新时代培育时代新人的逻辑进路

2019年10月27日,中共中央和国务院颁布了《新时代公民道德建设实施纲要》,这为我国未来很长一段时间的公民道德建设提供了根本指针,与2001年的《公民道德建设实施纲要》相比,在诸多方面实现了我国公民道德建设的开拓创新与转型升级。本刊特邀我国学界在公民道德研究领域有着深厚造诣的五位学者,就新时代培育时代新人的逻辑进路、民族文化自信与传统美德传承、新时代公民的网络道德建设、新时代公民道德建设的法治保障、夯实新时代基层公民道德建设的实践基础这五大问题,进行深入学理诠释,以飨读者,并求学界共鸣。     

《新时代公民道德建设实施纲要》的鲜明特征

党中央、国务院颁布的《新时代公道德建设实施纲要》(以下简称《纲要》),彰显着新时代性的鲜明特征和品格。《纲要》的新时代性,体现为习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想贯穿《纲要》始终,无论是逻辑框架、内容安排,还是理论分析、实践举措,《纲要》都坚持以习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想为指导,都是对习近平关于公民道德建设重要论述的理论坚守和实践运用;体现为《纲要》总结了2001年党中央印发《公民道德建设实施纲要》以来,特别是党的十八大以来我国公民道德建设的基本经验,坚持守正创新,赋予其适应新时代要求的鲜活内容,使我党对公民道德建设基本规律的认识和把握达到了新的高度;体现为《纲要》适应新时代的呼唤,深刻揭示了道德领域问题的根源,丰富发展了公民道德道德建设内容体系,科学界定了个人品德的内涵,精辟概括了中华传统美德,提出了弘扬中国精神的新要求,在公民道德建设一系列重大理论和实践问题上实现了新时代的重大突破,为推进新时代公民道德建设提高到一个新水平提供了理论指导和根本遵循。     

中国共产党道德建设的百年演进及现实启示

革命和建设时期,我们党坚持以为人民服务为核心、以集体主义为原则加强革命道德建设,坚定理想信念、加强理论武装,传承传统美德、培育优良作风,塑造崇高精神、强壮精神支撑,厉行纪律法规、倡导"五爱"公德,培养造就富有高尚情操的德才兼备、又红又专的革命者和建设者.改革开放和现代化建设新时期,我们党加强精神文明建设,全面提高公民道德素质,建设社会主义核心价值体系,实行依法治国和以德治国相结合,坚持先进性要求与广泛性要求相结合,培育"四有"公民.进入新时代,我们党坚持以培育和践行社会主义核心价值观为引领加强公民道德建设,强调领导干部明大德、守公德、严私德,着力抓好关键少数、公众人物、青少年、先进模范等重点人群的道德建设,营造风清气正的网络空间,强化制度和法治保障,在落细、落小、落实上下功夫,培养造就担当民族复兴大任的时代新人.面向未来,我们党要走向继续成功,必须坚持和加强党史学习教育,传承和弘扬中华优秀传统文化,强化以"关键少数"示范带动"绝大多数",持之以恒地抓好网络空间道德建设,奋力谱写出道德建设更为精彩的崭新篇章.     

何以载德——公民道德的实践载体

新时代公民道德不应该只是写在文件中或挂在口头上的口号,它需要实实在在地转化为人们的道德实践,其中道德的实践载体自然必不可少,而选择何种实践载体就是公民道德是否有效实施的关键。我们认为,在《新时代公民道德实施纲要》中,按照社会对个人行为的道德要求的高低程度,可以区分出三个层次的公民道德,即公共道德、社会角色道德和公民美德,相对应地,就有三类载体和三种运行机制。在公民美德层次上,是"导之以德";在社会角色道德层次上,是"齐之于礼";在公共道德层次上是"绳之于法"。如果我们对此没有理论自觉,就会造成公民道德实施的困扰甚至失效。     

