议;后者强调对主观意义的理解,却又面临相对主义和解释力较弱的困境。本文旨在系统阐述罗伊·巴斯卡所开创的批判实在论如何通过对社会科学的核心概念——尤其是因果与价值——进行根本性重塑,从而为社会科学提供一条超越上述二元对立的可能进路。本文认为,批判实在论的核心贡献在于其分层的本体论、生成性的理由阐释因果观以及事实关联的价值论,并最终通过解释性批判这一概念实现对前述理论的整合,从而导向社会科学的实践维度。通过这一系列概念重构与理论建构,批判实在论为社会科学的解释力与批判性提供了坚实的哲学基础,深刻重塑了社会科学研究的本质、规范与使命。
Abstract: Since the inception of social science, the divide between positivism and interpretivism has pervaded its various internal domains. Broadly speaking, the former pursues objective, universal causal laws but is often criticized for its flattened realism and naturalist stance. The latter emphasizes the understanding of subjective meanings yet faces the dilemmas of relativism and weak explanatory power. This paper aims to systematically elaborate how the critical realism pioneered by Roy Bhaskar offers a possible path for transcending this binary opposition in social science through a fundamental reconceptualization of its core concepts—particularly causality and value. It argues that the central contribution of critical realism lies in its stratified ontology, its generative-explanatory conception of causality, and its fact-value nexus, ultimately integrating the aforementioned theories through the concept of explanatory critique, thereby orienting social science towards its practical dimension. Through this series of conceptual reconstructions and theoretical constructions, critical realism provides a solid philosophical foundation for the explanatory power and critical potential of social science, profoundly reshaping its nature, norms, and mission.
文章引用:裴淏博. 因果机制与解放旨趣:批判实在论对社会科学二元对立的超越[J]. 哲学进展, 2026, 15(2): 301-309. https://doi.org/10.12677/acpp.2026.152082

参考文献

[1] 朱红文. 社会科学与哲学的关系: 社会科学史的视角[J]. 天津社会科学, 2003(5): 4-9.
[2] 郑震. 论实证主义与解释学的方法论争论[J]. 天津社会科学, 2016(1): 78-84.
[3] 殷杰. 当代西方的社会科学哲学研究现状、趋势和意义[J]. 中国社会科学, 2006(3): 26-38.
[4] 殷杰, 安篪. 巴斯卡的批判实在论思想——兼议哲学社会科学研究之第三条进路[J]. 哲学研究, 2007(9): 96-102.
[5] Gorski, P.S. (2013) “What Is Critical Realism? And Why Should You Care?”. Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 42, 658-670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[6] 彭玉生. 社会科学中的因果分析[J]. 社会学研究, 2011, 26(3): 1-32, 243.
[7] 王姝彦. 回望与反思: 实证主义之于科学哲学的影响[J]. 晋阳学刊, 2015(6): 11-16.
[8] 袁继红. 科学哲学与社会科学本土化有什么关联? [J]. 科学技术哲学研究, 2013, 30(3): 18-23.
[9] 江怡. 当代西方科学哲学的走向分析[J]. 自然辩证法研究, 2005(7): 15-19.
[10] 郭金杰. 温奇的诠释性社会科学哲学[J]. 自然辩证法研究, 2008(6): 12-15.
[11] (英)大卫∙休谟. 人性论[M]. 关文运, 译. 北京: 商务印书馆, 2016: 504-506.
[12] (美)希拉里∙普特南. 事实与价值二分法的崩溃[M]. 应奇, 译. 北京: 东方出版社, 2006: 27-28.
[13] Bhaskar, R. (1986/2009) Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation. Routledge.
[14] Bhaskar, R. and Lawson, T. (1998) Introduction: Basic Texts and Developments. In: Archer, M., Bhaskar, R., Collier, A., et al., Eds., Critical Realism: Essential Readings, Routledge, 3-15.
[15] Bhaskar, R. (1975/2008) A Realist Theory of Science. Routledge.
[16] Harré, R. and Madden, E.H. (1975) Causal Powers: A Theory of Natural Necessity. Basil Blackwell, 28-31.
[17] Sayer, A. (1981) Abstraction: A Realist Interpretation. Radical philosophy, No. 28, 6-15.
[18] Bhaskar, R. (1979/2005) The Possibility of Naturalism: A Philosophical Critique of the Contemporary Human Sciences. Taylor & Francis.
[19] Archer, M.S. (1998) Realism in the Social Sciences. In: Archer, M., Bhaskar, R., Collier, A., et al., Eds., Critical Realism: Essential Readings, Routledge, 356-382.
[20] Porpora, D.V. (1998) Four Concepts of Social Structure. In: Archer, M., Bhaskar, R., Collier, A., et al., Eds., Critical Realism: Essential Reading, Routledge, 339-355.
[21] Benton, T. (1998) Realism and Social Science. In: Archer, M., Bhaskar, R., Collier, A., et al., Eds., Critical Realism: Essential Reading, Routledge, 1998, 297-311.
[22] Sayer, A. (2011) Why Things Matter to People: Social Science, Values and Ethical Life. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[23] Collier, A. (1994) Critical Realism: An Introduction to Roy Bhaskar’s Philosophy. Verso, 172 p.
[24] Collier, A. (1998) Explanation and Emancipation. In: Archer, M., Bhaskar, R., Collier, A., et al., Eds., Critical Realism: Essential Reading, Routledge, 444-473.
[25] Lacey, H. (1997) Neutrality in the Social Sciences: On Bhaskar’s Argument for an Essential Emancipatory Impulse in Social Science. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 27, 213-241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[26] Bhaskar, R. (1993) Dialectic: The Pulse of Freedom. Verso, 245 p.
[27] Sayer, A. (1992) Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach. 2nd Edition, Routledge, p 5.
[28] Norrie, A. (1998) The Praxiology of Legal Judgement. In: Archer, M., Bhaskar, R., Collier, A., et al., Eds., Critical Realism: Essential Reading, Routledge, 544-558.
[29] Nouman, M. (2012) Treading Conventional Divides: The Case for an Alternative Paradigmatic Influence. Business Review, 7, 72-83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[30] Flatschart, E. (2017) Feminist Standpoints and Critical Realism. the Contested Materiality of Difference in Intersectionality and New Materialism. Journal of Critical Realism, 16, 284-302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[31] Albert, K., Brundage, J.S., Sweet, P. and Vandenberghe, F. (2020) Towards a Critical Realist Epistemology? Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 50, 357-372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[32] Zhang, T. (2022) Critical Realism: A Critical Evaluation. Social Epistemology, 37, 15-29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef