引用
論社會科學的開放性與公共性
On Openness and Publicness in the Social Sciences
作者:顧忠華(Chung-Hwa Ku) | 首次發表於 2020-06-30 | 第 35 期 December 2005
DOI:https://dx.doi.org/10.6786/TJS.200512_(35).0001
理事長演講(TSA President Address)
論文資訊 | Article information
摘要 Abstract
近年來,台灣的學術評鑑制度引起諸多爭議,此一學術政策建立在特定知識觀之上,譬如假設自然科學與社會科學並無二致,皆可透過論文於期刊發表的數量,來評鑑研究的績效等等。本文從社會科學的反身性談起,一方面探究社會科學在當前製度環境下遭遇的困境,另一方面論述社會科學知識應具有「開放性」和「公共性」的特質,方足以重建社會科學的「合法性」和「正當性」。
本文亦針對前美國社會學會(American Sociological Association)會長布洛威(Michael Burawoy)大力提倡的「公共社會學」(public sociology),進行不同類型社會學知識的討論。本文指出,無論專業社會學、政策社會學、批判社會學、或是公共社會學,都奠立於社會脈絡之上,因此「開放性」和「公共性」意味著共通的普遍質素,讓知識可以更為靈活地與社會交織,並產生改善人類生活的效益。本文認為,開放性是使學術自由成為可能的條件,如果沒有足夠的開放性,知識像是處於封閉空間之中,不能令想像力盡情飛翔;而「公共性」則是使學術責任能夠落實的助力,如果缺乏豐沛的公共性,知識像是鎖在私人倉庫之中,不能發揮造福人類的效益。而台灣的學術界想要擺脫「知識代工」的宿命,須從誠實的自我批判著手,一步步解構不合理的權威、不必要的管制、不公平的遊戲規則,如此才能眞正激發台灣學術發展的潛能。

關鍵字:社會科學、開放性、公共性、合法性、正當性、公共社會學
Many recent changes have occurred in Taiwan's academic environment, for example, the establishment of an evaluation system and the use of SCI or SSCI as indices of scientific productivity. Some measures are considered controversial, yet they are already exerting significant impacts on social science research. Two attributes of social science knowledge that form viewpoints on the sociology of knowledge are discussed in this paper, with the main argument being that all social science knowledge is reflexive in essence, and any discourse of knowledge legitimacy can only be reconstructed when social science knowledge fulfills the requirements of openness and publicness. Finally, I argue that in order to narrow the gap between social science knowledge and the world we live in, we must improve our academic environment by increasing our appreciation of multiple, critical, and reflexive values in order to win the public trust.

Keywords: social science, openness, publicness, legitimacy, public sociology
  • 關鍵詞: