ABSTRACT

This essay considers problems and advantages of philosophical involvement with sciences distant from our own. It endorses the view that, rather than testing of philosophical hypotheses against historical data, this is a matter of interpretation and explication. Guidelines for accessing and interpreting others’ sciences are proposed: a common ground maxim, relating to our need to find practices, questions and beliefs that we share with them; and a coherence maxim, relating to the need to do justice to the often alien ways in which others’ beliefs and practices may form coherent systems. Examples are then given of ways in which examination of distant sciences, guided by the common ground and coherence maxims, can challenge current philosophical assumptions and enrich our philosophical agenda.

摘要

这篇文章考虑了哲学介入远离我们自己的科学的问题和优势。它赞同这样一种观点，即不是根据历史数据检验哲学假设，而是解释和解释问题。提出了获取和解释他人科学的指导方针：一个共同基础的格言，涉及我们需要找到与他们分享的实践、问题和信念；连贯性准则，涉及到需要公正对待他人的信念和实践可能形成连贯性系统的通常陌生的方式。然后给出了一些例子，说明在共同点和连贯性准则的指导下，对遥远科学的检查可以挑战当前的哲学假设并丰富我们的哲学议程。