新中国技术发展的“人民之路”

科学技术是人类社会的重大发明,更是推动社会历史发展的关键因素。马克思和恩格斯肯定了科学技术在人类社会发展进程中所具有的最高意义的革命性地位,并从技术变革与社会变革关系的探讨中揭示了技术应用的意识形态倾向。更重要的是,马克思在针对“技术异化”现象的批判过程中对技术主体这一维度给予了高度重视,从“反面”指出了社会主义制度下技术变革需要且应当具备的“赋能”价值,这亦与技术功能所指向的人类解放的目标追求相契合。新中国成立后在技术变革领域充分践行了马克思主义科学技术思想,其呈现出的科学技术大众化的“人民之路”更符合马克思主义的价值指向,这为探索社会主义技术发展路径作出了努力,也为今天的技术发展提供了镜鉴。     

论马克思主义政治伦理思想的完整体系

马克思主义政治伦理思想的诞生,是对人类社会以往一切政治伦理思想的价值革命和积极超越。马克思主义创立的政治伦理思想,形成了一个集政治伦理认识体系、政治伦理价值体系、政治伦理制度体系和政治伦理实践体系于一体的完整思想体系,为人民大众尤其是工人阶级的根本利益进行了科学的、彻底的价值辩护和道德论证,是科学性与实践性、无产阶级道义主义和功利主义的有机统一。     

论西方马克思主义应用伦理及其基本特点

西方马克思主义应用伦理以对"科学技术合理性"问题的追问为逻辑起点,围绕科学技术与哲学、科学技术与生态、科学技术与消费关系的探讨,形成了系统的科技伦理、生态伦理和消费伦理。他们不同于一般应用伦理探讨现实问题应遵循的道德规范,而是立足于人的自由和解放这一本体论角度探讨上述问题,主要表现为一种伦理价值观,其应用伦理是其社会批判理论的内在组成部分。     

“伦理正义”的解释力 ——马克思正义观研究的思想背景和可能视角

"伦理正义"是马克思正义观研究的思想背景和可能视角。所谓"伦理正义",是肇始于古典政治哲学的一种正义理解。与"法权正义"基于个体权利追问平等优先还是自由优先的理论争执不同,"伦理正义"以个体德行与公共善的一致为前提,主张个体自由与共同体自由的实践统一。黑格尔对于市民社会和国家关系的思辨把握,揭示了"法权正义"的个体与共同体分裂的二元结构及其困境,探索了以"伦理正义"超越"法权正义"的国家哲学路径。马克思的政治经济学批判指认了"法权正义"与资本主义生产方式的耦合关系,阐释了从异化劳动向自由劳动复归的人类解放逻辑。政治经济学批判是对"法权正义"的根本批判,回答了在现代社会重构"伦理正义"何以可能的问题。     

建设性后现代主义的生态伦理转向

建设性后现代主义在现代主义伦理观所倡导的理性与伦理的异位和由此导致的种种危机的基础上,克服了后现代主义对“伦理”的单向度拒斥,认为必须以生态伦理转向实现对以往伦理观的批判和超越,在此基础上,建设性后现代主义以转变现代主义思维为基本立场,以克服后现代主义的价值虚无为价值旨趣,进行了一场捍卫人与自然和谐关系的“保卫战”——实现了生态伦理转向.     

"合法反对"与"和而不同"--中西政党制度伦理的比较

政党制度伦理是现代政治制度伦理的重要组成部分.西方国家多党竞争轮替制度的政治伦理价值取向是"合法反对",而我国的多党合作和政治协商制度则以"和而不同"为价值取向.两大政党制度伦理既有共同体现人类政治文明进步的一致性,又有因国情和社会制度不同而产生的差异性:它们都以遵守宪法为根本前提,但西方国家的政党制度伦理还体现为负责地竞争、有效地反对,我国的多党合作和政治协商制度则以团结合作为政治理念,以稳定和谐为价值追求,以最大限度地实现政治的公平正义与社会的稳定和谐,这是对西方竞争型政党制度伦理的超越,也是我国政党制度伦理先进性的体现.     

哈贝马斯科技伦理观述评——哈贝马斯《作为"意识形态"的技术与科学》解读

哈贝马斯关于科学技术执行着意识形态的职能的思想,进一步发展了霍克海默和马尔库塞的科学伦理思想。同时这又是他试图进行历史唯物主义“重建”的序曲。哈贝马斯通过对韦伯的合理化的伦理观进行解析和批判,提出了交往关系的伦理解释框架,辨析了科学技术意识形态化的社会制度背景,并认为,只有随着资本主义生产方式的出现,制度框架的合理性才能直接同社会劳动系统联系在一起。科学技术成为第一位的生产力使国家干预活动的增加,同时技术与科学具有意识形态的作用。哈贝马斯揭示了晚期资本主义社会科学技术发展的新动向,也可以引发我们对科学技术的合理应用的思考。然而,在哈贝马斯关于科学技术意识形态化的批判中,的确存在着方法论的误区。     

