实事求是地评价历史上哲学唯心主义的作用

关于历史上的哲学唯心主义评价问题的讨论,对于哲学史和现代资产阶级哲学的研究都有极为重要的意义。它不仅有助于我们全面、正确地去了解历史上各种哲学理论的意义和作用,恢复历史的本来面目,而且也有助于我们真正弄清和掌握马克思主义的方法论原则。 为了正确评价历史上哲学唯心主义的作用,我们认为有必要弄清以下几个问题:什么是哲学的党性?哲学的党性是否就是阶级性?唯心主义是否就等于反动?唯心主义在人类认识     

疾病治疗与康复的自我效能模式及其意义

自我效能是指个体对其在特定情境中成功地完成某种活动的能力预期.患者的自我效能预期能以直接或间接的方式影响其行为表现和生理机能,从而影响到疾病治疗与康复效果.患者自我效能的形成与发展既受各种效能信息的影响,也受个体认知加工方式的影响.根据患者自我效能的形成与作用模式,可以采取不同的措施来提高患者的自我效能预期,发挥它在疾病治疗与康复中的作用.     

濒死体验研究的认识论

在濒死体验研究中,有两条认识路线:唯物主义与唯心主义.唯物主义导致科学医学,唯心主义导致灵学医学.前者研究其组成和机制,分析其文化、生物学特点及心理动力学.后者则陷入对人死复生的证明,美其名为生命之后的生命.     

医患沟通中患者的信息认知

医患沟通在医疗过程中发挥着重要的作用,沟通中的主要内容是信息交流,信息交流的主要目标是达到医患双方的相互理解.论述影响医患沟通中信息认知的几个因素,其中包括信息的形式,情绪因素,沟通行为因素三个方面.通过对这些因素的干预,提高患者对信息的认知能力将使医患沟通更加有效,从而有利于合作式的医患关系的形成.     

再谈历史上哲学唯心主义的评价问题

随着哲学史方法论讨论的深入,对历史上哲学唯心主义的评价问题,已经引起不少同志的关心和兴趣了。和以前那种简单化、绝对化不同,现在许多同志都肯定,对历史上哲学唯心主义的社会作用,应该作历史的具体分析。但是,就在哲学史研究中这种形而上学方法已经被冲破了缺口的时候,有的同志仍然坚持“唯心必反动”的公式,认为“唯心主义,无论过去、现在或将来,都没有、也不可能起进步作用。”(陈孟麟:《唯心主义能起进步作用吗》,     

论民族偏见对民族认知的影响

民族偏见在民族心理中是一个很遍普的现象。它不但对民族情感、民族意识等方面发生影响,而且对民族认知也有很大的影响。在民族偏见的形成过程中,有民族认知的参与,民族偏见反过来对民族认知起导向作用;由于刻板印象在二者中所发生的作用,民族偏见可能导致民族认知发生晕轮效应,从而简化认知活动的过程,使民族思维变得狡窄和僵化;民族偏见是文化的偏见,民族认知也是一种文化的认知。由于民族文化在二者中的参与和影响,民族偏见在一定民族文化差异的情境下,对简化式的民族认知活动有强化作用。     

评М.Φ.奧符相尼科夫等编写的《美学学说史纲》

在М.Ф.奥符相尼科夫和З.В.斯米尔诺娃的著作中,考察了二千五百年来美学思想发展的历史,考察了许多种思想进行尖锐斗争的历史。在这种斗争的过程中,日益暴露出唯心主义美学的局限性。过去的唯心主义美学也有某些功绩(从毕达哥拉斯学派和柏拉图提出审美和伦理的统一问题,到黑格尔试图从艺术的历史发展去考察艺术)。可是,这本书想使读者相信,在唯心主义的范围内,唯心主义所捍卫的思想是没有发展道路的。只有在唯物主义美学中,这些思想才能得到全面的深入研究。如果作者们认为可以对现代资产阶级美学的基本特征和流派或多或少作些说明,那么这个十分重要的结论听起来会更有力一些。我们认为应     

