《管子》的民生思想及其对建设服务型政府的启示

《管子》是战国时期一本重要的治国理论著作,它包含着深刻的民生思想,告诫君主要坚持以民为本,才能国强民富,赢得民心,进而实现治理国家的目标。本文从利民、富民、顺民和爱民四个方面对《管子》的民生思想进行剖析,概括《管子》民生思想的精髓。这一研究可以为我国服务型政府建设提供启示和借鉴。     

《管子》治国思想的渊源探析

《管子》的治国思想强调以人为本、注重人性,礼法并用、德刑并重,发展经济、农商并重,为历代君王将相和学者所尊崇和探究。文章立足于《管子》成书的时间和空间因素,从周公和姜太公两者的治国思想探讨了《管子》治国思想的渊源,以期从历史的角度更好地理解《管子》的治国思想。     

《管子》之《七法》与《明法》中的治国策略对现代企业管理的启示

《管子》在《七法》和《明法》中探讨了其治国策略,明确提出了“正天下有分”、“动无非法”及“以法治国”理念。今天我们尝试着从《管子》治国策略思想本源出发,以企业管理者的角度剖析《管子》这两篇文章中所渗透出的企业管理精髓,在管子治国策略与企业管理之间架一座桥梁,为今天的企业运营服务。     

论《管子》的民本思想及其治国实践

《管子》民本思想是相当丰富的。它主张治国安邦以民为本。如何做到"以民为本"呢?《管子》认为首先要重民、爱民、富民、利民;其次,在治国方略上必须礼法并用,德法并举,即以法来维护人民的利益,同时,以"礼"来维护社会秩序,使社会和谐发展。再次,在用人制度上必须坚持尊贤授德,察能授官,重视人的价值的充分实现。     

论《管子》的富国富民思想

《管子》经济思想内容异常丰富,现代学者们对《管子》的许多经济观点,如消费观点、轻重理论以及货币观点、财政观点等作了较为深入的研究。但是,在现存的有关论著中,从富国富民角度考察《管子》经济思想的,却极为少见。因此,有必要对《管子》的富国富民思想进行全面深入的探讨。这种探讨不仅有助于我们正确理解和完整把握《管子》的     

论《管子》与《晏子春秋》中的教育思想

《管子》与《晏子春秋》作为两本流传至今的诸子著作,不仅涉及政治、经济、军事、伦理等,也涉及到教育,并将教育提高到治国必需的高度来认识,来对待。本文依据《管子》和《晏子春秋》,阐释了它们主张教育的目的,教育的范围,教育的内容,教育的方法等等。本文认为《管子》和《晏子春秋》中的教育思想虽有着其不可避免的历史局限性,但却仍对后世产生了一定的影响。《管子》、《晏子春秋》所倡导并采用的一些教育方法,即使对今天的教育来讲,仍不失一定的借鉴意义。     

试析《管子》的治国思想

《管子》一书具有很丰富的经邦治国思想。本文从以法治国、礼义治国、以道治国、明君治国、贤臣治国等方面，对这一思想进行了简要的分析和论述。     

《管子》慈善思想钩沉

《管子》的慈善思想源于原始社会的朴素福利观,继承并发扬了尧舜禹和夏商西周时期的德治、养民、安民、民本思想和荒政、养老、扶弱济贫的制度。其主张"以人为本","重用其民",爱民无私,"以天下之财,利天下之人","治国之道,必先富民",形成了以民本、重民、爱民、利民、惠民、富民为内涵的慈善思想体系。这为齐国的发展创造了一个融洽、和谐的社会环境,也为我国慈善事业的发展起到了巨大的推动作用。     

《庄子》与《管子》散论

《庄子》与《管子》之间有着较复杂的关系,它们都以“道”、“气”解释世界和人的存在,把“道”作为价值和意义的根据,但《庄子》更多关注的是个体性的存在,即治身问题,而《管子》则服务于治国之道,把治国与治身相结合。《庄子》对“名”持一种否定的态度,拒斥功名,《管子》不同之处在于把“名”与法术相结合,运用于政治。     

