Editors’ abstract

The first part of Chen’s paper illustrates the fact that reasons contained in common sense serve an explanatory role fairly well for everyday living. The inadequacy of commonsensical explanations for abnormal cases, however, breeds the desire to seek a unified explanation for all cases. Philosopher-scientists, as Chen characterizes them, hold the conviction that such an explanation is offered by speculative theories, which are created by reflecting on the reasons contained in common sense and then weaving them into a systematic theory. The second part of the paper shows that the philosopher-scientists’ theoretical project is doomed in light of the achievement of modern science, for which success in constructing positive theories relies on technical concepts defined independently of natural understanding and languages. Seeing this might help philosophy reorient itself to conceptual investigation and reflection on experience, which in Chen’s view offer the unique form of knowing that has always been central to the philosophical tradition.

编辑摘要

Chen的论文的第一部分说明了这样一个事实，即常识所包含的原因在日常生活中起了很好的解释作用。然而，对于异常案例的常识性解释的不足，滋生了寻求对所有案例进行统一解释的愿望。正如陈所描述的那样，哲学科学家认为，这种推测是由投机理论提供的，而投机理论是通过反思常识所包含的原因，然后将其织成系统的理论而产生的。本文的第二部分表明，鉴于现代科学的成就，哲学家-科学家的理论计划注定要失败，为此，构建积极理论的成功取决于独立于自然理解和语言而定义的技术概念。