革命、演化與拼裝：從HPS到STS，從歐美到台灣

Revolution, Evolution and Reassemblage: From HPS to STS and From Euro-America to Taiwan

本文討論歐美和台灣的科史哲（HPS）和科技與社會（STS）研究中的幾個理論和「達爾文演化論」的關係。從HPS與STS的共同開創者孔恩以來，科史哲和科技與社會的許多理論家都一再地指涉「演化」的概念，亦即科學理論或科技物的演變就像是生物演化一般，科技與社會的共同發展，也是一種共演化。可是，各種談及「演化和達爾文」的HPS和STS理論，未必都是達爾文主義的。本文以「理論整體類比」的比較方法來探討孔恩的科學革命論、技術的社會建構論（SCOT）、行為者網絡理論（ANT）、還有台灣的傅大為、陳瑞麟等學者的觀點與演化論的結構相似程度。本文論證歐美的SCOT、ANT其實不具達爾文演化論的意涵，孔恩的科學革命論則可以透過「間斷平衡論」聯結演化論。台灣的STS發展由於大量使用概念拼裝的策略，使得其特色其實遠離達爾文主義。

Many theories in history and philosophy of science (HPS) and science, technology and society (STS) seem to harbor evolutionary implication in Darwinian sense. Since Thomas Kuhn, who is regarded as the founder of both HPS and STS, connected his theory of scientific revolution to Darwinian theory of evolution, many theorists in HPS and STS referred to the concept of evolution in presenting their dynamics of science and technology. Is a theory Darwinian only because it uses the concept of evolution? This question raises many other questions: What is evolutionary? How should we identify a theory with Darwinism? Is Kuhn a Darwinian in the non-biological (HPS and STS) field? Is the theory of social constructivism of technology (SCOT) a Darwinian evolutionary theory in STS? This paper argues that Kuhn may be viewed as a Darwinian in terms of the theory of Punctuated Equilibria. According to a structural analysis of Darwin’s theory of evolution, SCOT and actor network theory have little implication of Darwinian evolution. Lastly, this paper shows that Taiwanese STS studies are far distant from Darwinism, because of taking the assembling strategy that is non-evolutionary.