乌托邦精神与现实的人道主义——布洛赫道德哲学的历程及其启示

恩斯特·布洛赫是20世纪以来德国最富盛名的马克思主义者之一。在他看来，马克思主义是一种希望的哲学、一种具有乌托邦主义色彩的现实的人道主义，只有遵循马克思主义的革命批判精神，在实践中改变这个非正义的世界，才是未来乌托邦得以实现的现实路径。无论是马克思主义对宗教“弥赛亚”的变革及其对现实的否定性批判，还是通过劳动和实践来从事乌托邦式的人道主义的现实化，抑或是在追溯天赋人权时对尊严、道德和自然法的人道主义阐明，无一不彰显了布洛赫作为一名马克思主义者所持有的以人为本的道德哲学，以及他对现实的人道主义的坚定信念。这种信念打破了传统马克思主义者在伦理价值问题上的固有论述方式，在坚持唯物史观的同时，将人道主义理想视为超越现实意识形态的道德形式，并将之置于希望的乌托邦之中，保留了马克思主义的道德观念对人类社会发展的现实导引作用。     

论企业社会责任的伦理文化基础

企业社会责任是人类商业文明的表现,也是现代社会的一种文化现象.针对目前学界对企业社会责任兴起条件分析中所缺乏的伦理视阈,本文从企业性质的社会伦理学思考、经济价值中立论的逆转、环境危机的伦理诉求以及社会福利制度的责任分担的伦理理念,阐释了社会伦理文化对企业社会责任兴起的价值先导作用.     

威廉·莱易斯的生态学马克思主义伦理思想

威廉·莱易斯是生态学马克思主义的重要代表,其在对控制自然的人类传统观念的分析中、对资本主义社会中过度生产与过度消费和对科学技术的资本主义使用的批判中、在对未来的理想社会的建构中呈现出了丰富的伦理思想.威廉·菜易斯的生态学马克思主义伦理思想对我国当代和谐社会的建设具有十分有益的启示.     

Construction of the Disciplinary,Academic, and Discourse Systems in the Contemporary Chinese Philosophy of Science and Technology: Retrospect and Prospect

A review of the decades of research shows that Chinese philosophy of science and technology, on the strength of carrying forward traditions and blazing new trails, has made progress in the construction of discipline system and development of institutions, teaching materials and periodicals, with deepening the discussion on discipline orientation. In academic system construction, driven by efforts to update the academic framework and deepen research on the philosophy of nature, philosophy of science, philosophy of technology, science, technology and society, as well as other traditional fields, achievements have been made in ethical reflections on high technology, engineering ethics, big data and artificial intelligence philosophy, responsible innovation and other emerging, frontier and crosscutting fields. In the construction of discourse system, work has been done to make China’s voice heard on the international stage, excavate and elucidate the excellent traditional Chinese culture, and build disciplines with Chinese characteristics. In short, the achievements of the Chinese philosophy of science and technology have not come easily. Though a diverse and dynamic academic pattern has been formed, and wonderful and unique Chinese discourse has been created, we still face some problems. To accelerate the construction of “Three Systems” of the philosophy of science and technology with Chinese characteristics by building on existing achievements, we should carry forward the tradition of dialectics of nature and strengthen the guidance of Marxism, consolidate the foundation of philosophy and support interdisciplinary interaction and cooperation, track the frontiers of science and technology, and pay attention to the social operation of science and technology.     

UNESCO’s Activities in Ethics

UNESCO is an intergovernmental organization with 193 Member States. It is concerned with a broad range of issues regarding education, science and culture. It is the only UN organisation with a mandate in science. Since 1993 it is addressing ethics of science and technology, with special emphasis on bioethics. One major objective of the ethics programme is the development of international normative standards. This is particularly important since many Member States only have a limited infrastructure in bioethics, lacking expertise, educational programs, bioethics committees and legal frameworks. UNESCO has recently adopted the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. The focus of current activities is now on implementation of this Declaration. Three activities are discussed that aim at improving and reinforcing the ethics infrastructure in relation to science and technology: the Global Ethics Observatory, the Ethics Education Programme and the Assisting Bioethics Committees project.     

Art,Ethics, and Critical Pluralism

Those who have views about the relation between aesthetic and ethical value often also have views about the nature of art criticism. Yet no one has paid much attention to the compatibility of views in one debate with views in the other. This is worrying in light of a tension between two popular kinds of view: namely, between critical pluralism and any view in the art and ethics debate that presupposes an invariant relation between aesthetic value and ethical value. Specifically, the tension with invariance arises insofar as critical pluralism accommodates the aesthetic value of interpretive richness, including the aesthetic value of ethically conflicted interpretive richness. Given this tension, a shift of focus is needed in the art and ethics debate; from specifying the criteria for the aesthetic relevance of a work's ethical qualities to defending the fundamental nature of the aesthetic‐ethical value relation.     

