析波普尔政治哲学之困境

发布时间：2018-03-27 09:33

本文选题：波普尔　切入点：政治哲学　出处：《中国政法大学》2011年博士论文

【摘要】：波普尔政治哲学是对时代发展主旋律的一种回应。然而,由于其时代的动荡和其政治哲学存在的诸多困境,使他与20世纪的思想家相比,其学说的命运显得格外悖谬。从方法论上看,波普尔政治哲学是根据独特的认识论和方法论推论而来的,这使得他的政治哲学论证严密和观点新颖。然而,其强势之处必是其弱势之点。一方面,方法论个人主义对密尔心理学主义和方法论整体主义的批判不但不成功,反而还陷入了“形而上学”的迷途。另一方面,在论证过程中,由于其认识论和方法论上的适用范围的限制、倚重逻辑抽象,以及运用二元对立和制衡的思维模式,使得其论证效果矛盾重重,难以自圆其说。此外,波普尔的悖论群也陷入了消减“中心主义”的悖论,终究难逃逻辑上的自悖。这样,最终其方法论只能是一种“想象力的贫困”。在理论上,首先是作为一种消极功利主义的“最小痛苦原则”不但存在着“痛苦难以达成共识”、“与平等主义的不相容性”以及“导致的不良后果”三个方面的缺陷,而且波普尔也未能解决“谁的痛苦最小化”、“什么样的痛苦最小化”、“是否能够最小化”以及“如何做到最小化”的四个问题。其次,从波普尔对两种社会工程的论证来看,也存在一些悖谬与偏失。在反乌托邦社会工程的论证上,波普尔把历史主义、极权主义、科学和乌托邦社会工程联系起来是有失偏颇的；同样的,无论在合理性上还是科学验证上,他对渐进社会工程的论证也是存在问题的；更重要的是,反乌托邦社会工程、渐进社会工程与其所倡导的开放社会之间是矛盾的。最后,作为其政治哲学的最终归属点的开放社会也有着潜在的缺陷和脆弱性,这主要体现在开放社会的封闭性、权威性以及空想性上本论文无意对波普尔学说作全面的论述,而是通过对其政治哲学困境的剖析,在存在何种困境、其困境的存在对波普尔政治哲学的价值以及对西方政治界有何影响、走出困境有无必要和可能性等问题上,表达一孔之见。同时,论文进一步评论了波普尔的思想特征、政治归属以及困境效应,并得出了一些相应的结论。
[Abstract]:Popper's political philosophy is a response to the main theme of the development of the times. However, because of the turbulence of his times and the difficulties existing in his political philosophy, his theory is especially paradoxical compared with the thinkers of the 20th century. From a methodological point of view, Popper's political philosophy is based on his unique epistemology and methodology, which makes his political philosophy argumentation rigorous and novel. However, its strength must be its weak point. On the other hand, in the process of argumentation, the methodological individualism has not succeeded in criticizing Mill's psychology and methodological holism, but on the contrary, it has fallen into the "metaphysical" misguided path. Because of the limitation of its epistemology and methodology, the emphasis on logical abstraction, and the use of dual opposites and checks and balances, it is difficult to justify its argument. Popper's paradox group also fell into the paradox of abatement of "centralism", and was unable to escape the logical paradox after all. Thus, ultimately, its methodology can only be a kind of "imaginative poverty." in theory, First, as a kind of negative utilitarianism, the principle of "minimal pain" not only has three defects: "pain is difficult to reach a consensus", "incompatibility with egalitarianism" and "resulting adverse consequences". And Popper failed to solve the four questions of "who minimizes pain", "what kind of pain minimization", "whether it can be minimized," and "how to minimize it." second, in terms of Popper's argument for two kinds of social engineering, There are also some paradoxes and biases. In the case of dystopian social engineering, Popper is biased in linking historicism, totalitarianism, science and Utopian social engineering; similarly, Whether in rationality or scientific verification, his argument on progressive social engineering is also problematic; more importantly, there is a contradiction between dystopian social engineering, progressive social engineering and the open society it advocates. The open society, which is the ultimate belonging point of its political philosophy, also has potential defects and vulnerabilities, which is mainly reflected in the closed, authoritative and utopian nature of the open society. This thesis does not intend to make a comprehensive exposition of Popper's theory, but through the analysis of its political philosophy dilemma, what kind of predicament exists, what influence its existence has on Popper's political philosophy and how it affects the western political circle. At the same time, the paper further comments on Popper's ideological characteristics, political attribution and dilemma effect, and draws some corresponding conclusions.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D091

【参考文献】