This paper attempts to revive the epistemological discussion of scientific articles. What are their epistemic aims, and how are they achieved? We argue that scientific experimental articles are best understood as a particular kind of narrative: i.e., modernist narratives (think: Woolf, Joyce), at least in the sense that they employ many of the same techniques, including colligation and the juxtaposition of multiple perspectives. We suggest that this way of writing is necessary given the nature of modern science, but it also has specific epistemic benefits: it provides readers with an effective way to grasp the content of scientific articles which increases their understanding. On the other hand, modernist writing is vulnerable to certain kinds of epistemic abuses, which can be found instantiated in modern scientific writing as well.

本文试图恢复科学文章的认识论讨论。他们的认识目标是什么，又是如何实现的？我们认为，科学实验文章最好被理解为一种特殊的叙事：即现代主义叙事（想想伍尔夫、乔伊斯），至少在某种意义上，它们采用了许多相同的技术，包括多种观点的整合和并置。我们认为，鉴于现代科学的性质，这种写作方式是必要的，但它也有特定的认识优势：它为读者提供了一种有效的方式来掌握科学文章的内容，从而增加他们的理解。另一方面，现代主义写作容易受到某些类型的认识论滥用的影响，这在现代科学写作中也可以找到。