以“啬”治人事天

中国的道家文化，几千年来一直是伟大的中华文化的支柱之一，为中华民族和中华文化的繁荣和发展作出了巨大的贡献。     

“法天”以“利人”，“修身”以“为义”——墨家天人关系视域下的伦理思考

墨家的伦理学常被概括为功效主义,但其背后的哲学谱系非常多维与丰富。墨家如儒家、道家一样是在天人关系论中展开其伦理思考的,不过墨家的天人论是一种天对人监察与赏罚而人只能效法天的比较“强硬”的天人观。在这样一种天人观影响下,墨家一方面与儒家一样认为人禽之间有根本性差异,但墨家所认可的人禽之别在于人有“力”（勉力而为）;另一方面墨家不像儒家那样重视人性论、心性论,而认为以“所染”来理解人性即可。这样一种对人的理解虽然更强调人应“被动”地效法天,但仍旧需要言行合一、学以成智、明义以成德等个人修养来既实现对天志、鬼神之真理智慧的认知,又将这些真理智慧——墨家的“十大主张”——实践于现实。     

既靠天，也靠地，还靠自己

狐狸是一个十分聪明的家伙。它经常偷农人家的鸡，屡屡得手。尽管农人想了不少对付狐狸的办法，但无奈道高一尺，魔高一丈，狐狸总是让农人防不胜防。     

儒家“六天”说辨析

“六天”说是郑玄对周时祭祀制度的一种解释。郑玄依于《周礼》及《春秋纬》,把天分为实体与作用,认为昊天上帝是天的实体,其功用对应于五时而有五个帝。郑玄以为帝就是天,把它们合起来,就有了六个天。王肃把郑玄对周时祭祀的这种解释称之为“六天”,并站在古文学家的立场上对郑玄的解释提出了异议。后儒们则时有附郑、难郑之说,逐渐形成了儒家的“六天”之说。     

不怨天，不怨命

十年前,她的事业达到了很辉煌的阶段,在别人惊讶的目光中,她也有了一种释然。在那之前,她听到最多的话就是“这个孩子的命太苦了”,“她的命怎么这么差呢”。     

试论希伯来“耶和华”与道教“天”的概念异同——“一神论”和“无神论”对比

中国的上古文献中渗透着"天有意志"的思想,有学者据此认为中国曾经存在类似希伯来式的上帝信仰,并希望由此能把两大文明连接起来。但笔者把轴心时期《希伯来圣经》的"耶和华"形象和道家原初经典《老子》中的"天"的概念相对比,并从汉代道教正式形成时的经典《太平经》入手解读"皇天"的概念,发现《老子》中的"天"和《太平经》中的"皇天"是一脉相承的。虽然在道教时期"天"有表现出相对明显的人格化属性,但它依然无法违背自然之道来创世或影响"道本体"。这与《希伯来圣经》中耶和华介入历史创世、创造奇迹有本质上的不同。所以中国古代的"道"与"天"及相关的概念不是希伯来式的信仰对象,其本身是非人格化的,具有无神论特质。     

魏晋南北朝天师道典籍中的“县官”

天师道是早期的道教流派,信徒多为下层民众,为便于传教,其典籍语言通俗,较为真实地反映了当时社会日常生活用语。魏晋南北朝天师道典籍中"县官"常表"官司"之义,这个义项在传统典籍中不多见。     

“绝地天通”中的宗教与历法

绝地天通是中国文明史上的重大事件,它既是宗教事件,也是历法事件,因为中国古代巫教的核心就是天文历法。绝地天通确立了统一历法,重黎是掌握历法天道的巫师,它与《尧典》中的“观象授时”和《易传》中的“神道设教”都是以天文历法为核心,确立了自然与文明的区隔,却并非绝对的天人分裂,而是总体上的天人合一关系的一个重要方面。     

吴历及其“天学诗”(六)

<正>吴历约有十年在上海牧会,方豪先生认为:"所谓在上海十年者,以上海为根据地,有时亦偶往嘉定、常熟或苏州等处。"嘉定旧称疁城,也是渔山经常工作的地方,费赖之(AloysiusPfister,1833-1891)所作的《吴历神甫传略》称:     

