《精神现象学》的前提——其始于绝对的绝对开端

海德格尔通过对黑格尔的《精神现象学》从绝对开端并返回绝对的前提的分析,在扬弃黑格尔的同时巧妙地阐发他自己的解释学观点,特别是其中涉及到的有限性和无限性的关系、存在与存在者的含义等问题,对于我们理解《精神现象学》,理解海德格尔本人的思想及其从事哲学方法,以及两位思想家之间内在的继承和批判关系都很有启发。     

塑成作为伦理主体的父母与子女——勒维纳斯与儒家的孝道和父道

在勒维纳斯的哲学规划中,繁衍为主体打开了一种开放性的时间。在这种时间中,自我通过父道和孝道,让自身在亲子关系中成为面对他者的伦理主体。勒维纳斯对亲子关系的这种论述与儒家的慈孝存在共通之处,且能为儒家的亲子观念给出某种合理性证明。不过,由于勒维纳斯将亲子关系的重心放在为他人的伦理责任之上,他的父道和孝道观念又能为儒家的亲子伦理提供一些另类的补充说明。     

责己和责人:儒家责任伦理主体指向的二元结构

责己与责人是儒家用以处理己他关系或人我关系的重要伦理规范。儒家阐释了作为道德活动的责任伦理主体指向——责己和责人,从特定维度丰富了儒家的责任伦理学和角色伦理学。历代儒家既讲责人又讲责己,但更重视责己;同时,儒家并不否定责人,而是主张敢于责君、敢于劝谏,提出了以责成人之道的思想范式。儒家凸显责己,彰显了重责己轻责人的价值导向。     

海德格尔对主体"自我"的解构

近代以来人被定义为主体,主体和客体的关系问题成为哲学的主要问题。主体对客体的关系是一种表象关系,客体被主体所表象,主体成为思维和存在的中心。而现代科技的发展使得表象关系又进一步变为控制关系。作为主体的人征服和控制世界,人自身最终也变成被控制过程的一部分,有失去自身的危险。海德格尔则打破了这种主体-客体对立的模式,重新构建主体性。他所说的主体是＂在-世界-中-存在＂的超越着的此在。海德格尔用此在的这种源始的存在方式解构了主客对立的主体自我,并说明了自我是此在操劳活动最终的＂为何之故＂,此在本真的自我也是此在本真的＂能在＂。     

个体与社会关系中的宗教

一般地认为,宗教所处理的首先和主要是作为个体的人与天主之间的关系,对于生活在现代社会中的人来说,这点似乎没有什么好疑问的。无论如何,宗教不会首先和主要处理世界与天主的关系,因为新近的哲学学说都告诉我们,在人之外谈论世界没有意义,世界总是“生活的世界”(胡塞尔),人的存在是世界意义得以出现的视野(海德格尔),语言是所有实在的地基(语言哲学);宗教更不会首先和主要处理动物与天主的关系,因为宗教所宣扬的拯救是关于人的拯救,只有作为自由的人才需要拯救和可能得救;宗教当然也不太可能首先和主要处理其他的什么,如天使与天主的关系…     

从习俗伦理责任到道德责任——西方责任伦理思想的现代性变迁

责任概念本身具有一个历史发展的过程.随着西方现代性的发展,西方责任伦理思想产生了"习俗伦理责任"、"类理性责任"与"道德责任"三种责任形态的变迁.在传统社会里,人的责任是个人对自己所在社会结构的习俗伦理责任.现代社会里的责任为个人基于主体外在自由的类理性责任.后现代社会里的责任为个人基于主体意志(内在)自由的道德责任.后现代社会的个体化使得责任解除了外在结构的要求,走向了道德责任.     

伦理价值背后的“理性”与“生命”——奥伊肯的中国伦理观及其对德国古典唯心主义的批判

鲁道夫·奥伊肯(Rudolf Eucken)是德国生命哲学的代表人物。他重视中国传统伦理的现代意义,并在价值评判上与以康德和黑格尔为代表的德国古典唯心主义哲学产生了分歧。他通过对康德哲学真理观的批判,反对认识主体与道德主体的分裂;通过分析黑格尔哲学的伦理观,反对国家伦理对个体价值的压制。他肯定了儒家伦理中的整体性与超越性,在后启蒙的视野中对儒家伦理提出了新的思考角度和追问方式。     

海德格尔哲学的“伦理学问题”——以《存在与时间》为中心的辨析

海德格尔哲学中有没有一种伦理学,构成了学界争论已久的问题。本文主要以《存在与时间》为核心,通过分析此在、他人与常人之间的生存论关系,说明海德格尔关注的焦点不是人与人或者人与社会之间的伦理规范,而是此在与存在之间的存在论关系;海德格尔关于此在之沉沦的分析实际上颠覆了日常生活的伦理规范,凸显了此在作为具有“向来我属性”的“去存在”的在者,归根结底是朝向可能性的存在。因此,海德格尔关于此在的生存论分析既不可能为沉沦的常人世界“背书”,也不太可能为现存的伦理学奠基,他所说的“源始的伦理学”不是伦理学而是“基础存在论”。我们可以基于任何一种伦理学的立场评价和批评海德格尔哲学,但是海德格尔哲学本身并不导向一种伦理学。     

主体与存有的拓扑学：拉康论海德格尔

拉康认定海德格尔对笛卡尔我思哲学的批评忽略了“故我思”中隐含的本己因果性，而此因果性就存在于“我在撒谎”“他不知道他已经死着”这些生存状态对海德格尔的生存论建构的建基之中，因为此在只有在想象性的误认中建构起他的身体性的在“此”存在时才能获得追问存在的能力，才能“以有死的方式”入世生存。尽管在思想“转向”时期，海德格尔已经在深度无聊中揭示了此-在与极端者的相关性，由此为此在的生存论建构开拓出了新的空间，但在拉康看来，因为无视主体在欲望关联中的“缺乏存在”,海德格尔还是错失了主体生存的“先将来”维度对在世时间性的建构。通过对“让存在”之起源的追问，拉康最终从主体的生存维度将海德格尔的存有拓扑学——本有/它对三维时间的自行抑制着的传送，展示为了因掉落而不可见的客体小a对想象、象征、实在三界的生成。拉康创建的主体形而上学与海德格尔的超越的形而上学之间存在着一种奇妙的错位的相合。     

对物化的批判为何反而成为物化?——评阿多诺对海德格尔反主体理论的批判

海德格尔在否定主客体框架的基础上来批判物化,在进行这样的批判的时候,他弱化了主体,把最基本的生存结构内化到人自身,使人顺从现代社会的物化结构。由于他弱化了主体的作用,所以他只能采用现象学直观的方法来把握存在,于是存在就变成了直观的对象,具有了存在者的特征。这样海德格尔的存在论就有了一种客观主义的倾向,即用资本主义社会所普遍出现的功能关系来代替实体,从表面上看,这避免了物化,但是这个东西类似于无形式的质料,是不能用概念表达的东西,是"X"。在阿多诺看来,海德格尔之所以需要这个最终的"X",是因为他要虚假地满足社会对稳定性的需要。虽然海德格尔批判了物化,但是他只是否定了物化的外在条件。阿多诺对海德格尔的批判的核心是,海德格尔虽然把存在和存在者区分开来,但是他还是让存在在一定程度上获得了存在者的特征。     

马克思对经济主体的伦理分析

经济主体的伦理分析是马克思经济伦理思想的主要内容之一。马克思从人类主体活动的社会形式角度,把人类社会分成三个形态。对应于三种形态,经济主体的表现形式为原始丰富的人、异化的人、全面发展的人,在马克思看来,一定社会形态下现实的不同的人表现出不同的伦理特性。     

论宏观经济调控和管理中的若干伦理问题

宏观经济调控和管理中的伦理问题,是一个不可忽视的领域。中国是一个发展中国家,正处在从传统经济向现代市场经济转型,政府的宏观调控不可或缺;同时政府作为经济活动的主体,其行为也必须遵守适应市场经济运作的规则。     

Responsibility,Complexity Science and Education: Dilemmas and Uncertain Responses

While complexity science is gaining interest among educational theorists, its constructs do not speak to educational responsibility or related core issues in education of power and ethics. Yet certain themes of complexity, as taken up in educational theory, can help unsettle the more controlling and problematic discourses of educational responsibility such as the potential to limit learning and subjectivity or to prescribe social justice. The purpose of this article is to critically examine complexity science against notions of responsibility in terms of implications for education. First, themes of complexity science prominent in contemporary educational writing are explained. Then dilemmas of responsibility in complexity are explored, such as what forms and meanings responsibility can have in a ‘complexified’ perspective of education, how care for others is mobilised, and how desire can be understood. Analyses of ethical action grounded in complexity science are then examined, as well as theories of the ethical subject and participatory responsibility that are congruent with certain tenets of a complexity ontology. Finally, the possibility of an educational vision of responsibility animated by complexity theories is considered, drawing from related writings of Bai, Biesta, Derrida, Levinas and Varela.     

Called to repair injustice: Connecting everyday practices to societal phenomena,creating momentum for solidarity and change

I have been working with a model of witnessing for more than 30 years (Weingarten, 2000a). In this article, I add layers to its conceptualization by discussing several related concepts: the implicated subject (Rothberg, 2019) and ethical loneliness (Stauffer, 2015) among them. What distinguishes the Witnessing Model positions from the implicated subject is that the implicated subject is always aligned with power and/or domination, whereas a witness may not be. Certain responsibilities accrue if we take our implication seriously. Just as I have suggested there are steps one can take from positions two, three and four of the Witnessing Model to enter, return or remain in the aware and empowered position, a position from within which accountability is more likely, I offer ideas about how one can respond accountably when one acknowledges one's implication. Throughout this article, I raise questions, some of which I cannot answer. For instance, can empathic repair be undertaken by one party to a ruptured relationship, one segment of a society, without an unfolding process of mutual recognition and compassion? The contemporary moment in which we are living presents us with dire outcomes if the answer is “no.” The entire article is an extended meditation on the following central question: How can we, implicated subjects, practice solidarity to diminish ethical loneliness and create movement toward the personal, interpersonal and structural changes necessary to address the truths that our implication entails?     

