重建人类禁忌观念

禁忌是指被禁止或忌讳的言行,在古代被认为是不可触犯的戒律。禁忌作为人类最古老的观念,从原始社会到传统社会一直是人类生命安全的守护神。然而,近代以来市场经济、工业革命和现代科技汇聚成的巨大力量使过去建立在畏惧敬畏对象和恇畏对象基础上的禁忌消失殆尽,导致了许多前所未有的重大社会问题和灾难性事件。因此,重建近代以来被否弃的禁忌观念必须提上议事日程。今天的禁忌对象也无非就是敬畏对象和恇畏对象这两大类,前者包括自然、神灵和祖先,后者包括战争、恐怖主义、干预人类自然生长和生活的各种科学研究,以及毒品、性乱、谣言、不讲卫生等。重建禁忌观念,就是要努力促使人们将禁忌内化为自己的底线生存观念,从而在内心深处对触犯禁忌感到羞耻和有罪。当前尤其要注重从小培养人们的畏惧和禁忌意识,强化触犯禁忌的耻感和罪感,营造切忌触犯禁忌的舆论氛围,用法律和道德促进禁忌观念形成。     

Time Records in Human Maze Learning and their Comparison with Maze Records

Nine measures of role-taking in the tradition of Flavell and two measures of classification were administered to 64 boys and girls in India in four age groups: 6–7, 7–8, 8–9, and 9–10 years. The results lend cross-cultural support to the hypothesis that certain classification skills underlie this type of role-taking ability. The inappropriateness of searching for developmental relationships with some parametric statistics was also demonstrated with these data. The influence of two types of role-taking question on role-taking ability was also assessed. Role-taking questions were asked after the Ss had seen a cartoon sequence. On one type of role-taking question (a “next” question) Ss were asked how another child would think the cartoon ended if shown only the beginning. On the other type of role-taking question (a “before” question) Ss were asked how another child would think the cartoon began when shown only the end. Cartoon content was shown to influence role-taking ability in response to “next” questions.     

科学家也是人

DNA双螺旋结构发现者之一、美国著名生物学家沃森的<基因·女郎·伽莫夫:发现双螺旋之后>一书,以亲身的经历和感受生动地描述了科学家之间微妙的合作和激烈的竞争,说明了科学是严肃而神圣的,科学家的生活却是丰富多彩的.     

论"天人合一"

最近看到<科技中国>2004年11月号和12月号刊登了由该刊和清华大学高等研究中心主办的"中国传统文化对中国科技发展的影响"论坛的报导和在讨论会上各位专家的发言,其中有好几位专家都讲到"天人合一"问题.本文打算就这个问题谈一些想法.     

Protecting Nature for the Sake of Human Beings

It is often assumed that to say that nature should be protected for the sake of human beings just is to say that it should be protected because it is a means to one or more anthropocentric ends. I argue that this assumption is false. In some contexts, claims that a particular natural X should be protected for our sakes mean that X should be protected, not because it is a means to anthropocentric ends, but because it is part of something about human life that is of value: because, that is, its value is anthropocentric and constitutive rather than anthropocentric and instrumental. It follows, I suggest, that one does not need to endorse the non‐anthropocentric claim that nature should be protected for its own sake in order to challenge the instrumentalist notion that it should be protected simply because it is a means to anthropocentric ends (as, say, a provider of ecosystem services). To make my case, I consider the UK Government's failed attempt to sell off England's publicly‐owned forests.     

守卫人类的神圣与尊严

主要由基因技术实施导致的人类自然身体的技术化,以及由智能技术完成的人类智力和精神的技术化,正在将人类的身和心推向双重的非自然化,使人类生命的神圣与尊严受到严重的挑战。守卫人类身体的自然本真,守卫人类大脑思维、意识的主体性,守卫人类与生俱来独有的人格特征,守卫人是目的而非工具的底线,是当代医学伦理学和生命伦理学面临的紧迫任务,是保卫人类神圣与尊严的要旨,也是发展生命技术不可逾越的红线。大力发展那些不伤害、不是再造人类生命自然本真的弱高新生命技术,为预防和治疗那些遗传性和复杂性疾病服务,抑制那些旨在再造人类生命的强高新生命技术,是发展生命技术策略的最佳选择。

     

