"洞极之经"反映王莽时代考

<太平经>的成书问题历来为学者所关注.本文结合有关史料,考证和分析了<太平经>成书过程的具体演变情况.作者指出,"洞极之经"是<太平经>成书的中间过渡环节,该书之编撰想法似源于王莽执政时期.     

王明与《太平经》研究--纪念王明先生逝世十二周年

<太平经>是东汉道教的一部重要经典,后因缺佚严重、无法睹其全貌,加之经文中掺杂了后人造作的成分而被视为伪书,故一度无人进行专门研究.王明先生长期从事于<太平经>的研究工作,早年编辑成<太平经合校>一书,此后对<太平经>的相关问题做过广泛探讨,极大地推动了<太平经>研究的深入开展.本文从这一角度入手,回顾了王明先生与<太平经>研究的不解之缘,分析和陈述了先生在各个阶段所关注的一些基本问题及其治学方法和学术态度等.     

《太平经》图像作于明代考

<正统道藏>收录有<太平经>57卷,国内学者多认为它为汉代道经<太平清领书>之残卷,日本学者则倾向认为它出于六朝本<太平经>,但这些讨论都没有涉及其中的图像内容.通过对57卷本<太平经>中图像多角度的详细解读,证明这些图像绘于明代,盖当时原图像已经遗失或严重损毁,时人根据经文内容对其进行了再创作.     

褚伯玉与《太平经》

本文通过对有关<太平经>在南齐流传的一条资料进行考辨,旨在说明<上清道类事相>和<南岳总胜集>关于南朝隐士褚伯玉曾读过<太平经>的记载是不可信的.因此,一些以此为据来说明<太平经>在南齐时流传情况的论著也就是站不住脚的.但是,从文献的蛛丝马迹中,似乎又让人觉得褚伯玉与<太平经>有很多关联.文章以文献梳理为线索,试图展示其中细微之处,为确定<太平经>的成书年代和了解南朝<太平经>流传情况提供一些帮助.     

略论董仲舒的"以德为国"思想

在汉代,如果说,汉武帝时期确立的"德主刑辅"是一种积极的统治政策的话,那么,董仲舒的"以德为国"(<春秋繁露·立元神>)则从治国理念上对这种统治政策提供了系统的理论支持.本文认为,"以德为国"的德治思想既是代黄老之学而兴的一种积极的治国理念,同时也是对武帝时期刑法酷烈在理论上的补偏救弊,其实质和落脚点在于以德正君.     

熊十力"乾坤一元"论探微

熊十力先生融<周易>乾坤二卦中<彖>辞为一体,演"乾坤一元"新论.乾代表生命、心灵,是宇宙大生之力用.坤代表物质、能力,是宇宙广生之力用.他认为"乾统坤,坤承乾"的"乾坤一元"思想是孔子易学的精髓,并以"乾坤一元"解说宇宙生命的演化形成过程.熊十力沿袭了宋明以来三教合一的精神,其<乾坤衍>站在儒家本位,批判性地融合了儒道二家思想,揭示了儒家易学的时代创新精神.     

超越"忠恕"之道——《中庸》"道不远人"章义疏

<中庸>一书引"子曰"处甚多,"道不远人"章[1]即其例.此章论君子之道,内及"忠恕",与<论语>颇可映证.然细加推绎,又可见其说己非"忠恕"所能范围.深入研究此章,既有利我们看清<中庸>作者对孔子"忠恕"思想之发展,同时,对我们认识<中庸>所引"子曰"之特点亦不无裨益.     

忆"全国第一次伦理学讨论会"暨"中国伦理学会成立大会"——访《道德与文明》原主编温克勤研究员

受访学者简介:温克勤,男,汉族,1936年9月生,天津人,大学毕业,研究员,享受国务院特殊津贴,历任天津社会科学院哲学所(伦理学所)所长、<道德与文明>主编、天津市伦理学会会长.主要学术成果有<中国伦理思想史>(合作)、<伦理学简编>(主编)、<社会主义职业道德概论>(主编)、<管理伦理学>(主编)、<干部道德教程>(主编)、<毛泽东伦理思想的理论与实践>(主编)、<中华名人与治国>(主编)、<中华五千年美德丛书>(主编,获1993年度"五个一工程"入选项目奖)等十几部著作;<道德约束论>、<先秦儒家合理人生观述评>、<社会主义市场经济与集体主义道德>(获1993年度"五个一工程"入选项目奖)等论文百余篇.     

张载"和"论探微

张载是宋儒中讲"和"最多、有着关于"和"的丰富思想的理学家之一.其"和"论具体体现在"太和"、"心和"、"中和"以及"仇必和而解"、"民胞物与"等概念或命题中.从宇宙论层面的"太和",到道德心性论层面的"心和"、"中和",再到社会伦理层面的"民胞物与",形成了一个完整严密的天人合一"和"论体系.此论上承<易>、<孟>、<庸>等"和"的思想,下启宋明理学以"和"为取向的心性修养论.张载"和"论对其体系的"天人合一"特征、道德心性论特质的彰显,有着重要的理论意义.对于当代建立和谐社会、和谐世界也有着重要的方法论意义.     