Basing Science Ethics on Respect for Human Dignity

A “no ethics” principle has long been prevalent in science and has demotivated deliberation on scientific ethics. This paper argues the following: (1) An understanding of a scientific “ethos” based on actual “value preferences” and “value repugnances” prevalent in the scientific community permits and demands critical accounts of the “no ethics” principle in science. (2) The roots of this principle may be traced to a repugnance of human dignity, which was instilled at a historical breaking point in the interrelation between science and ethics. This breaking point involved granting science the exclusive mandate to pass judgment on the life worth living. (3) By contrast, respect for human dignity, in its Kantian definition as “the absolute inner worth of being human,” should be adopted as the basis to ground science ethics. (4) The pathway from this foundation to the articulation of an ethical duty specific to scientific practice, i.e., respect for objective truth, is charted by Karl Popper’s discussion of the ethical principles that form the basis of science. This also permits an integrated account of the “external” and “internal” ethical problems in science. (5) Principles of the respect for human dignity and the respect for objective truth are also safeguards of epistemic integrity. Plain defiance of human dignity by genetic determinism has compromised integrity of claims to knowledge in behavioral genetics and other behavioral sciences. Disregard of the ethical principles that form the basis of science threatens epistemic integrity.     

关于全球伦理的哲学审思

全球化过程有两个基本方面：一是科学技术的发展,一是资本主义的发展。迄今为止的全球化过程是资本主义利用不断更新的科学技术来实现自己发展的过程,此过程的社会实质在于资本主义全球化——包括资本主义经济全球化和与之相适应的资本主义伦理全球化。然而,诸如反全球化浪潮之美的国际现象和国际事件表明,原来作为全球化之推动力量的资本主义,如今正在走向其反面,愈来愈成为全球化的阻碍力量了;而日益严重的全球性生态危机,更其表明资本主义再也不能按其固有的方式存在和发展了。因此,客观上要求变革现存的资本主义经济制度及其伦理——包括资本主义经济理性、人理性和科学理性。适应解决当今全球性生态危机的需要,一种新伦理——生态伦理正在形成之中,它有望最终演变为取代传统资本主义伦理的全球伦理。     

A draft model aggregated code of ethics for bioethicists

Bioethicists function in an environment in which their peers--healthcare executives, lawyers, nurses, physicians--assert the integrity of their fields through codes of professional ethics. Is it time for bioethics to assert its integrity by developing a code of ethics? Answering in the affirmative, this paper lays out a case by reviewing the historical nature and function of professional codes of ethics. Arguing that professional codes are aggregative enterprises growing in response to a field's historical experiences, it asserts that bioethics now needs to assert its integrity and independence and has already developed a body of formal statements that could be aggregated to create a comprehensive code of ethics for bioethics. A Draft Model Aggregated Code of Ethics for Bioethicists is offered in the hope that analysis and criticism of this draft code will promote further discussion of the nature and content of a code of ethics for bioethicists.     

A Draft Model Aggregated Code of Ethics for Bioethicists

Bioethicists function in an environment in which their peers—healthcare executives, lawyers, nurses, physicians—assert the integrity of their fields through codes of professional ethics. Is it time for bioethics to assert its integrity by developing a code of ethics? Answering in the affirmative, this paper lays out a case by reviewing the historical nature and function of professional codes of ethics. Arguing that professional codes are aggregative enterprises growing in response to a field's historical experiences, it asserts that bioethics now needs to assert its integrity and independence and has already developed a body of formal statements that could be aggregated to create a comprehensive code of ethics for bioethics. A Draft Model Aggregated Code of Ethics for Bioethicists is offered in the hope that analysis and criticism of this draft code will promote further discussion of the nature and content of a code of ethics for bioethicists.     

处在夹缝中的哲学

针对当今科技文化与人文文化的矛盾,哲学能够在理解并弥合这种矛盾的过程中起不可替代的作用。在当前,马克思主义哲学是什么和能够做什么的问题是必须提出来弄清楚的。当前马克思主义哲学的研究水平有待提高：不要再追究国外争论已久的问题,史的研究也不能再停留在按原著顺序叙述的水平上;应该立足现实确立当代性的问题,并具备世界性的眼光。在苏东巨变后,马克思主义者在研究中不能回避原则性问题、为迎合对手而追求所谓非意识形态化。另外,防止离现实和民众愈来愈远的贵族化倾向和追求短平快的市场化倾向,注意术语的公央性和可理解性．也是须注意的问题。     

中国传统女性伦理与礼仪及其现代价值

中国传统女性伦理与礼仪内容庞杂,糟粕精华并存。现代女性伦理与礼仪建设应当摒弃其中维护男性特权,束缚女性人身自由的非人道性的糟粕,承继其中具有现代价值的精华,从而建立人道、文明、科学的现代女性伦理与礼仪新体系。     

政治伦理的现代建构

政治伦理作为一门研究人类政治正当性及其操作规范和方法论的价值哲学。时政治明的发展和政治体制改革,具有导向、规范和终极价值关怀的意义。政治的正当性在于谋取人类“优良的生活”。在人类政治生活中具有优先性。围绕政治的正当性问题而展开的人类政治的价值选择和伦理结构是政治伦理的主体内容。人类生活在由政治支撑着的社会框架中,政治价值理念、政治制度伦理、政治组织伦理以及政治行为主体伦理,是现代政治伦理构成的基本框架。