马克思的历史唯物主义

一、导言我认为历史唯物主义就是马克思在其著名的《<政治经济学批判>序言》(以下简称《序言》——译者)中所阐述的、在《资本论》和马克思以及马克思主义者其他许多著作中举出作为例证的那种观点。我将用几句导言开始我的论述,然后概略地介绍一下这个理论,最后我要力辩,尽管这个观点确实具有许多吸引人的地方,但它过分限制了对历史进行合理探讨的范围,以致最后成为不可接受的了。     

幼儿不同情绪状态对其智力操作的影响

本实验结果显示:1)在16至18个月的婴儿中,愉快和痛苦情绪对其问题解决的操作有不同的影响。愉快组被试比痛苦组被试的操作效果明显优越;体现在“直接抓取”、“注视”和“顺利获得”三种操作策略中。2)愉快和痛苦两种情绪的不同强度与操作效果之间的相关是不同的。愉快组显示为一种曲线相关,即过高或过低的情绪唤醒不如适中的唤醒水平使操作效果达到最优。痛苦组显示为一种直线相关,即痛苦强度越大,操作效果越差。     

Some effects of interreinforcement time upon choice

Pigeons' responses were reinforced on two identical and concurrently available chain variable-interval-schedules. Unlike the typical concurrent chains procedure, both links were operative throughout, thus producing three types of concurrency: (1) concurrent initial links; (2) concurrent initial and terminal links; (3) concurrent terminal links. Choice proportions in each of these three states suggested that the pigeons were sensitive to momentary likelihoods of reinforcement: choice proportions for a schedule were higher when the schedule had been operative for some time, resulting in a higher probability of reinforcement. The study also showed that the relative rates of responding did not match the relative rates of reinforcement in any of the three states of concurrency. Instead, the choice proportions in both the concurrent initial and in the concurrent terminal links were intermediate between the scheduled and the obtained relative rates of reinforcement, while the choice proportions for a terminal link concurrent with an initial link consistently overmatched the relative interreinforcement times (and were typically 1.00). These data indicate that an accurate characterization of choice may not be obtained by considering only the relative interreinforcement interval where one interreinforcement interval is segmented into a chain. Instead, the organism's choice for a schedule will be substantially lowered by the chaining operation.     

Choice for periodic schedules of reinforcement

Pigeons' responses in the presence of two concurrently available (initial-link) stimuli produced one of two different (terminal-link) stimuli according to identical but independent variable-interval schedules. Responding in the mutually exclusive terminal links was reinforced with food according to fixed-ratio schedules for six pigeons and according to fixed-interval schedules for two pigeons. None of the pigeons matched the proportion of (choice) responses in the initial links to the proportion of the rates of reinforcement obtained during the terminal links. Instead, as the values of each of the terminal-link schedules were increased by a constant amount, the choice proportions for the stimulus associated with the smaller of the two values increased, even though the relative rates of reinforcement during the terminal links decreased. These results are incompatible with those from previous studies with aperiodic (variable-interval or variable-ratio) schedules. The present results do suggest, however, that in transforming aperiodic schedules into their periodic equivalents, it may be necessary to consider the size of the smallest interreinforcement interval comprising the terminal-link schedules.     

艺术审美尺度的超验问题质疑 H—G 卡达穆尔《真实性和方法·哲学诠释学纲要》——第一部分:对于艺术经验的真实性问题的阐述

卡达穆尔的《真实性和方法》一书是用以论证一种“哲学诠释学”的,它的第一部分在方法论上是其他一切部分的基础,涉及审美尺度的超验问题,并在这个基础上设想出一种艺术作品的本体论。如果我们要对这部广博的、内容丰富的著作加以批判,我们首先就必须讨论它的第一部分。     

评恰托帕驮耶《顺世学派。古代印度唯物主义研究》

近来在印度学家中间,从马克思主义立场来深入研究印度哲学的历史开始获得愈来愈大的威望。虽然在这一方面马克思主义者刚刚走上开始的阶段,他们却巳写出了一系列印度哲学史的重要著作,其中包括Д.П.恰托帕驮耶的这本著作。还在1956年,该书首次以印地文出版;但是对本书的兴趣如此之大,以致于1959年出版了它的英译本,1961年出版了从英译本转译的俄译本。恰托帕驮耶的这本书无疑是从马克思主义立场研究印度哲学某些根本问题的较有份量的著作之一。作者用了大量的实际材料,其中大部分以往从未进行过科学的整理。该书不仅探讨了古代     

关于作为自在目的的人的概念

“那末,我说,人以及一般说来每个有理性者都是作为目的存在着,而绝不能仅仅被当作手段。”这是康德的一个足以自豪的诊断。如果康德没有从这个情绪上有利的地位倒退到用一种非常令人不满的推论去代替证明,那末我们由于对这个论断的崇高意义怀有某种模糊的感情,可能会倾向于对它表示同情。康德写道:“人以及一切有理性者是自在目的这个原理,不是靠我的观察或者经验     

现代英语哲学介绍

逻辑实证主义《逻辑实证主义》一书收集了M.石里克、R.卡尔纳普、O.纽赖特、F.魏斯曼、H.汉恩、F.D.朗塞、C.G.汉贝尔、B.罗素、A.J.艾耶尔、C.L.司蒂文逊和G.莱尔等的文章。这些文章最早是在1924年(如罗素的文章)发表的,晚止于1946年(如莱尔的文章)。在今天都不是容易看到的了。它们之合成为一个单行本,正像艾耶尔宣称的,特别可以证明逻辑实证主义并没有构成一个学派,并且也说明了那些散居在各地而又往往互相对立的思想家们的某些立场的类似倾向。