积极精进的心志

一个人能够把自己的智慧和才能布施社会,对社会服务,利乐有情,勤奋努力,精进不退,就是行菩萨行。《八大人党经》说:若勤精进则事无难者,是故汝等当勤精进,譬如小水,长流则能穿石:若行者之心数数懈废,     

道教辞典

内景 指“至人”的内在境界。《荀子·解蔽》:“浊明外景,清明内景。”杨倞注:“景,光色也。……清而明者,内景,谓至人之内明也。”指阴幽含气之物。《大戴礼记·曾子天圆篇》:“天道日圆,地道曰方,方曰幽而圆曰明。明者,吐气者也,是故外景。幽者,含气者也,是故内景。故火曰外景,而金水内景。”又称“内象”。道教名词。指身内景象,包括血肉、筋骨、脏腑之象及诸“身神”等。《黄庭内景经》为道教内景论文专著,务成子《解题》云:“黄庭内者,心也;景者,象也。……内象论,即血肉、筋骨、藏府之象也。心居身内,存观一体之象也,故曰内景。”又     

佛祖言语

问曰:人能以力胜人、并国、杀怨,或畋猎皮肉,所济处大;令不杀生,得何等利?答曰:得无所畏,安乐无怖。我以无害于彼,故彼亦无害于我,以是故无怖无畏。好杀之人,虽复位极人王,亦不自安;如持戒之人,单行独游,无所畏难。复次,好杀之人,有命之属皆不喜见;若不好杀,一切众生皆乐依附。复次,持戒之人命欲终时,其心安乐,无疑无悔,若生天上,若在人中,常得长寿,是为得道因缘,乃至得佛,住寿无量。复次,杀生之人,今世后世受种种身心苦痛;不杀之人,无此众难,是为大利。复次,行者思惟:我自惜命爱身,彼亦如是,与我何异?以是之故,不应杀生。复次,若人杀生者,为善人所诃、怨家所嫉,负他命故,常有怖畏,为彼所憎,死时心悔,当堕地狱,若畜生中,若出为人,常当短命。复次,假令后世无罪,不为善人所诃、怨家所嫉,尚不应故夺他命。何以故?善相之人所不应行,何况两世有罪、弊恶果报!复次,杀为罪     

闲话名利

在尘世间生活的人们,经常会受到来自各方面的名利诱惑。由于名利能给人带来很多好处,于是便有很多人为了能够得到更多的名利,千方百计投机钻营,以达到自己的目的。但是,名利又是把双刃剑,在给人带来利益的同时,也会给人带来灾难和痛苦。这正如古语所说：木秀于林,风必摧之;堆出于岸,流必湍之;行高于人,众必非之。正所谓：人怕出名猪怕壮。     

佛言祖语

或问禅门信无口诀乎?曰:佛法正大光明,一人演之而百千万亿人天之所共闻也,何口诀之有?无已,则有一焉。夫一言二言,言简而义精者,斯之谓诀。连篇累牍,牵枝而引蔓者,非诀也。是故“应无所住而生其心”者,《金刚经》之口诀也;“惟一     

公正的天平 五——对称天平中的大天平

<正>第七章魔鬼的天平及内学派对它的使用我说:可怜的人啊!你听听对你朋友的天平的说明!你太顽固了!须知,我所提到的《古兰经》中的每一个天平,在魔鬼那里都有一个与之接近的天平,他以之混淆真理的天平,以便使人用它们来衡量而出错。然而,魔鬼只能从一些漏洞进入,故谁堵住了漏洞并加固之,他便是安全的。(魔鬼进入的)漏洞有十个,我在《推理的试金石》(?????????)和《知识的准则》(??????????)等详细阐述天平之条件的著作     

你的杖、你的杆 哀伤辅导

哀伤,是生命里的必经窄巷,具摧毁生命之能。然而,史记《屈原贾生列传》有云:"人穷则反本,故劳苦倦极,未尝不呼天也。"何解呼天?因为"天者,人之始也。"西方学者也指出,哀伤经验能够促使人从灵性与宗教的深处发问"何故"的问题。考夫曼(Jeffrey Kauffman)认为,"何故"是罪咎的展现;"何故"是怀疑的符号;     