对П.切尔卡申的《唯心主义的认识论根源》一书的几点意见

在党的第二十二次代表大会上所通过的苏共态的斗争。苏联哲学家们对这一斗争作出了自己的贡献;近年来,他们对揭露形形色色的唯心主义理论作了不少工作,写了一些批判唯心主义哲学的书籍。其中引人注意的是П.П.切尔卡申的一部学术专著《唯心主义的认识论根源》。大家知道,这一问题对于马克思主义哲学和一般科学认识来说,都具有巨大的意义。如果不顺利地解决这一问题,就不可能从科学上揭露唯心主义。但是,对唯心主义的认识论根源问题的研究仍然     

邓小平历史观的特点

邓小平理论的哲学基础，说到底就是邓小平的科学历史观即唯物辩证历史观。邓小平的人生道路、社会生活、工作实践及其所完成的历史重任有其特殊性，因而邓小平历史观的形成及理论内容也有其显著特点。一、邓小平历史观形成、演进的特点马克思主义哲学史告诉我们，从马克思到毛泽东，众多伟人都经历了世界观的根本转变即与唯心主义世界观、历史观决裂的过程。邓小平世界观、历史观的形成和确立，不存在与唯心主义世界观、历史观决裂的问题。但又不能认为邓小平先天具备科学世界观、历史观。自从１９世纪中叶马克思主义世界观、历史观创立之后…     

论董仲舒哲学的历史作用

董仲舒是我国西汉时期最大的唯心主义哲学家。解放以来,很多人发表论著对董仲舒哲学思想进行了分析批判,揭露了它的唯心主义和形而上学实质。这是完全必要的。但是,董仲舒哲学是不是就一无可取呢?我认为,这是值得深入研究的。事实上,他的唯心主义神学目的论和形而上学世界观,在当时的历史环境中,曾经起了进步作用。     

A Preverbal Perspective on Conversion Disorder

ABSTRACT

In contrast to the vast majority of writings on hysteria that place its genesis within the Oedipal period, this article conceptualizes a preverbal, pre-Oedipal origin for the primary manifestation of hysteria—conversion disorder. Findings from infant observation research are used to support a conceptualization that includes connections to temperament, attachment strategies, Wilma Bucci’s multiple code theory, and Leslie Farber’s perspectives on will and willfulness. This article suggests an etiology that is dependent on a complexity of factors operating interactively and within the context of a relational process.     

Mentalism and Epistemic Transparency

Questions about the transparency of evidence are central to debates between factive and non-factive versions of mentalism about evidence. If all evidence is transparent, then factive mentalism is false, since no factive mental states are transparent. However, Timothy Williamson has argued that transparency is a myth and that no conditions are transparent except trivial ones. This paper responds by drawing a distinction between doxastic and epistemic notions of transparency. Williamson's argument may show that no conditions are doxastically transparent, but it fails to show that no conditions are epistemically transparent. Moreover, this reinstates the argument from the transparency of evidence against factive mentalism.     

Mentalism, behavior-behavior relations, and a behavior-analytic view of the purposes of science

In a behavioral view, the purposes of science are primarily prediction and control. To the extent that a scientist embraces both of these as a unified and generally applicable criterion for science, certain philosophical and theoretical practices are counterproductive, including mentalism in both its metaphysical and metatheoretical forms. It is possible and often worthwhile to recast some mentalistic talk into an issue of behavior-behavior relations. When behavior-behavior relations are approached non-mechanistically, however, analysis cannot stop at the level of the relations themselves. Several analytic concepts common in the behavioral community share some of the dangers of mentalism if not employed properly, including such concepts as self-reinforcement, response-produced stimulation, and self-rules.     

Behaviorism and mentalism: Is there a third alternative?

Behaviorism and mentalism are commonly considered to be mutually exclusive and conjunctively exhaustive options for the psychological explanation of behavior. Behaviorism and mentalism do differ in their characterization of inner causes of behavior. However, I argue that they are not mutually exclusive on the grounds that they share important foundational assumptions, two of which are the notion of an innerouter split and the notion of control. I go on to argue that mentalism and behaviorism are not conjunctively exhaustive either, on the grounds that dropping these common foundational assumptions results in a distinctively different framework for the explanation of behavior. This third alternative, which is briefly described, is a version of non-individualism.     