中共中央、国务院印发《新时代公民道德建设实施纲要》

正2019年10月27日,中共中央、国务院印发《新时代公民道德建设实施纲要》,要求各地区各部门结合实际认真贯彻落实。《纲要》深入贯彻习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想和党的十九大精神,特别是充分体现习近平总书记关于公民道德建设的重要论述,总结了2001年党中央颁布《公民道德建设实施纲要》以来,我国在公民道德建设中形成的新经验和新成就,反映党中央对新时代公民道德建设工作规律的深刻理论认识和科学把握,重视突出公民道德建设的群众性、实践性和可操作性,是我国推进新时代公民道德建设的总纲领。《纲要》保留、继承了2001年《公民道德建设实施纲要》的主要内容,又立足新时代和新形势的要求提出了一些新问题、新思想,着重体现党员领导干部、青少年、社会公众人     

新时代公民道德人格重塑的社会基础、核心原则与实现路径

新时代公民道德人格的重塑,不仅对于公民个人的自我完善意义重大,而且对于推动社会伦理建设、提高社会文明程度、开启全面建设社会主义现代化强国新征程影响深远。全面深化社会主义市场经济体制改革,创造适度经济条件;不断提高社会治理现代化水平,营造和谐社会氛围;有效提升公民道德自觉意识,培育良好道德能力是新时代公民道德人格重塑的社会基础。主体性、发展性、实践性是新时代公民道德人格重塑的核心原则。注重全面引导,协同推进公民道德教育;激活内生动力,引导公民主动提升道德修养;构建公正合理、运行顺畅的道德回报机制是新时代公民道德人格重塑的实现路径。以重塑公民道德人格为落脚点和着力点,不断提高公民道德实践能力,才能真正做到引导人们向往和追求讲道德、尊道德、守道德的生活,全面提升新时代公民道德建设水平。     

《公民道德建设实施纲要》颁布以来的理论与实践评析

《公民道德建设实施纲要》颁布实施十几年来,在实践上公民道德建设活动异彩纷呈,文明道德之花竞相开放;在理论上多学科联动,中国特色的公民道德建设理论体系正在形成。但无论在道德建设实践中还是理论研究上都还有很多问题和不足,它需要党和政府、各种社会组织和广大民众的广泛参与,其中学术理论界应着重从三个方面做出努力:进一步加强相关理论研究,为公民道德建设奠定良好的理论基础;进一步加强实践调研,增强推进公民道德建设的针对性;积极探索将道德建设制度化、法律化的途径和机制。     

公民道德建设的法治保障

《新时代公民道德建设实施纲要》在第一部分"总体要求"中提出,坚持以社会主义核心价值观为引领,将国家、社会、个人层面的价值要求贯穿到道德建设各方面,以主流价值建构道德规范、强化道德认同、指引道德实践,引导人们明大德、守公德、严私德。在"总体要求"中还指出:坚持发挥社会主义法治的促进和保障作用,以法治承载道德理念、鲜明道德导向、弘扬美德义行,把社会主义道德要求体现到立法、执法、司法、守法之中,以法治的力量引导人们向上向善。     

论公民道德建设中的"以人为本"思想

公民道德建设必须坚持"以人为本"的指导思想,即公民道德建设要以多数人的现实道德状况为出发点;以提高人的素质,促进人的全面发展为着眼点;以培养公民成为自觉的道德主体,充分发挥公民的道德主体性为落脚点,使公民道德建设顺应时代的发展和进步.     

社会主义道德建设70年的回顾和展望

70年社会主义道德建设的经验是,党和 政府始终高度重视,坚持德法并重,将道德建设的先进性与广泛性结合起来,坚持传承与创 新相结合,坚持理论与实践相结合。新时代需要以习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想为指 导,加强党对社会主义道德建设的领导;以社会主义核心价值观引领社会主义道德建设;以 着力培养担当民族复兴大任的时代新人为社会主义道德建设的根本任务;构建社会公德、职 业道德、家庭美德、个人品德建设相统一的公民道德建设工程。     

Reality Testing and Testing Reality in Group TreatmentPart I: Reality and Reality Testing

This two-part contribution addresses reality, reality testing, and testing reality—how we think about and may technically approach these concepts. Part I provides a topic overview and focuses on reality testing. Part II (in an upcoming issue) focuses on testing reality and how it promotes emergence of new or previously inhibited forms of engagement.

Reality testing and testing reality represent two fundamental, reciprocal manifestations of the drive to know and of tasks of learning: approaching problems and solving them. While testing reality involves approaching reality without necessarily looking for or coming to definition or clarity, reality testing centers on a particular theme or object. It evolves towards organization and rationality, with a goal to define and solve problems—or to avoid them.

