天才大脑机制的神经学研究

天才是指那些在创造力和技巧方面有特殊才能或倾向,以及具有非凡成就的极少数个体。人们认为天才的最普遍特征是智商(IQ)高,创造力强,并有强烈的动机感(承担任务)。本文对目前有关智能及创造力的脑研究知识作一个综述,包括脑电波(EEG)的生理测量,脑功率谱分析,大脑诱发电位和阳离子发射层面x射线照相术,并考虑了现存的矛盾、争议、正式假说和研究中的争端问题。我们特别对脑电波动力学的确定性功能加以阐述,提出了一个天才认知组织和大脑加工过程层次的混沌模型。     

宗教在道德教育中的作用

长期以来,大多数宗教总是很自然地把道德与宗教信仰和实践联系在一起。例如,在古希腊,道德教育基本上是通过传奇式的宗教文学来进行的,象关于上帝的传说以及希腊英雄的故事等。正是由于这个原因,柏拉图十分审慎地对待道德教育中所采用的诗歌和典故。柏拉图批评当时的大多数诗歌,认为他们不适合于用来教育青少年,因为这些诗歌错误地把上帝描绘成具有迷惑力的、骗人的、好战的和假的东西。相反,柏拉图认为真正的上帝是完美无缺的,是不可更换的,也不可能欺骗人。     

重在实践

至大的真主在《古兰经》中说:“你们是诵经的人,你们怎么可以命人行善,而忘却自身呢?难道你们真不明白吗?”(2∶44)从这段详明的经文,我们应当知道:有些人,他们常以诚信者自诩。他们常以信仰和善功命令别人,而他们自身却放任自流,     

公正:变化中的美德观念

有两种互不相容的公正观念:一是通过说明怎样根据各人所挣之物赋予其权利和赋予哪些权利来解释公正概念;一是通过说明根据各人的基本需要及其满足方法而确立的平等权利来解释公正概念。 分析道德哲学家R·诺齐克和J·罗尔斯对上述基于合法所得权利和基本需要这两种主张在理论上作出表述: 罗尔斯认为,在规定任何社会制度下对利益的公正分配时都将依据下述两条原则和一条规     

人道主义伦理学与理性

1.问题在最近几个世纪中,一种自豪和乐观的精神使西方文化闻名于世:对作为人理解和驾驭自然界的手段的理性的自豪;对实现人类最渴求的希望即为最大多数人取得最大幸福的乐观。人的自豪是有道理的。他凭借着理性创造出一个物质世界,其现实甚至胜过了各种神话故事和乌托邦的梦想与幻想。他利用了各种物质能力,它们将使人类能保证获得有尊严和生产性的存在所必不可少的物质条件,尽管他的许多目的还未达到,但几乎毫无问题,这些目的是能够达到的。生产的问题(这是个老问题)原则上解决了。现在,人在他的历史上第一次能够感觉到,人类统一和为人而征服自然的思想不再是一种梦幻,而是一种现实的可能性。难道他没有理由感到自豪,自信并对人类的将来充满信心吗?     

Effects of reinforcer delays on choice as a function of income level

Three rats earned their daily food ration by responding during individual trials either on a lever that delivered one food pellet immediately or on a second lever that delivered three pellets after a delay that was continuously adjusted to ensure substantial responding to both alternatives. Choice of the delayed reinforcer increased when the number of trials per session was reduced. This result suggests that models seeking closure on choice effects must include a parameter reflecting how preference changes with sessionwide income. Moreover, models positing that reinforcer probability and immediacy (1/delay) function equivalently in choice are called into question by the finding that probability and immediacy produce opposing effects when income level is changed.     

Cultural practices of Hispanics: implications for the prevention of AIDS

Hispanic Americans have one of the highest rates of HIV seroprevalence among all ethnics groups in the US, with high rates being especially noticeable among women and children. Were it known which cultural factors have the most influence on whether Hispanics engage in high-risk behavior for HIV transmission, prevention interventions could be targeted accordingly. To that end, this study was mounted to identify which Hispanic cultural factors relate to condom use. 117 males and 73 females aged 17-56 years of mean age 25.67 were surveyed in Washoe county, Nevada. These mostly young adults had recently immigrated to the western US. It was initially posited that fate orientation, male- female relationships, family relationships, machismo behavior, and religion would have equal influence with respect to condom use. Analysis found that condom use was largely associated with and determined by men who are the principal buyers of condoms. A machismo attitude toward protecting women by using condoms was also associated with condom use. Neither fate orientation with respect to AIDS, nor religion were important determinants of condom use, even though 86.5% of the respondents were Catholic. The degree to which respondents adhered to traditional Hispanic cultural values was influenced by the degree of education and acculturation. On the basis of these findings, the authors suggest targeting AIDS prevention messages to males, while emphasizing the protection of women through condom use. They also suggest that both education and acculturation levels be assessed before implementing prevention programs.     

The relationship between attitude,assertiveness and condom use

The Australian study investigated condom-specific assertiveness and condom use as a means of prevention infection from sexually transmitted diseases. 211 men participated including 83 homosexual men (aged 19-62 years) and 128 heterosexual men (aged 17-49) who completed a questionnaire that comprised demographic details such as age, monogamy, and sexual activity as well as attitudinal and assertiveness measures. General assertiveness was measured by the Rathus Assertiveness Schedule (RAS) which had been widely used across a wide range of social situations. Assertiveness relating specifically to situations involving condoms was measured by the Condom Assertiveness Scale (CAS). Intention to use condoms was positively related to favorable attitudes, which were related to condom-specific assertiveness for both groups. For the heterosexual men only, general social assertiveness was negatively related to attitudes toward condoms. For both groups, the condom-specific measure of assertiveness was positively correlated with attitudes toward condoms. Condom-specific assertiveness was positively related to general social assertiveness as measured by the Rathus Assertiveness Schedule for the homosexual, but not for the heterosexual men. The negative relationship between general assertiveness and attitude to condoms among the heterosexual men implies that the risk reducing behavior of condom use did not seem to accord with the perceptions of masculinity and social assertiveness among heterosexual men. Thus, female partners of such heterosexual men exhibiting negative attitudes toward condom use combined with assertiveness would have to overcome resistance to insist on the use of condoms. Recently some advertising campaigns have been directed at women. The promotion of condom use among heterosexual men has to deal with the perceptions of condom use as unmasculine behavior.     

The legal consensus about foregoing life-sustaining treatment: its status and its prospects

The legal consensus that has evolved through adjudication and legislation since the Karen Quinlan case in 1976 is founded on the premise that there is a bright line between passive euthanasia and active euthanasia. Indeed, the term passive euthanasia is often eschewed in favor of less emotionally-laden terminology such as "forgoing life-sustaining treatment" or "terminating life support" so as to further sever any possible connection with active euthanasia. Legal approval has been bestowed upon passive euthanasia under certain circumstances while active euthanasia is routinely condemned. This consensus was put to a test in 1990 when the United States Supreme Court ruled on the Cruzan case. However, the Court's narrow decision did not upset the consensus, and in the most significant appellate decisions handed down by state courts since Cruzan, there has been a reaffirmation--and possibly even an extension--of the consensus. Two other threats to the legal consensus about forgoing life-sustaining treatment have begun to manifest themselves: the increasing pressure for mercy killing and "futility" cases. Both of these challenge the fundamental premises on which the consensus is grounded.