郭安沁:也谈“科学技术是第一生产力”与“人的因素第一”之关系

郭安沁：也谈“科学技术是第一生产力”与“人的因素第一”之关系在“科学技术是第一生产力”与“人的因素第一”之关系的讨论中,有人认为科学技术与人共处于生产力之中,只能有一个第一。更有二种“发展论”者,力图人人生产力发展的历史过程或从科学技术与生产力诸要素在现代生产力中的地位和作用方面．论证用前者取代后者的科学性、合理性,从而否定“人的因素第一”的现实意义。这实质上是把科学技术与人完全对立起来去研究这两个命题的关系。笔者认为,必须从历史唯物主义立场出发,从马克思本人对“人”与“科学技术”关系的理解入手力口以研究。马克思在《政治经济学批判》一书中,把科学技术看作人在生产力的客体化和对象化,科学技术构成了人的社会现实体,成为社会化和历史化了的人,它以人的本质力量的面貌出现在自然界面前。而现实中活动着的人,只不过是历史化了的人的过程,社会化了的人的局部,系统化了的人的元素。因此,在自然界面前,人的社会现实体──科学技术与具体的人是一致的。“科学技术是第一生产力”,是指在一般生产劳动过程中,科学技术是全部人类改造自然界能力的主要部分,它在现实财富的创造和增长过程中居于支配地位,科学技术活动在人们直接面向自然的斗争中越来越     

祖师语录

为无为,事无事,味无味。大小多少,报怨以德。图难于其易,为大于其细;天下难事必作于易,天下大事必作于细。是以圣人终不为大,故能成其大,夫轻诺必寡信,多易必多难。是以圣人犹难之,故终无难矣。《道德经》六十三章古之至人,先存诸己而后存诸人。所存于己者未定,何暇至于暴人之所为?《庄子·人间世》天地有大美而不言,四时有明法而不议,万物有成理而不说。圣人者,原天地之美而达物之理。是故至人无为,大圣不作,观于天地之谓也。《庄子·知北游》祖师语录     

医德诗三句辑注

人有义声,卖药宋清。[注]宋清,唐代民间医生。长期在长安西市卖药,贫者买药钱不够时,他折价售之;对于有急难无钱的人,则赠钱救之;年终对借他钱还不起的人,便将债券烧掉,故长安当时流传有诗曰:人有义声,卖药宋清。     

Kant's Ethics and Duties to Oneself

Abstract: This paper investigates the nature and foundation of duties to oneself in Kant's moral theory. Duties to oneself embody the requirement of the formula of humanity that agents respect rational nature in them-selves as well as in others. So understood, duties to oneself are not subject to the sorts of conceptual objections often raised against duties to oneself; nor do these duties support objections that Kant's moral theory is overly demanding or produces agents who are preoccupied with their own virtue. Duties to oneself emerge as an essential and compelling part of Kant's moral theory.     

Who wants to be a psychologist?

Every significant piece of public policy, every important generalization in history, economics, political science, and sociology depends on (largely unevaluated) assumptions about human nature. Personality psychology concerns the nature of human nature; it is, therefore, concerned with one of the most powerful and dangerous forces on earth. Developing adequate methods for conceptualizing human nature and forecasting significant components of social behavior-for example, integrity, creativity, leadership-would seem to be a matter of real urgency. Nonetheless, personality psychology has a minor and marginal status in academic psychology. I have spent my career trying to understand the origins of human behavior, trying to develop measurement models for capturing key elements of social performance, and trying to defend the study of personality against the complaints of a seemingly endless supply of academic critics.     

THE NATURALNESS OF CREATION AND REDEMPTIVE INTERESTS IN THEOLOGY,SCIENCE, AND TECHNOLOGY

Abstract. This paper advances ways in which the understandings of “nature” and “creation” can be seen to overlap through specialized relations between humans and their environment. The hope of redemption of nature, united with evidences of grace in the advancements of science, can become helpful guides toward a theological interpretation of technology and the emerging character of human relations with nature.     

Protecting God from Science and Technology: How Religious Criticisms of Biotechnologies Backfire

Many religious critics argue that biotechnology (such as cloning and genetic engineering) intrudes on God's domain, or plays God, or revolts against God. While some of these criticisms are standard complaints about human hubris, I argue that some of the recent criticism represents a "Promethean" concern, in which believers unreflectively seem to fear that science and technology are actually replicating or stealing God's special deity–defining powers. These criticisms backfire theologically, because they diminish God, portraying God as an anthropomorphic superbeing whose relevance and special nature are increasingly rivaled by human power.     

