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.

本文试图复兴科学文章的认识论讨论。他们的认知目标是什么？它们是如何实现的？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），至少在它们采用许多相同技术的意义上，包括整理和多种视角的并置。我们认为，考虑到现代科学的本质，这种写作方式是必要的，但它也有特定的认知好处：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，现代主义写作很容易受到某些类型的认知滥用的影响，这也可以在现代科学写作中找到实例。