儒家“权”论的两种路径——兼论汉宋“经权”观的内在一致性

经权论是儒家伦理研究的重要议题,孔子"权"论蕴涵了道德与知识两个发展路径,自孟子到汉儒、宋儒,都在道德的路径上为行"权"设定道德依据;清儒戴震则发展了"权"的知识论取向。汉儒与宋儒对"经权"关系的表述看似相反,但在以"道"或"理"制"权"的取向、"道""经""权"的思想结构,以及构建道德体系最终消解"权"的独立性的后果上具有一致性。     

对我国临床医学教育体制改革的设想

我国是世界上临床医学学制层,次最复杂的国家,有专科、本科、研究生教育,学制3年～8年不等,甚至还有多种形式的非学历教育.培养途径的混乱和规格的多样导致我国医生质量参差.未来,临床医学教育将逐步与国际接轨是必然趋势,厘清当前现状并尝试构建改革框架成为当务之急.     

试论上博简《多薪》篇对兄弟伦情的诗意言说

上博简《多薪》、《内礼》等篇与《诗经》、《尚书》、《仪礼》诸传世文献,对中国伦理思想中五伦之一的"兄弟"一伦都有相关论释。《多薪》篇以植物间的对比起兴兄弟伦理亲情同别人一般友情的关系,这表明该篇作者对家庭伦理、对"天伦"的着意重视。本文以此文脉回视残简缺文,提出个人的论说方式。同时对其他部分传世文献中论及"兄弟"亲情的文献也作了初步梳理,认为结合上博简中对五伦作单向度强调的伦理倾向,可以进一步探析中国伦理学说的某种转向与儒学诗教功能。     

风湿性心脏病瓣膜置换术后抗凝治疗中"度"的把握

风湿性心脏瓣膜病在世界范围内发病率极高,瓣膜置换术是目前治疗该病的主要方法,根据不同的病情及需要可置换机械辩或生物瓣,我国患者更常选择机械瓣置换,术后生物瓣置换需抗凝3个月～6个月,而机械瓣置换者需终身抗凝,故抗凝治疗非常关键.本文从辨证思维的角度分析如何在瓣膜置换术后把握好抗凝治疗.     

论疾病治疗的自然观

人体本身对各类疾病有着强大的自我抵制和修复能力,疾病的发生和康复有其自然的进展规律,治疗疾病的过程应遵循相关规律,并辅助人体的这些能力去促进机体的修复。而现实医疗中,人们在享受医学科技成果和医疗保障实惠的同时,常常伴有过度的医疗处置或过度忽视疾病的存在,从而影响疾病本身的自然康复进程,或加重病情,甚至造成二次伤害。本文从疾病治疗自然观的角度探讨了医生和患者在应对疾病时需了解的辩证思想,并就如何认识和应用疾病治疗的自然观去诊治疾病做一探讨。     

奥伦自理理论对充血性心力衰竭患者综合生存质量的预后影响研究

研究分析奥伦自理理论对充血性心力衰竭患者综合生存质量的预后影响。选取2012年2月~2013年5月本院收治的90例充血性心力衰竭患者为研究对象,将90例患者遵循随机分配的原则分为对照组（常规护理干预组）45例和观察组（奥伦自理理论组）45例,然后将两组患者护理干预前和护理干预后1个月、3个月的MLHFQ量表、WHOQOL-100量表及Zung量表评估结果进行统计与比较。观察组护理干预后1个月、3个月的MLHFQ量表评分均低于对照组,WHOQOL-100量表评分高于对照组,Zung量表评分与阳性率均低于对照组,P均〈0.05,两组护理干预后的评估结果差异均有统计学意义。奥伦自理理论有助于改善充血性心力衰竭患者的综合生存质量,在此类患者中的应用价值较高。     

3～6岁幼儿目标取向、自我效能感与自我控制的关系

自我控制是自我意识的重要成分,是儿童自主发展的重要前提。通过问卷调查法对241名3~6岁幼儿被试进行调查,考察其目标取向、自我效能感和自我控制的发展及三者关系。结果发现:(1)3~6岁幼儿的任务目标取向居于主导,女孩的他人目标取向比男孩明显,幼儿四类目标取向的发展皆呈现先上升后下降复又上升的趋势;幼儿的自我效能感居于中等水平,自我控制居于中等偏上水平;女孩的自觉性和自制力水平明显高于男孩;幼儿的自我延迟满足在4岁发生明显转折;(2)自我提升目标取向显著正向预测自我控制;(3)自我效能感在自我提升目标取向与自我控制关系间存在部分中介效应。     

词汇飞跃的本质:命名洞察力的实证研究

通过个案跟踪和控制实验探讨了词汇飞跃的本质。研究结果表明命名洞察力具有现实性,且词汇飞跃与命名洞察力的出现紧密相关,这在一定程度上解释了儿童词汇量快速增长的原因。命名洞察力的获得促进了词汇的快速增长,标志着儿童建立起词汇与指称之间的匹配关系。词汇飞跃之后,儿童很快建立起词语间的符号关系,并最终促进了儿童语法的发展。基于此实证结果,本研究还建构了诠释词汇飞跃本质的理论模型。     

The implicit sociometer effect and the moderating role of relational self‐construal

The present study examined how negative feedback influenced implicit self‐evaluations and how individuals' level of relational self‐construal (RelSC) moderated these relationships. One hundred Chinese university students completed the relational‐interdependent self‐construal scale and were randomly assigned into one of three conditions (social exclusion, personal failure, or control). After receiving the manipulation, participants completed two Brief Implicit Association Tests (BIATs) that measured their implicit self‐liking and self‐competence. The results indicated that people with a highly RelSC typically had higher implicit self‐liking, but they decreased their implicit self‐liking more than those with a low RelSC after experiencing social exclusion. However, RelSC did not influence the effect of personal failure on implicit self‐liking. In addition, RelSC was not associated with implicit self‐competence in any situation.     

The Problem of Authorship and the Project of Chinese Philosophy: Zhuang Zhou and the <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Zhuangzi</Emphasis><Emphasis Type="Bold">between Sinology and Philosophy in the Western Academy</Emphasis>

This essay looks into a particular aspect of Sinological challenge to the modern project of Chinese philosophy within the Western academy through the lens of authorship, using the Zhuangzi 莊子 as a case study. It explores philosophical implications for texts whose authorship is in doubt and develops a new heuristic model of authorship and textuality, so that a more robust intellectual space for the philosophical discourse on Chinese classics can be carved out from the dominant historicist Sinological discourse. It argues that philosophical and Sinological approaches to Chinese classics have divergent scholarly objectives and follow different disciplinary norms. To clarify such divergence, it proposes a heuristic model to distinguish two sets of scholarly objects operative in Sinology and philosophy respectively, namely original text versus inherited text, historical author versus textual author, and authorial intent versus textual intent. These two sets of scholarly objects are related, at times overlapping but often irreducibly distinct, with the former in the pairs belonging to Sinologists and the latter to philosophers.