《太平经》“周穷救急”的社会救济思想

东汉后期的道教经典<太平经>从民本思想出发,批判了社会上贫富不均、以强凌弱、以智诈愚等现象,怀着对民众的关爱和对弱者的同情,提出了"周穷救急"的社会救济思想,要求社会上层的统治者和富人们慈善布施,广散余财,以保障社会下层的贫民百姓能获得基本的生活资料,过上安稳的生活,从而构建一个和谐的社会.     

"Psychotherapy" versus "treatment"

Presents a comment on "Psychological treatments" by D. H. Barlow. Barlow proposed that we distinguish between the terms "treatment" and "psychotherapy." The author believes that not only is the distinction unnecessary, but that its implications could have negative consequences for the field of clinical psychology. It is the proposed distinguishing feature that treatments are "specifically tailored to the pathological process that is causing the impairment and distress" that is most problematic. Clinical psychology does not need a distinction that further exacerbates the split between researchers and practitioners.     

"Enmeshment" and "Fusion"

The paper examines two related concepts utilized by two different schools of family therapy. Any family seen to be "enmeshed" is also seen as "fused," and vice versa. The difference in the level of focus, on the "system containing the individuals" (structural) or the "individual in the system" (fusion), determines the difference in therapeutic approach of these two schools.     

“对的”与“好的”

什么是“对的”,和对它的证立,是道德哲学中具有争议性的核心问题,也是效用主义和道义论间的主要差异之所在。统合效用主义对于“好的就是对的”这个陈述有一套完整周延的说法。而道义论对这个问题的证立不够周延或没有足够的说服力。     

"本体论"与"伦理学"--形而上学的两个向度

形而上学有两个密切相关的内在向度,就是本体论向度与伦理学向度.在哲学史上,哲学家们之所以在"追求形而上学"的同时,又总是"反形而上学",并非是人们的形上本性出了问题,而是因为人们总是将形而上学视为单纯的"一维性",总是用一个向度来取代或遮蔽另一个向度.而所谓的"后形而上学思想",也并不是消解了形而上学,而是指形而上学从"本体论向度"转向了"伦理学向度".     

"石狮"、"风水"与"吉祥"

谁都知道,在古老的中国,不管是衙门、宫殿、庙宇的门前,还是豪宅、大户人家的门口,人们都能看到摆着一对石狮。据说,这对石狮子在许多中国人的心目中,它不但是一种气派的象征,而且还是一种被人认为是好的“吉祥物”。如今,旧时的衙门没有了,但遗留下来的宫殿、庙宇的门前,其中有些石狮仍有保存。然而,想像不到的是,这号称“吉祥物”的石狮今天却开始“走”进某些党政机关的大门口,它们(石狮)在那里时时都在保护着这些政府要员“平平安安”、“吉祥如意”。这不仅使我联想起一些极端的报道,有些政府官员为升迁,请算命先生定位,用风水术为政府…     

从"管制"到"平衡"--政府与公众理想关系模式的构建及其制度化

论文从行政民主的角度探讨政府与公众之间的理想关系模式及其制度化构建过程 ,将我国在改革之前的政府与公众模式概括为管制模式。论文指出 ,在制度变迁的过程中 ,这一模式日益受到挑战。而在新的制度环境下 ,我国政府与公众的关系模式应该是平衡模式。这一模式的制度化措施包括培育自主的市民社会 ,赋予公众以独立的活动空间 ;促进行政公开 ,建立一个开放负责的政府 ;推进行政法建设 ,抑制行政恣意     

"Us" and "Them":

Abstract: In the Aristotelian tradition, politics is a matter of public deliberation over questions of justice and injustice. The Bush administration's response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, has been uniformly hostile to this notion, and it has instead promoted a jingoistic politics of self‐assertion by an America largely identified with the executive branch of its government. This is doubly disturbing, as the executive branch has sought to free itself from international law, multinational commitments, and domestic judicial regulation, even as it has sought to validate itself by demonizing its enemies. This essay draws out the disturbing echoes here of Carl Schmitt's work of the 1920s, in particular of Schmitt's conception of the sovereign as the ungrounded ground of the law and the political as the site of mortal conflict between friend and enemy. The essay argues that Schmitt's position in the twenties, for all of its evident problems, is superior to that of Bush, Wolfowitz, and Ashcroft in at least two senses: Schmitt condemns the idea of waging war for profit and recognizes that such wars will often be disguised as moral crusades waged against the “inhuman”; and he acknowledges that claiming to fight a war for humanity denies one's enemies their humanity, leaving them open to torture and even extermination.     

PREFERRING "HOUSEWIVES" TO "FEMINISTS"

Four studies are described outlining the favorability of attitudes toward women. In Study 1, participants indicated their attitudes toward women and men and their construal of the term "women". The results revealed that women were evaluated more favorably than men, but that male right-wing authoritarians (RWAs) who construed women as referring primarily to feminists were least favorable in their attitudes. In Study 2, participants indicated their attitudes toward both "housewives" and "feminists". The results revealed that feminists were evaluated less favorably than housewives, and that the most negative attitudes toward feminists were expressed by authoritarian men. Study 3 revealed that high-RWA males held more negative symbolic beliefs concerning feminists (i.e., beliefs that feminists failed to promote participants'values) and that these beliefs accounted for variation in attitudes among high RWAs and much of the RWA-attitude relation. Finally, Study 4 revealed that high RWAs perceived greater value dissimilarity between them-selves and feminists. The implications of the findings for future research are discussed.