On The Studies Of Local Knowledge

If the different times in the human world are defined respectively as metaphysics, theology and science in the western intellectual history, the domination of rational source from God has been transformed gradually into natural science which is dictated by the mathematical laws in the first half of the 17th century when it belongs to theological times full of dogmatism and divinity (that is reason), a universal feature of modern rationalism was formed:the subjective reason which is separate from external world on the emotion and practice is an only solid foundation of all knowledge, and the view of universal knowledge is found in the orderly world on the basis. However, on the one hand, the transformation of defining world by from religion to science occurred in the western world, the view of universal knowledge is naturally questioned; on the other hand, the form of science is changing, and the form of knowledge on the basis must be also changing. The article discusses local nature of knowledge rooted in science.The thesis includes five parts. The introduction introduces the situation of research, study routes about the topic and Geertz's and Rouse's academic achievements, and discusses the feasibility and meanings about the subject.Chapter one introduces the overview of developing of local knowledge theory. It briefly discusses the dilemmas of traditional and modern epistemology, sketches out the background of emergence of local knowledge theory, and paints the broad-brush picture about appearance and evolution of local knowledge theory from the starting point of the two " linguistics turns "The second chapter discusses how to get, deepen and verify local knowledge in the anthropological approach. Firstly, it introduces social and historical background, academic starting point and sources about the interpretation anthropology, and Greetz's critique to the past theory of anthropology. Secondly, it discusses Greetz's the strategies and methods: reinterpreted "text", questioned the method of traditional ethnography, took advantage of and developed the methods of cognitive anthropology/ethnosemantics, symbolic anthropology, linguistics and semantics in order to achieve the aim of "thick description", and then established his theory of local knowledge by the methods which were from thick description which fused many advantages of anthropologies together and developed further them when Foucault deconstructed traditional epistemology.Chapter three discusses what the nature of scientific knowledge is on earth in the framework of philosophy of scientific practice, and how it is constructed. Firstly, it investigates the origin and development of practical philosophy, and then discusses why Rouse's theory started from the criticism leveled against empiricism, especially post-empiricism which all hold the theory-dominance view of science. Secondly, it reinterprets the thoughts of two different Kuhns and the relationship between knowledge and power through the reflection on pragmatism and neo-empiricism; also analyzes theoretical hermeneutics and practical hermeneutics in their process of generalizing which is closely related with two sorts of Kuhn's thoughts, proceeds with the interpretation of science as practice. Finally, it discusses how Rouse constructed his own philosophy of scientific practices which was beyond realism and anti-realism by the criticism aimed at Heidegger's early scientific philosophy; and claimed the nature of scientific knowledge is local in the context of practice and political science on power.The forth Chapter reflects upon the two sorts of local knowledge theories above, and makes comparative studies on them. On the one hand, it analyzes the characteristics of local knowledge in the interpretative anthropology, and explains its academic plight and methodological flaws; on the other hand, it analyzes the nature of local knowledge in Rouse's philosophy, and discusses the rationality of refutation which is aimed at the questioning over Rouse's philosophy. Afterwards, it re-understands the concept of local knowledge, claims the nature of knowledge is local, and argues for its rationality. At the end of the article, it probes what we should adhere to about views of knowledge in the broader perspective of philosophy culture. It can be seen that we should moderately adhere to the local nature of scientific knowledge by the anatomy of the plight in the theories of local knowledge and by the discussion of rationality of moderate relativism.Both universal concept model of experience reductionism (natural metadiscourse) and social reductionism of social constructivism (social metadiscourse); similarly, both theory-dominance representationalist view of knowledge and practice-dominance view of knowledge are limited to an ideal context, overlooking the nature of scientific knowledge which is universal and abstract or contextual and practical, and sticking to a pole or one-sided view of knowledge. Therefore, on the one hand, we must admit it is the direct goals of science that human expands the understanding of operating rules of material world which is system of objective truth; on the other hand, we must admit to being contextual and local with the specific practices of science. Only does the view of local knowledge organically combine with the view of universal knowledge to perhaps form an appropriate view of knowledge. It is profound that the picture of arguments for science is one-way, however, we can not ignore the entirety because of the profound.