论人的脆弱性和依赖性

人类所有的脆弱性是人性的一个基本事实。人类的脆弱性与人类的德性需要是内在相关的。但是,在漫长的西方哲学史上,对于人的脆弱性以及人的依赖性这一基本的人性事实却很少有人注意。然而,人类需要承认依赖性的德性。     

Artificial Intelligence and the New Alienation of Human Beings

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a revolutionary and overwhelming technology that is yet to immature. While profoundly changing and shaping people and society, AI also splits into its own opposites and develops into a new external alien force. As the basic technical support of the entire society, intelligent technology entails the overt or covert domination of human beings, who are becoming the “vassals” and “slaves” of this high-speed intelligent social system. Various intelligent systems are constantly replacing human work, so that the “digital poor” gradually lose the opportunities and values offered by labor and hence are excluded by the global economic and social system, rendering their existence empty and absurd. The rapid development of intelligent robots has blurred the boundary between humans and machines and had a strong impact on the nature of man and his position as a conscious agent, making “What is man?” and the human-machine relationship prominent issues for our times, challenging the commonplaces of philosophy. We must face up to the existing or imminent risk of alienation, expand our theoretical horizons, innovate theories of alienation in the era of intelligence, take constructive action in terms of the construction of an ideal society and the evolution of man himself, build an ecological system for the joint evolution and growth of human beings and intelligent machines, and achieve liberty of man and the all-round and free development.     

论人的主体性与主体性教育

由于科学技术革命所引起的社会巨变 ,人的“主体性问题”成了当代理论和实践发展的一个生长点 ,弘扬人的主体性已成为我们这个时代的呼声 ,这就要求担负着“培育人”的重任的教育界把高扬主体性作为当今教育倡导的基础和核心。但是 ,由于传统教育的影响 ,长期以来 ,在我国教育界存在着一种可以称之为“主体性缺位”的现象 ,本文试图通过对这一现象及其成因的剖析 ,把哲学理论所探讨的主体性问题与当今教育理论相结合 ,认为应在当今教育中贯彻“主体性教育”的理念 ,这既是教育理论的发展所趋 ,也是当今社会实践状况的要求。一、主体性理论—…     

The High Relief Finger Maze for Human Learning

Albino rats in independent studies were administered varying dosages of diazepam and methylphenidate prior to a daily shock traumatization experience in infancy. All animals were tested on avoidance conditioning in adulthood. Both drugs were found to be effective in modifying the typically obtained shock deficit. The results failed to substantiate that increased dosage level resulted in more effective modification of trauma effects. Delayed consequences of methylphenidate administration included modification of central nervous system reactivity as manifested in quicker reaction times and growth depression as manifested in lessened body weights in this group in comparison to the diazepam group. An additional feature of the study was the finding that male and female animals responded differently to the drug and shock experiences.     

From the Terrible Loneliness to the Wonderful Agreement of Human Beings

What would be the “terrible loneliness” and what would be the “wonderful agreement” in the present paper? The “terrible loneliness” is the only reality that a person perceives and/or thinks during the now going on. For the person, an enormous quantity of occurrences is in the present moment absent. A very small quantity of occurrences is present. The person is the only being in having this. And, this is only during a little moment. The person never thinks about his loneliness in this moment. On the contrary, he thinks he is plenty of people and full of occurrences. But, if he were thinking about reality, he would live in a terrible loneliness. How does he escape himself from this loneliness? He thinks that the probable occurrences are real occurrences. He may be right in a plenty of times. Going through what I call opening hypotheses—basic hypotheses and non-basic but important hypotheses—and going through what I call simply hypotheses he is able to sanction a wonderful agreement of human beings about the known parts of the Universe. However, they are hypotheses, not absolute realities.     

On the Complexity and Wholeness of Human Beings: Husserlian Perspectives

Abstract

At the beginning of Being and Time, Heidegger rejects Husserl’s classical phenomenology on three grounds: he claims that Husserlian phenomenology is impaired by indeterminate concepts, by naïve personalism, and by obscurities in its account of individuation. The paper studies the validity of this early critique by explicating Husserl’s discourse on human persons as bodily-spiritual beings and by clarifying his account of the principles by which such beings can be individuated. The paper offers three types of considerations. After a summary of Heidegger’s early critique of Husserl, the second section of the paper distinguishes between two dimensions of Husserl’s discourse on human persons. It argues that Husserl does not put forward one analysis of the being of humans, but explicates two different accounts and then studies critically their mutual relations of dependency: on the one hand, the naturalistic account of human beings as layered beings and on the other hand the personalistic account of human beings as peculiar kinds of unified wholes in which the mental and the bodily are inextricably intertwined. The third section of the paper clarifies Husserl’s theory of individuation and its consequences for our discourse on human persons. Finally, the fourth section explicates the conceptual means by which Husserl develops his account of human beings as persons. The paper ends in drawing some conclusions for contemporary philosophical anthropology.     