我国人体临床试验和研究中有关伦理审查的若干问题

目前我国对涉及人体的临床试验与研究进行伦理审查时,存在的主要问题是:(1)对伦理审查的目的、意义不是足够清楚;(2)伦理委员会的构成不符合要求,缺少独立性;(3)有盲目运用伦理准则或方法,忽视文化、心理的差异的倾向.这些影响了伦理审查的效用,需要有针对性地加以改进.     

Tragic Recognition: Revisiting Hegel’s Conception of Ethical Life

This paper interprets Hegel’s engagement with tragedy and especially tragic action as an interpretive model for understanding ethical life in complex societies in which independent value spheres collide. Tragic recognition, in contrast to the kind of recognition introduced in the master and slave dialectic, is not based on desire, but arises from the suffering deriving from clashing value spheres. As a coming to terms with one’s finitude, tragic recognition presents an important corrective to the account of mutual recognition that has been the reference point of contemporary interpretations of Hegel’s social and political philosophy. The paper concludes by pointing to some of the limits of tragedy as a universal interpretive framework for modern societies.     

Subjek en etiese verantwoordelikheidsbesef Die Idee van die Oneindige in Levinas se Totality and Infinity

Subject and the realisation of ethical responsibility - The Idea of the Infinite in Levinas’ Totality and Infinity. In Totality and Infinity Emmanuel Levinas writes about the categorical character of the ethical responsibility that the subject owes to the other. The confrontation with the suffering other puts the subject’s natural self-interest into question, and brings him/her to realise an ethical responsibility of which s/he cannot unburden himself/herself. The question arises as to what in the constitution of the subject makes him/her susceptible to the realisation of ethical responsibility. This article illustrates that in order to accentuate ethical responsibility as strongly as he does, Levinas needs to take a quasi-metaphysical step. The “trace of the infinite” that “creation” has left on the finite subject, predisposes the subject to the appeal of the other. Levinas’ use of words such as “God”, “the Good”, “creation” and “the Idea of Infinity” does not have a theological or a mystical underpinning. These metaphysical concepts are philosophical figures of speech that Levinas borrows from Plato and Descartes.     

Aesthetics of Surrender: Levinas and the Disruption of Agency in Moral Education

Education has long been charged with the taskof forming and shaping subjectivity andidentity. However, the prevailing view ofeducation as a project of producing rationalautonomous subjects has been challenged bypostmodern and poststructuralist critiques ofsubstantial subjectivity. In a similar vein,Emmanuel Levinas inverts the traditionalconception of subjectivity, claiming that weare constituted as subjects only in respondingto the other. In other words, subjectivity isderivative of an existentially priorresponsibility to and for the other. Hisconception of ethical responsibility is thusalso a radical departure from the prevailingview of what it means to be a responsible moralagent. In this paper, I use jazz improvisationas a metaphor to focus on three interrelatedaspects of ethical responsibility on Levinas'saccount: passivity, heteronomy, andinescapability. I then point toward some waysin which reframing responsibility andsubjectivity along this line might offer newpossibilities for conceiving subjectivity andmoral agency in education.     

How Ethical Are Ethical Purchasing Policies?

In recent years ethical purchasing policies have been promoted as potentially effective and promising ways of combatting global inequality and oppressive labour practices in developing countries. These initiatives have been launched on university campuses with the hope of opening a new front for improving labour rights under conditions of neo-liberal globalization. This paper is an attempt to respond to the critics of these policies, and especially their claims that ethical purchasing may have the perverse effect of increasing job losses and undercutting economic development in poorer countries. Although it can be shown that these criticisms are misguided, it is important to acknowledge that ethical purchasing should not be seen as a full-blown alternative to the kind of progress that can be achieved through state-centred labour regulation. Nevertheless, the new role of universities as monitors of corporate responsibility remains a promising one.     

高技术的伦理风险及其应对

当代高技术的迅速崛起正日益改变世界,高技术的发展更增加了高技术伦理风险负效应的不确定性,既提供了更多的道德选择的可能性,又提出了严峻的挑战,进而使高技术的道德选择成为高技术活动主体不可回避的问题。为了在高技术的道德选择中尽可能减少高技术伦理风险负效应,就必须坚持必仁且智的价值取向、德得相通的运作方略、内圣外王的探究智慧,进而达到天人合一的澄明之境———使人-社会-自然系统协调发展。