Jankélévitch and Gusdorf on Forgiveness of Oneself

In this article, I examine the issue of forgiveness of oneself by looking at the writings of two postwar French philosophers: Georges Gusdorf and Vladimir Jankélévitch. Gusdorf believes that forgiving oneself is necessary for being able to forgive others. On the other hand, Jankélévitch sees no possibility of forgiveness for oneself and for similar reasons is very suspicious of traditional views of the role accorded to repenting and penitence. In short, the main view that separates the thinkers is, quite literally, whether work on oneself—such as repentance and penitence—comes first before forgiveness, or whether repentance and penitence are the result of some prior gracious act, such as forgiveness. Somewhat ironically, their views, when all is said and done, may not really be all that far apart from each other, especially in light of how each views the nature of the self. In the end, the main factor dividing the two thinkers is metaphysical allegiances. Reflecting a tendency that is shown in most—if not all—of his early works, Gusdorf views the self more from the perspective of anthropology. Jankélévitch, like his mentor Henri Bergson, has faith in science and does not have a supernatural view of the human soul.     

TRANSCENDING OUR BIOLOGY: A VIRTUE ETHICS INTERPRETATION OF THE APPEAL TO NATURE IN TECHNOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS

“Arguments from nature” are used, and have historically been used, in popular responses to advances in technology and to environmental issues—there is a widely shared body of ethical intuitions that nature, or perhaps human nature, sets some limits on the kinds of ends that we should seek, the kinds of things that we should do, or the kinds of lives that we should lead. Virtue ethics can provide the context for a defensible form of the argument from nature, and one that makes proper sense of its enduring role in debates concerning our relationship to technology and the environment. However, the notion of an ethics founded upon an account of the essential features of human nature is controversial. On the one hand, contemporary biological science no longer defines species by their essential characteristics, so from a biological point of view there just are no essential characteristics of human beings. On the other hand, it might be argued that humans have, in some sense, “transcended our biology,” so an understanding of humans as a biological species is extraneous to ethical questions. In this article, I examine and defend the argument from nature, as a way to ground an ethic of virtue, from some of the more common criticisms that are made against it. I argue that, properly interpreted as an appeal to an evaluative account of human nature, the argument from nature is defensible with the context of virtue ethics and, in this light, I show how arguments from nature made in popular responses to technological and environmental issues are best understood.     

Simultaneous spatial updating in nested environments

When one moves, the spatial relationship between oneself and the entire world changes. Spatial updating refers to the cognitive process that computes these relationships as one moves. In two experiments, we tested whether spatial updating occurs automatically for multiple environments simultaneously. Participants turned relative to either a room or the surrounding campus buildings and then pointed to targets in both the environment in which they turned (updated environment) and the other environment (nonupdated environment). The participants automatically updated the room targets when they moved relative to the campus, but they did not update the campus targets when they moved relative to the room. Thus, automatic spatial updating depends on the nature of the environment. Implications for theories of spatial learning and the structure of human spatial representations are discussed.     

医药产业、市场与人

技术进步能否增进人类的福祉,可能有因人而已的答案.在这种背景下,与人类生存息息相关的医药产业疯狂进步与扩张是以人为中心的还是以利益为中心的,医学的人类关怀为中心的道德准则是否受到商业利益的影响.本文对这些问题进行了分析和探讨,并指出医学应当在新形势结合本民族对福祉的理解保持为人服务的本质.     

论人、我、自然的和谐发展:疫情的社会心理学反思

新型冠状病毒疫情的预防和控制不仅是一个科学技术的问题,还是一个人文社会科学的议题。从社会心理学的视角来看,新型冠状病毒疫情的发生、蔓延是人与自然、人与他人以及人与自己的关系失调的体现。他人、自我、自然的和谐是社会和谐发展的前提和保证。培育好自尊自信、理性平和、亲善友爱的良好社会心态,把握好物质与精神、自由与规范、统筹与协作平衡发展的社会治理方法,可以在疫情的预防和控制中起到重要作用。