心理学的前提审理:对象化预设的完备失败 / 心智的否定性约束:非对象性下的知识形态与边界 Premise Examination of Psychology: The Complete Failure of the Objectification Premise / The Negative Constraint of Mind: The Form and Limits of Knowledge Under Non-Objectifiability

本文包含两篇相互衔接的论文。 第一篇《心理学的前提审理》对心理学的存在论前提——心智可以被对象化——进行审理。论证不从任何外部前提出发,而是将心理学家自己的理论应用到产生这些理论的行为本身,逐一展示其自反矛盾。八个案例覆盖对象化的全部可能路径,全部失败。从这些失败中提取出三个独立的存在论前提:心智不是对象、心智是一种主体性运行、心智的成立具有持续性约束。三个前提不是被提出的公理,而是任何关于心智的理论行为得以发生的存在论条件——否定它们的理论在应用到自身时自我取消。 第二篇《心智的否定性约束》追问这三个前提的认识论后果。论证表明:正向定义心智在结构上不可能;否定性约束是关于心智的知识在非对象性条件下所能取的唯一合法形态。心智归属判断在两个方向上都不可完成。对心智成立条件的结构分解不可能达到穷尽性,但可以达到不可压缩性与同质性,穷尽性不可确认的来源被精确定位。体系各层级的认识论地位被逐层区分。 This volume contains two interconnected papers. The first, "Premise Examination of Psychology," examines the foundational ontological premise of psychology: that the mind can be treated as an object. Rather than arguing from any external standpoint, it applies each psychologist's own theory to the very act that produced it, exposing self-referential contradictions across eight cases that structurally exhaust all possible paths of objectification. From these failures, three independent ontological premises are extracted: the mind is not an object, the mind is a form of subjective operation, and the mind's constitution requires continuity. These are not proposed axioms but existential conditions for any theoretical activity concerning the mind — theories that deny them cancel themselves when applied to their own production. The second, "The Negative Constraint of Mind," investigates the epistemological consequences of these three premises. It demonstrates that a positive definition of the mind is structurally impossible; that negative constraint is the only legitimate form of knowledge about the mind under non-objectifiability; that mental attribution cannot be completed in either direction; and that structural decomposition of the mind's constitutive conditions can achieve incompressibility and homogeneity but not exhaustiveness, with the source of unconfirmable exhaustiveness precisely located. The epistemological status of each level of the theoretical system is distinguished layer by layer.