Engaging the group and supporting individuals in these two types of approaches to learning requires a well-defined therapeutic focus on process and purpose; at times, different tactics and techniques are appropriate.     

虚拟与"虚拟实在"

"虚拟"是这个时代的热门词,也是当下文化的关键词.在三亿多的网民中,很多人见面时的问候语从"吃过没有"变为"魔兽了吗"抑或"摘菜了没有",网络虚拟生活已经成为国人乃至世人一种必不可少的生活方式.二十年前美国学者迈克海姆写过一本关于虚拟实在的书,大约十年前引入国内,引发了国内学者关于"虚拟实在"的研究和讨论.但由于当时国内的信息技术尚未普及,网民数量稀少,所以他的书和这场讨论未能引起社会轰动并深入持久下去.如今恰逢读网时代,我们重拾"虚拟实在",重新探讨它的形而上以及与"虚拟"的区别与联系,因为它是我们在谈及当下文化时绝不能回避和忽略的问题.     

Reality Testing and Testing Reality in Group Treatment

This two-part contribution addresses concepts of “reality,” “reality testing,” and “testing reality,” as they apply to group treatment. Part I provided topic overview and focused on reality testing. Part II focuses on testing reality and how it promotes emergence of new or previously inhibited forms of engagement.

Whereas reality testing centers on a particular theme or object, with a goal to define and solve problems, testing reality involves approaching targets of interest without necessarily looking for or coming to definition or clarity. It is wide open, spontaneous, and unbounded, and may take the individual and group into realms that are uncomfortable and even unwanted. Engaging the group and supporting individuals in these two approaches to learning requires a well-defined therapeutic focus on process and purpose; at times, different tactics and techniques are called for.     

Reality as Trauma

Trauma is usually understood as reaction to an exceptional disorganizing event. Instead, it can be recognized as the underlying fabric of everyday experience, entailing reality’s fundamental unpredictability, constant change, and the inevitable erosions wrought by sickness, aging, and death. This paper draws on Ferenczi’s psychoanalytic thinking to develop this view of reality as trauma, and to suggest a shift in interpersonal self-regard as central to psychoanalytic change.     

Really Ultimate Reality

This essay sketches a radically apophatic conception of ultimate reality, explains how rational comparison and evaluation of theological views is possible, and indicates how this view comports with the social and natural sciences. Really ultimate reality, whatever it finally is, is beyond being, and thus beyond the putative gods that are held to be beings.     

Levels of Reality

Philosophers and non‐philosophers have been attracted to the idea that the world incorporates levels of being: higher‐level items – ordinary objects, artifacts, human beings – depend on, but are not in any sense reducible to, items at lower levels. I argue that the motivation for levels stems from an implicit acceptance of a Picture Theory of language according to which we can ‘read off’ features of the world from ways we describe the world. Abandonment of the Picture Theory opens the way to a ‘no levels’ conception of reality, a conception that honors anti‐reductionist sentiments and preserves the status of the special sciences without the ontological baggage.     

Reality in science

One way in which to address the intriguing relations between science and reality is to work via the models (mathematical structures) of formal scientific theories which are interpretations under which these theories turn out to be true. The so-called ‘statement approach’ to scientific theories—characteristic for instance of Nagel, Carnap, and Hempel—depicts theories in terms of ‘symbolic languages’ and some set of ‘correspondence rules’ or ‘definition principles’. The defenders of the oppositionist non-statement approach advocate an analysis where the language in which the theory is formulated plays a much smaller role. They hold that foundational problems in the various sciences can in general be better addressed by focusing on the models these sciences employ than by reformulating the products of these sciences in some appropriate language. My model-theoretic realist account of science lies decidedly within the non-statement context, although I retain the notion of a theory as a deductively closed set of sentences (expressed in some appropriate language). In this paper I shall focus—against the background of a model-theoretic account of science—on the approach to the reality-science dichotomy offered by Nancy Cartwright and briefly comment on a few aspects of Roy Bhaskar's transcendental realism. I shall, in conclusion, show how a model-theoretic approach such as mine can combine the best of these two approaches.