查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 高性能的波導式光電連 |
---|---|
編 次 | 中 |
作 者 | 陳瑞曾; 黃宏森; 楊智博; | 書刊名 | 光訊 |
卷期 | 47 1994.06[民83.06] |
頁次 | 頁33-34 |
分類號 | 448.533 |
關鍵詞 | 波導式光電連; 高性能; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 社會科學基本上是在聯結理論與事實間之對立關係。然而,由於分吸強調理論層面與事實層面,社會科學中存在兩種極端對立的理論典範;它們在本體論、宇宙論、認識論、人生論、方法論和研方法上,都存在極不同的內涵,而甚至使相同典範的不同學門間較不同典範的相同學門內更易溝通。 所謂強調理論層面者,指較強調科學知識的特質及科學知識的發展,以致於偏重科學知識的邏輯結構形式,和經驗檢證程序上的證實或否證過程者。他們主張不變的本體、超時空的歷史社會觀、理性與思維可以先於張方法論個體主義,並強調演繹、形式化、相關分極後及從理論到事實的研究過程,以追求一般化理論的建構。 相對而言,所謂強調事實層面者,指較強調歷史事實的分析和歷史因果關係的掌握,以致於偏重歷史實事的實存內涵,和整體因果網絡關係之發展者。他們堅持變的本體、具相對時空因果性的歷史社會、事實與存在先於理性和思維、人是被時空結構化的個體,而在方法論與研究方法上,亦主張方法論非個體主義,並強調歸納、實質化、因果分析及從事實到理論的研究過程,以重構整體歷史。 |
英文摘要 | The basical function of social sciences is to connect the world of theory with the world of fact. Due to different emphases on the aspect of theory and the aspect of fact respectively, there exist two extremely contrasting paradigms in social sciences. These two paradigms have different contents in ontology, cosmology, espistemology, philosophy of life, methodology, and research methods, and they may make students with different disciplines in the same paradigm easier to communicate with one another than those with the same discipline but in different paradigms. People who emphasize the aspect of theory pay more attention to the nature and development of scientific knowledge, and also to the logical structure of the knowledge and the procedures of its verification or falsification. They believe in the ontological constancy, universality over time and space, reason and thinking independent of fact and existence, and the atomic being of an individual. Moreover, on methodology and research methods, they follow the methodologically individualism, and they put more emphasis on deduction, formal logics, association (or correlation) analysis, and the research procedure from the level of theory to that of fact. The utmost goal for them is to construct a general theory. On the contrary, people who spotlight the aspect of fact place more stress upon the analysis of historical facts and their causal relations, and thus also the substantial contents of history and the development of its holistic causal network. They believe in the ever-changing of the ontological substance, historical causality with particularity at different time and space, fact and existence ahead of reason and thinking, and the historically structuralized being of an individual. Furthermore, on methodology and research methods, they accept the methodologically non-individualism, and they pay more attention to induction, substantial logic, causal analysis, and the research procedures from the level of fact to that of theory. The final objective for them, you may say, the reconstruction of the whole history. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。