《易经》“天”“帝”超越意义的诠释

上古“鬼”“神”的分别是：“鬼”指人鬼,其他为“神”。《易经》有“鬼”字无“神”字,并非没有神的观念,而是没有“神”的概念。《易经》的“天”“帝”即神。“天”是至上神,即超凡存在者;“帝”与“天”同义,同位同格。“天”“帝”不仅是至上神,而且是唯一神。蓍筮不是超凡的,而是超验的,即人的一种超越经验世界而通达超凡者的努力。《易经》的超越观念存在矛盾：一方面肯定帝王的超验性、神圣性,另一方面又解构帝王的超验性,否定帝王的神圣性。     

Suicide is Neither Rational nor Irrational

Richard Brandt, following Hume, famously argued that suicide could be rational. In this he was going against a common ‘absolutist’ view that suicide is irrational almost by definition. Arguments to the effect that suicide is morally permissible or prohibited tend to follow from one’s position on this first issue of rationality. I want to argue that the concept of rationality is not appropriately ascribed – or withheld – to the victim or the act or the desire to commit the act. To support this, I explore how the concept is ascribed and withheld in ordinary situations, and show that it is essentially future-oriented. Since the suicide victim has no future, it makes no sense to call his act rational or irrational. The more appropriate reaction to a declared desire for suicide, or to the news of a successful suicide, is horror and pity, and these are absent from Brandt’s account, as is a humble acknowledgement of the profound mystery at the heart of any suicide.

Neither Mereology nor Magic,but Teleology

Contemporary theories of universals have two things in common: first, they are unable to account for necessary connections between universals that form a structure. Second, they leave teleology out of their accounts of instantiation. These facts are not unrelated; the reason why contemporary theories have such trouble is they neglect the ancient idea that universals are ends at which nature aims. If we want a working theory of universals, however, we must return to this idea. Despite its unpopularity among realists, teleology is not a disposable eccentricity, and its dismissal is not an improvement on ancient views.     

Neither Muslim nor Other: British Secular Muslims

Secular Muslims constitute a significant group within the Muslim population of the UK, though under the prevalent multicultural policies their voice is often ignored. This article introduces some of the more outspoken secular, ex-Muslim, and atheist British Muslims and analyses their positions toward major issues that preoccupy the Muslim community and society at large. The secularists are highly critical of multiculturalism for creating mutually hostile communities controlled by conservative religious leaders. In the heated public debate on Islamism, they oppose both its militant and its more pragmatic versions. They are strongly opposed to religious terrorism, and also to the imposition of Sharia law, the wearing of hijab, and separate Islamic schools, though they may differ as to the right ways to combat them. Caught between Islamism, which is often supported by the radical left, and the far right, Muslim secularists are among the staunchest supporters of universal human values and of integration.     

Cyberbullying: Neither an epidemic nor a rarity

There appears to be some perceptual confusion with regard to the scope and extent of online bullying based on media reports and a number of studies—some of which are theoretically sound and methodologically rigorous and some of which are not. In the following text, we share findings from our own research and those of our peers to highlight the actual prevalence rates of cyberbullying. We also depict an overlap between offline and online bullying based on empirical works to make clear that those who are mistreated in the real world and in cyberspace are not two separate populations. Finally, we champion the systemic approach of enhancing the emotional and relational climate within schools as the most promising way to stem the tide of adolescent aggression.     

Preregistration Is Neither Sufficient nor Necessary for Good Science

To address widespread perceptions of a reproducibility crisis in the social sciences, a growing number of scholars recommend the systematic preregistration of empirical studies. The purpose of this article is to contribute to an epistemological dialogue on the value of preregistration in consumer research by identifying the limitations, drawbacks, and potential adverse effects of a preregistration system. After a brief review of some of the implementation challenges that commonly arise with preregistration, we raise three levels of issues with a system of preregistration. First, we identify its limitations as a means of advancing consumer knowledge, thus questioning the sufficiency of preregistration in promoting good consumer science. Second, we elaborate on why consumer science can progress even in the absence of preregistration, thereby also questioning the necessity of preregistration in promoting good consumer science. Third, we discuss serious potential adverse effects of preregistration, both at the individual researcher level and at the level of the field as a whole. We conclude by offering a broader perspective on the narrower role that preregistration can play within the general pursuit of building robust and useful knowledge about consumers.