「實證論」與「實在論」：建構本土心理學理論的哲學基礎

Positivism vs. Realism: Philosophical Foundations for Constructing Theories in Indigenous Psychology

實證主義者採取了「極端經驗論」（radical empiricism）的立場，認為藉由感官經驗所獲得的事實（empirical facts），就是唯一的「實在」（reality），科學家不必在「經驗現象」背後，追尋任何造成此一現象的原因或理由。實證主義者的這種「本體論」立場，讓他們相信：科學方法「證實」過的知識就是「真理」，因此他們在「方法論」上主張「實證論」，邏輯實證論者更旗幟鮮明地主張：「一個命題的意義，就是證實它的方法」（Schlick, 1936）。康德所提出的「先驗理念論」（transcendental idealism），他們認為：「後實證主義」者大多主張科學研究的對象是實在的，其「本體」卻是「超越」（transcendent）而不可及的，永遠不可為人所知。人類感官能知覺到的，僅是表徵「實在」的現象而已。由於實在的「物自身」永不可及，科學家從事科學活動的目標，是要用他創造的想像力（creative imagination），以「先驗的理念」（transcendental ideas）建構理論，描述自然秩序或模型。這種目標是人為的建構，它們雖然可能獨立於特定的個人，但卻不能獨立於人類的活動，所以必須經得起科學學術社群用各種不同的「實徵研究方法」來加以檢驗。正是因為：科學研究對象的本體（即「物自身」）是超越而永不可及的，科學家所建構的理論僅是「接近真理」而已，不代表「真理」，它必須經得起科學社群的成員用各種不同的方法來加以「否證」（Popper, 1963），因此它的方法論立場是「否證論」，而不是「實證論」。本土心理學者必須將他們的研究心態由「實證論」調整成為「實在論」，才有可能解決他們在理論建構上所遭遇的困難。

Positivism advocated radical empiricism for its ontology and argued that the only reality is what can be experienced by one's sensory organs. The only legitimate way for a scientist to recognize objects in the world is through their representations in his mind. It is unnecessary for scientists to seek the ultimate cause that creates the objective world beyond sensory experience. Such radical empiricism advocates for an epistemological view, believing that scientific theories represent truth. Therefore, Schlick (1936) proposed a famous statement that was followed by most logical positivists: ＂The meaning of a proposition is the method for its verification＂ (Schlick, 1936). In contrast, evolutionary epistemology adopts the ontology of ＂realism,＂ which assumes that there exists an ontological reality beyond our sensory experience. A scientist has to construct a theory to describe the objective world by conjecturing about the nature of its noumena. According to the transcendental idealism proposed by Kant and the various versions derived from it. The goal of scientific activities is the construction of theoretical models to depict the natural order. Hence theoretical models are constructed by scientists, and though they might be independent from any particular individual, they cannot be independent from the scientific community. Because the noumenon of an object for study is transcendent, any scientific theory constructed by a scientist is just an approximation to the truth, but not truth itself. Therefore, it must be examined by members of a scientific community through various methods. Its methodology is falsification but not verification. In order to resolve the difficulties encountered in their theoretical construction, Indigenous psychologists have to adjust their mentality form positivism to realism.