管子社会控制思想及其现实意义

齐国法家及其代表论著《管子》中包含着丰富的社会控制思想。《管子》一书在顺民心的前提下,主张运用法治制衡,培养民众礼节来进行社会的合理控制。在整个中国古代历史上,《管子》所倡导的礼法结合的社会控制手段是最为有效完善的。《管子》从治国实践的角度认为,要真正做到"以民为本",对国家和百姓进行合理的控制安排,实现百姓安居,国家长治,在治国方略上就必须礼法并用,德法并举:一方面以法来维护人民的利益,另一方面以"礼"来维护社会秩序。《管子》礼法并举的社会控制思想在构建和谐社会、减少社会道德失衡等方面具有重要的现代价值及意义。     

Notes towards a description of Social Representations

The theory of social representations occupies a place apart in social psychology both by the problems it raises and the scale of the phenomena with which it deals. This provokes many a criticism and misunderstanding. Such a theory may not correspond with the model of social psychology as it is defined at present. One attempts however to show that it answers important social and scientific questions, in what it differs from the classical conception of collective representations and, from the very beginning, adopts a constructivist perspective which has spread in social psychology since. Several trends of research have confirmed its vision of the relations between social and cognitive phenomena, communication and thought. More detailed remarks aim at outlining the nature of social representations, their capacity to create information, their function which is to familiarize us with the strange, according to the categories of our culture. Going farther, one insists on the diversity of methodological approaches. If the experimental method is useful to understand how people should think, higher mental and social processes must be approached by different methods, including linguistic analysis and observation of how people think. No doubt, social representations have a relation with the more recent field of social cognition. But inasmuch as the former depend on content and context, i.e. subjectivity and sociability of people, they approach the phenomena differently from the latter. Referring to child psychology and anthropology, one can contend, despite appearances, that it is also a more scientific approach. There is however much to be learned from criticisms and there is still a long way to go before we arrive at a satisfactory theory of social thinking and communication.     

The bicoherence theory of situational irony

Situational irony concerns what it is about a situation that causes people to describe it as ironic. Although situational irony is as complex and commonplace as verbal and literary irony, it has received nowhere near the same attention from cognitive scientists and other scholars. This paper presents the bicoherence theory of situational irony, based on the theory of conceptual coherence (Kunda & Thagard, 1996; Thagard & Verbeurgt, 1998). On this theory, a situation counts as ironic when it is conceived as having a bicoherent conceptual structure, adequate cognitive salience, and evokes an appropriate configuration of emotions. The theory is applied to a corpus of 250 examples of situational ironies gathered automatically from electronic news sources. A useful taxonomy of situational ironies is produced, new predictions and insights into situational irony are discussed, and extensions of the theory to other forms of irony are examined.     

有限理性的本质辨析与价值之争

有限理性不是受约束条件下的最优化, 更不能等同于非理性。从本质上说, 它是对迄今为止人类理性进化和发展水平的客观描述, 意味着无论在对待现实的态度上, 还是在认识和改造现实的能力上, 人都是理性的, 但人的理性是有限度的。有限理性观质疑当代社会科学中流行的强势理性观及其推演出来的方法论和知识体系的可靠性, 但并不质疑人的理性本身, 摆脱了历史上形形色色的理性论或非理性论非此即彼的二元论思维模式, 为我们提供了从资源观、量化观及动态发展观角度理解和把握人类理性本质的新视角。在价值理性意义上, 有限理性是有缺陷的, 但在工具理性意义上, 有限理性具有合理性, 需要在二者之间寻找适当的均衡点。心理学的有限理性研究及其产生的广泛影响酿成了继文艺复兴的概率革命之后又一次人类理性观的革命, 是这门学科为人类知识和思想宝库做出的最重要的贡献之一, 不仅具有深远的历史意义, 而且具有跨学科的方法论意义。     

