從科學哲學思辨政治科學的基礎

政治科學包涵理論與方法論，政治理論大致分規範性與科學性，規範性理論如「應然」取向的政治哲學思想屬之；科學理論則是「實然」取向，志在描述、解釋與預測現象，以建立經驗通則成理論。這種分殊起因於認識論考察現象的立場差異，因此產生方法論在研究設計與研究途徑的爭論。影響所及，政治學在理論建構與知識累積的過程，面臨應該用什麼準則建立科學知識的挑戰。科學理論難道沒有哲學？哲學理論難道沒有科學精神？科學哲學結合兩者，其意涵為何？何以政治科學的基礎當從科學哲學來思辨？這些問題涉及科學的經驗面與理論面，這要追溯自本體論到認識論，西哲企圖建構科學知識的脈絡。本文的立論不在探討科學哲學的哲理意義，或是學派爭辯與方法論的優劣，而是運用具影響力的科學哲學家－孔恩、波柏、拉卡托斯，他們為科學方法所建構的理論意涵，省思科學哲學對政治學建立科學知識的啟發。特別是針對（後）行為主義以降經驗政治所掀起的典範爭議，促使政治學反省科學知識的建構，不應急速下拉到方法論層次論方法的技術面，應該回歸科學哲學的法統進行經驗意涵的辯證。

關鍵字

科學哲學；科學內容；科學準則；後行為主義；經驗意涵

並列摘要

The scope of political science consists of theory and methodology. Political theory is usually divided into normative theory and scientific theory. The former is ”ought to be” approach, while the latter refers ”is” approach that aims to describe, explain and predict phenomena so as to build generations or theories. Both are in the position of epistemological differences, and then the methodological aspects research designs and approaches are differentiated. Political science bears the brunt to build scientific criteria to accumulate scientific knowledge: Is philosophy embedded in scientific theory? Does scientific philosophy contain the spirit of science? What scientific philosophy really is? Why should we verify political science with scientific philosophy? These thinking points are related to theoretical and empirical surfaces of science, and lead us to the context from which western philosopher tried to construct ontology and epistemology. The research does not explain philosophical significance of the philosophy of science, or argue with the methodology of the merits of school, yet shows Kuhn, Popper, and Lakatos discourse by which the scientific theories or methods are constructed. We especially focus on the paradigm argument comes from (post) behavioralism. Rethink that political science should not rapidly drop down to the technical aspects of methods, researchers might hold scientific philosophy to make empirical implication in dialectic thinking.