释“彼”

“彼”是《墨辩》中的一个重要术语,对它的理解直接关系到对墨家辩学性质的认识。自近代至今,有关“彼”的释义,众说纷纭,如“中词”说、“非”说、“矛盾命题”说、“一个命题”说等等,但我以为这诸种解释都失之确当,与《墨辩》“彼”之原意不符。近代比较逻辑研究大师梁启超释“彼”为“研究之对象”。此说虽较接近《墨辩》原意,但仍失之确切,过     

辩名析理:杨芾荪的墨家逻辑学研究

"辩名析理"是中国古代解释经典的方法之一。如果从"辩名析理"角度看杨芾荪的墨家逻辑学研究,其所辩之"名"包括:集百家之言提供"辩名"的基础;在文本里开展田野工作,寻求《墨辩》逻辑学之意义。其所析之"理",引入两个"新学",即西方逻辑和苏联式的马克思主义理论,得出西方逻辑框架下的墨家逻辑和先秦唯心主义、唯物主义的逻辑。这两点是建国17年研究中国逻辑史学者的共同特征。我们认为逻辑观问题的解决是我们开展中国逻辑史研究的先决条件。     

“非诽者誖”

在我国春秋时代,儒家提出‘隐恶而扬善’,认为批评是不道德的。对此,《墨辩》提出了尖锐的批判。值得注意的是,墨辩是从逻辑角度提出问题的,因而是有力的,无法否认的。《墨辩》指出:‘非诽者誖,说在弗非。诽非,己之诽非也。不非诽,非可非也。‘意思是,反对批评的主张(‘非诽’)是荒唐的     

中国逻辑史研究会讨论《墨辩》的逻辑思想

由中国逻辑史研究会和山东省哲学学会联合组织的中国逻辑史第三次全国学术讨论会于1982年9月上旬在山东泰安举行。来自全国十多个省、市的中国逻辑史教学和研究工作者三十余人参加了会议。会议集中讨论了《墨辩》逻辑以及与《墨辩》逻辑     

从“十论”到“墨辩”——先秦墨学的思想转向及其学术史意义

墨学在先秦时期经历过一次意义非凡的思想转向,即由墨子的"十论"转向后期墨家的"墨辩",由政治、伦理转向逻辑、论辩。学界一般以内部分化与外部刺激作为墨学转向的两大原因,然通过《墨子》之文本实可获得第三种解释,那就是"十论"的政治、伦理思想当中本就蕴含着逻辑之自觉与论辩之观念,后期墨家则将此自觉的观念发展为系统的论辩方法。先秦墨学从"十论"转向"墨辩"有重要的学术史意义,不仅为墨子的"十论"做了有力的逻辑补充,对稷下辩者和惠施、公孙龙等名家辩者所代表的战国中后期名辩思潮产生了非凡的影响,对当代逻辑学、论辩术以及自然科学的发展亦有深远之启示。     

齐同、剸同、和同——“和同之辩”中“同”的三种理路

"和同之辩"是中国古代哲学的重要命题,在《左传》《国语》等先秦文献中都有阐发。《论语》中提出的"和而不同"原则,是对"和同之辩"的发展,不仅代表了孔子的理想,也是"和同之辩"的正解,即肯定差异性的和谐统一("和"),反对不顾事物之间差异的强行统一("同")。在此,"和"的价值被肯定,而与之对立的"同"则被摒弃。但是,由于"和"的逻辑是在尊重复数他者的前提下构成的新的统一体,故"和同"本身又可看作一个新的概念即"由和而同"。在这个层面还有"剸同"和"齐同"。"剸同""齐同"虽与"和同"不同,是在差异性基础上的类同和强同,但都是"同"的子概念。"剸同"与"和同"不同具有对抗性,"齐同"则因具有化解二者紧张的性质而具有过渡性。因此,"齐同""剸同""和同"就构成了"和同之辩"中与"同"相互关联的三种理路。最终,共同体的未来需要通过"和而不同"的逻辑,使"和同世界"成为"和合世界"。     

后期墨家

墨家是战国初期由墨子创立的一个学派。墨家在墨子死后即分为相里氏之墨、相夫氏之墨,邓陵氏之墨三派,这就是后期墨家。今存《墨子》一书中的《经上》、《经下》、《经说上》、《经说下》、《大取》、《小取》等六篇就属后期墨家的重要著作,人们统称之为《墨辩》或《墨经》,是我们研究后期墨家逻辑思想的基本资料。后期墨家在总结墨子和各家逻辑思想成果的基础上,终于创立了一个相当科学的完整的古典逻辑科学体系,被今人称为“墨辩逻辑学”或“墨经逻辑学”。     