中国人压力应对研究:基于主位与客位的视角

目前,学界探索中国人的应对大致有两种方式:客位研究与主位研究。客位研究分析中国文化在以下几个方面对国人应对行为和心理的影响,分别是应对的文化环境和自我特质、压力来源、应对方式、应对结果。研究结果得出有关应对的客观知识,揭示中国人的应对实践。但是由于客位研究注重理论的普适性,所以其研究成果与中国人应对实质并不十分契合。主位研究从传统文化中的儒家、道家、佛家哲学思想提取应对观,其成果更深入的分析了国人应对的实质。但是,主位研究下的应对观过于注重直观体验,并且当今中国人行为心理模式也发生了变化,这些因素势必导致主位研究的缺陷。两种研究方式各有利弊,未来的研究应把两种方式结合起来,取长补短。     

Toward a unified fielder theory: what we do not yet know about how people run to catch a ball.

Linear optic trajectory theory claims that people catch balls by running in a direction that keeps an optic trajectory of the ball linear. The authors show a range of ball trajectories for which departures of the optic trajectory from linearity do not predict which direction people will run, and the direction they choose does not correct these departures. Data from a wide range of ball trajectories show that people run so that the angle of elevation of gaze to the ball increases at a decreasing rate. But it is not yet known why people choose the particular path they do from the many that would achieve this.     

Defending the Objective List Theory of Well‐Being

The objective list theory of well‐being holds that a plurality of basic objective goods directly benefit people. These can include goods such as loving relationships, meaningful knowledge, autonomy, achievement, and pleasure. The objective list theory is pluralistic (it does not identify an underlying feature shared by these goods) and objective (the basic goods benefit people independently of their reactive attitudes toward them). In this paper, I discuss the structure of this theory and show how it is supported by people's considered judgments. I then respond to three objections. First, I argue that there is no conceptual reason to favor a monistic theory of well‐being over a pluralistic one (such as the objective list theory). Second, I argue that states of affairs can benefit people even though they hold no positive reactive attitudes toward them. And, third, I argue that objective list theorists can identify a fairly‐determinate list of basic goods.     

中国人价值观特点及其与社会主义核心价值观的契合性

本研究采用汉化的Schwartz《肖像价值观问卷》（2012）测量了2569人的大样本,以验证Schwartz新价值观理论及其工具在中国的适用性及中国人价值观结构特点。结果表明,19种价值观内部一致性系数平均为0.66,范围从“支配权力”价值观的0.54到“社会安全”价值观的0.80,验证性因素分析各项指标均达到可接受水平;中国人个人定向类价值观之间的相关关系与原理论假设不相符合;个人定向类和社会定向类价值观之间,出现了多项位置相对、在原理论中假定为低相关的价值观呈高相关关系。表明Schwartz等（2012）价值观理论虽从测量学角度适用中国人群,但其不能预测和解释中国人价值观的“个人”与“社会”辩证统一与交叉融合特点。     

中国人价值观特点及其与社会主义核心价值观的契合性

本研究采用汉化的Schwartz《肖像价值观问卷》（2012）测量了2569人的大样本,以验证Schwartz新价值观理论及其工具在中国的适用性及中国人价值观结构特点。结果表明,19种价值观内部一致性系数平均为0.66,范围从“支配权力”价值观的0.54到“社会安全”价值观的0.80,验证性因素分析各项指标均达到可接受水平;中国人个人定向类价值观之间的相关关系与原理论假设不相符合;个人定向类和社会定向类价值观之间,出现了多项位置相对、在原理论中假定为低相关的价值观呈高相关关系。表明Schwartz等（2012）价值观理论虽从测量学角度适用中国人群,但其不能预测和解释中国人价值观的“个人”与“社会”辩证统一与交叉融合特点。     

主观解释的新发展:主体交互解释

主体交互解释是主观解释的发展,它比主观解释具有更为明显的客观性。本文探讨了主体交互概率的测度,主体交互概率形成的条件,主体交互解释与人造客体概率解释一道构造的从主观向完全客观延伸的谱系,以及主体交互解释的恰当性问题。通过探讨这个新近兴起的理论,为人们在确定基本概率时提供了普遍的适用性并使人们避免了主观的随意性。