Quine's Naturalism and Behaviorisms

This paper investigates the complicated relations between various versions of naturalism, behaviorism, and mentalism within the framework of W. V. O. Quine's thinking. It begins with Roger Gibson's reconstruction of Quine's behaviorisms and argues that it lacks a crucial ontological element and misconstrues the relation between philosophy and science. After getting clear of Quine's naturalism, the paper distinguishes between evidential, methodological, and ontological behaviorisms. The evidential and methodological versions are often conflated, but they need to be clearly distinguished in order to see whether Quine's argument against mentalism is cogent. The paper argues that Quine's naturalism supports only the weakest version of behaviorism, that is, the evidential one, but this version is compatible with mentalistic semantics. Quine's opposition to mentalism is an overreaction against the behaviorist camp. By contrast, Jerry Fodor's objection to José Luis Bermúdez is an overreaction from the opposite direction.     

从皮亚杰到柯尔伯格——兼论道德认知理论的哲学问题

从皮亚杰到柯尔伯格的道德认知理论是富有创新性的心理学理论 ,它以实证的方法研究了道德认知的发生和发展 ,对道德教育实践产生了巨大的影响。道德认知理论与现代唯物主义的精神实质相一致 ,并体现了丰富的辩证思维。但其理论在哲学世界观和方法论方面 ,存在一些自身不能解决的问题 ,对这些问题进行分析 ,有助于道德科学研究和伦理哲学研究的发展。     

The hysterical organization

The term hysteria has been used in the history of the psychoanalytical movement to describe a large variety of psychic modalities. What is the common denominator of the hysterias? The author suggests that ambivalence in relation to penetration in its passive form (vaginal desire), in its pregenital and genital valences, constitutes the essence of hysteria. It seems that the issue of hysteria thus configured finds its best resolution in the fantasy of an incorporeal penetration, which leads to orgasm, and spares one from the anxiety of destruction to the internal space as well as from the anxiety of guilt following the hoped for climax. The author is attempting to discern, by means of two case studies, how disembodied penetration, depending on whether it is fantasized or delusional, constitutes a solution, neurotic or psychotic respectively, to the issue of hysteria: the private theatre in neurosis, as well as the inhabited and influenced mind in psychosis (delusion of control), act as psychic figurations of vagina.     

On the early history of male hysteria and psychic trauma

This paper discusses the influence of Jean-Martin Charcot's views on Sigmund Freud's early theory of hysteria and the notion of psychical trauma. We consider the early history of both psychical trauma and male hysteria, for in Charcot's view traumatic hysteria and male hysteria are identical. Freud's two 1886 lectures on male hysteria, delivered after his return from Paris, are crucial to the subject because they present Freud's first impressions of Charcot and his teaching. Some of the ideas presented in the two lectures foreshadow Freud's later generalization of the etiological role of trauma and his theory of the role of psychical trauma in the genesis of hysteria; that is, each hysterical symptom is due to a psychical trauma reviving an earlier traumatic event—the so-called principle of deferred action (Nachtraglichkeit). Several arguments substantiate the thesis that Freud's notion of psychical (sexual) trauma was developed in reference to Charcot's notion of traumatic hysteria, and that the early psychoanalytic theory of psychical trauma is clearly indebted to Freud's encounter with Charcot's male traumatic hysterical patients. The discussed Freudian development points out the major role of (physical) traumata in eliciting psychopathological pictures and in this way is of definite historical relevance for the present-day discussion on the traumatic nature of the so-called multiple personality syndrome and other dissociative disorders, and post-traumatic stress disorders.     

Where have all the behaviorists gone?

Many of the world's current problems are the result of behavior, and traditional appeals to mental determinants are again proving inadequate. The time for a behavioristic alternative appears ripe, yet many behaviorists seem to be becoming less behavioristic and more mentalistic. When confronted with the complexity of human behavior many are resorting to the intellectual comfort and safety of mentalism. A recent example of this tendency (Schwartz et al, 1978) is presented and discussed. Additionally, speculations regarding the origins of the resurgence of mentalism are presented, and it is proposed that arranging histories which provide for more rigorous and lasting control of verbal behavior about behavior may serve to improve the situation.