《墨辩》与亚里士多德的“类”概念之比较

对于类概念的自觉认识是逻辑学赖以产生和建立的基础。因此,无论是亚氏逻辑还是《墨辩》逻辑都是在类概念的基石上建构的。类的同异关系是推理的基本依据。但是,尽管两者出发点相同,《墨辩》与古希腊逻辑却有着不同的发展道路。由于古希腊哲学家主要是为求知而从事学术研究,纯理论地研究逻辑,因而亚氏在建构逻辑体系时,主要研究的是撇开内容的思维形式的结构,并建立了以三段论为核心内容的演绎逻辑体系,因而使古希腊逻辑具有人类科学思维一般工具的特性。     

墨辩逻辑的唯物主义基础

(一)“彼”的客观物质世界的存在 辩者的逻辑思想,从邓析、墨翟以至惠施基本上是唯物主义的,但到公孙龙却转到唯心主义方面去。墨辩继承了墨翟的唯物主义优良传统,批判了公孙龙的客观唯心主义,确立了我国古代唯物主义的逻辑体系。 公孙龙从他的客观唯心主义观点出发,     

儒家智者的逻辑——析荀子正名论

荀子适应当时社会需要 ,从儒家智者的视角 ,创发孔子正名的逻辑内涵 ,建构以概念论为中心的逻辑体系 ,继墨辩之后把中国古代逻辑推向又一高峰。荀子对概念论和语言论、本体论、认识论、判断论、推理论、诡辩论、语言规范化、华夏大一统的相关论述 ,是当前仍有积极价值的学术精华。以现代方法揭示荀子正名论的逻辑意义 ,是中国逻辑元研究的课题。     

"Killing the Messenger": Religious Black Gay Men's Neutralization of Anti-Gay Religious Messages

I use cognitive dissonance theory as a framework to examine coping strategies used by men endeavoring to maintain a coherent sense of themselves as gay Christians. Using interviews with black gay Christian men, I uncover a strategy used to maintain that identity in the face of stigmatizing religious rhetoric. While these men have managed to reconcile their religious and sexual identities, sermons delivered by church leaders disrupt that reconciliation, causing them to have to neutralize these anxiety-inducing attitudes. This study shows that they focus accusations of illegitimacy on the speaker rather than the doctrine by denigrating the speakers' knowledge, morality, focus, and motivations. In this way, they neutralize the sting of churches' negative messages by neutralizing the moral authority of the churches' messengers. These findings offer new insight into how parishioners persist in religious communities in which their sexual behaviors or identities are condemned.     

Evidence that Killing Escalates Within‐Subjects in a Bug‐Killing Paradigm

Prior research has examined killing behavior using a paradigm in which participants believe (falsely) that they are killing bugs. This work suggests that killing behavior escalates. In the present study, we sought to replicate the basic escalation effect within‐subjects. Further, in doing so, we controlled for experimenter “sanctioning” of killing that may have differed with key between‐subjects manipulations in the prior research. To control for this possible confound, the present experiment held experimenter instructions constant and examined whether killing naturally escalated within‐subjects across two 12‐sec bug‐killing tasks. Additionally, to verify that escalation is due to killing per se and not just physical practice of the procedure, we manipulated whether the procedure was described as real killing or simulated killing. Results showed that when participants thought they were killing bugs, the number of bugs put into the grinder increased from the first to the second killing task. No such escalation occurred when participants performed the procedure while knowing the killing was simulated. Thus, killing of bugs escalates and is not simply a consequence of perceived sanctioning of killing by an experimenter or simulated practice of the procedure.     

Killing for knowledge

I distinguish between four arguments commonly used to justify experimentation on animals (I). After delineating the autonomy of the question of experiments from other topics within animal ethics (II), I examine and reject each of these justifications (III-VI). I then explore two arguments according to which animal-dependent experimentation should continue even if it is immoral (VII). I close with the way in which liberationists' strategic considerations modify the moral conclusions of my analysis.     

Killing Me Softly

Abstract

“Forced termination” of psychoanalysis occurs when the analyst electively terminates the treatment for reasons of his own, independent of the clinical indications for termination. The author describes his own experience with the forced termination of his training analysis. The literature is reviewed, with an emphasis on the attitude of each author regarding the straggle around the decision. The author explores sources of general ethical knowledge, the ethical foundations of the analyst-analysand relation ship, and the application of these ideas to psychoanalysis. From these princi ples, the ethical problems of forced termination are derived and examined. The author proposes reforms to address these problems.     

The Killing Ground

No abstract available for this article.