Self‐Creation? On the Dignity of Human Beings

It was not through biotechnological possibilities that human beings first discovered “self‐creation” as a question. Rather, the question fits into the horizon of the primordial human desire to be like God. Against this hamartiological insight, a soteriological expectation related to technology has arisen. The latter expectation must be rejected, but not in all respects. Rather, one has to stress the inventive and constructive aspect of the dignity to rule, which is implied in human linguistic reason (λογοσ). There are, however, boundaries to be perceived and to be set. This becomes evident when embryo‐consuming research is at stake. In this context, the main question is: Wherein lies human “dignity”? This is the same question as: wherein lies the “being‐as‐person”? The author sees the fewest difficulties in attributing personhood to the beginning of life, which occurs with the fusion of ovum and sperm. This attribution is not justified by the material substrate as such. Rather, it is the result of intertwining the element, namely the lump of cells, and the word of institution, which “speaks together” the lump of cells and the person: This lump of cells is a person. Human beings are honored and enabled to use this instituting word, a φυσ?ι, because according to Gen 2:7 and 19f, God granted unto human beings linguistic reason (λογοσ), and thus the power to define. In this intertwining of element and instituting word lies the human dignity, which is undeservedly conferred on humans as a categorical gift. This absolute gratuity implies the unconditional acknowledgment of the dignity and the personhood of human beings—before one can speak of any characteristics or abilities. Psalm 8 underscores the elementary human dependency on unconditional acknowledgment as an inviolable person, an acknowledgment preceding all human characteristics and achievements. The psalm further intertwines this acknowledgment and the commission to rule, which is conferred on human beings, as an insoluble unity. What at first appear to be opposites is in fact a synopsis and inseparable connection of creaturely human determinations that correspond to God's simultaneously being the almighty creator and the compassionate, merciful father. By using “dignity” and “person” as critical terms of negotiation, theology can engage in a conversation with the societal and political public. In rejecting the dominant determination of the “person” as an autonomous, self‐determinately active, individual rational being, theology finds an ally in juridical thinking, which also acknowledges the dignity even of persons unable to act. Two consequences are to be drawn concerning biotechnology: perceiving the remaining dependency, vulnerability and vanity of human beings forces us to abandon illusions of “self‐creation” and immortality. Second, priorities are required that determine the goals and limits of research—especially in protecting the personal dignity of embryos—in the light of our accountability before God the creator and judge.     

Human Learning on a Four-Section,Elevated, Finger Maze

Forty Ss learned 10 sentences composed of adjective, noun, verb, and adverb and were subsequently tested for their recall of the sentences and their ability to generate new sentences based on an association rule for words within the sentences. The rule could be discovered from the sentences learned and was comparable to grammatical rules for sentence structure. Subjects also rated the meaning of the words from the sentences before and after learning. Eight Ss were in each of five experimental conditions, which differed in terms of the degree to which the words in the 10 sentences were in a natural language order. The five orders were natural, reversed, 20% random, 50% random, and 100% random orders.

The results showed that the closer the sentence order was to natural language order, the more Ss recalled the sentences they learned and the more accurately they generated unlearned sentences, apparently as a result of discovering and using the association rule. Another finding was that the rated evaluative meaning of words changed in a predictable direction, toward the mean rating of the words associated with each word. Such meaning conditioning appears to be an automatic process comparable to classical conditioning in that it is unaffected by the order of words within sentences and occurs for different word forms.     

《管子》的天地人和合观探析

《管子》的"和合"是一种差等和合,治国理念以天地人和合观为基础,建立了形而上的天地和合道德根据,治国的目标是为了达到社会和合偕习,和合观的使用在方法上运用个人内心和合、国家内外和合达到国家治理,形下之用体现于政治上政通人和以实现天地人和。管子之所以成为我国春秋初期著名的政治家,是因为他的治国理念高远、方法得当、运用适宜,既有道德感化,又有法治辅助,还有礼义调和,实现了社会上下和合、内外和合、形上形下和合。