西方和俄国经济思想的萌芽

Ⅰ经济科学的发展是与资本主义制度紧密相联的。虽然古代和中世纪的思想家在该领域中已经陈述过某些观点,但直到17世纪和18世纪初,现代意义上的经济科学才真正诞生。当时,探索自然科学的方法论得到发展,首批科学研究机构与社团已经建立起来(英国、法国、普鲁士、俄国)。经济科学的最初发展是与这一过程相联系的,而且,最初的经济学家的思想总是集     

The question is: what is medicine supposed to be all about?

The Hippocratic Oath has survived, with overriding power, the test of time. Written somewhere between 600 B.C. and 100 A.D., it addresses the intrinsic nature of medicine. Even those of us who know little of it or reject parts of it acknowledge it to be a symbol of the values of medicine. Such "canonization" is unlikely to be arbitrary; it is more likely that the oath strikes some key chord of truth. I suggest that it is its drive to the heart of medicine that makes the Hippocratic Oath inspiring today.     

多值逻辑内部的弗协调结构

在本文中,我们要区分出一些足以构造弗协调逻辑的多值逻辑的最低限度的函数方法,借此来确定作为片断而包含在弗协调逻辑内的多值逻辑这个极大的类。这样,就能够讨论多值逻辑内部的弗协调结构,就象大家讨论多值逻辑内部中的模态结构那样,而且还可表明:从多值逻辑中区分出的     

哲学的历史性事业

本期发表了一组有关俄国哲学史的译文。19世纪末和本世纪初,俄国涌现出一大批在国内外深有影响的唯心主义哲学家和宗教哲学家。1985年以后,特别是近两年来,苏联哲学界一改以往的回避传统做法,着手出版百卷左右的《祖国哲学思想史丛书》,《哲学问题》等杂志特辟专栏,大量发表介绍这些哲学家生平的文章和他们的著作节选。这些现象不能不引起各国哲学工作者的注意和深思。这里介绍的三位哲学家是三个不同时期最具代表性的人物,但这里选登的三篇文章并不完全是他们的代表作。读者若能从这些文字中粗略地了解到俄国宗教唯心主义哲学之一斑,或进而看到苏联哲学已经并正在发生的变化,就不负编者的初衷了。     

逻辑与思维

康德相信亚里士多德逻辑的不可更改性,依赖于这样一种思想:逻辑规则陈述‘思维形式’,我们不得不遵照这些规则进行思维。这种思想引起了逻辑与“我们的思考方法”有什么关系的一系列复杂问题。虽然曾假定逻辑规则为“思维规律”是司空见惯的(见布尔1854版著作),但弗雷格有力的批评如此有影响,以致近来一直很少有人在任何模型或形     

社会主义生产关系的表现形式

一、社会主义生产关系的物化生产、分配、交换、消费以及经济关系的所有不同形态在实践中差不多总是表现为物的关系。生产关系直接或间接地同物发生联系。人生活和活动在物质世界中,与他人有密不可分的联系。但是,这种同他人的联系,在很大程度上是通过物表现出来的。一些人生产产品,而另一些人则消费产品。随着社会分工的发展,这种某一个人生产的产品被另一个人用于生产或者个人的消费的情况,正在越来越普遍。反之,每一个人消费的并不是他所生产的。一个人生产的物被另一个人所消费。物不仅应该通过生产过程,而且在进入消费之前还要通过分配和交换的过程。因此,在生产     

论经济管理中形式与内容的矛盾

对社会主义经济发展的种种矛盾进行深刻而又全面地研究,这无疑是必要的。本文只对社会主义经济矛盾之一——管理的形式与内容矛盾的某些方面做些分析。形式化的过程及形式化的结果是复杂多样的。形式化的结果可表现为法律行动、行政命令和社会传统(“不成文的法规”),但下面将探讨的则是形式化的两种基本经济方式:第一种     

德谟克利特的伦理学

认识德谟克利特(约生于公元前460年,卒年不详)的伦理观点,并确定这些观点在伦理学史上的地位,遇到了一个困难。我们所见到的这位哲学家的某些伦理学残篇(这些残篇的真实性至今还有争议)存在着明显的矛盾。对这些残篇中那些在公元前5世纪就已成为伦理学上思想争论的主要对象的问题,现在仍然存在着截然不同的论断。一方面,德谟克利特提出了可以说是他的伦理学的自然主义的(甚至是享乐主义的)方面的命题:“……快乐     

Questions of scientific responsibility: the Baltimore case

A number of cases of questionable behavior in science have been extensively reported in the media during the last two or three years. What standards are upheld by the scientific community affect the community internally, and also affect its relations with society at large, including Congress. Here I wish to address questions of scientific responsibility, using the Baltimore case as a concrete instance where they came up. The first part containing historical background is necessary to provide readers with documentation so that they can have some factual bases on which to evaluate respective positions and my conclusions that follow -- based on further but more succinctly summarized documentation. I have reproduced many quotes because I firmly believe people are entitled to be represented by their own wording. Conversely, I hold people accountable for their official positions. Some of these are reproduced in footnotes, and some longer ones are reproduced in appendices. I also do not ask to be trusted. By providing numerous references, I hope that readers who find my documentation insufficient can follow up by looking up these references.... The article is in six parts: Part I. Historical Background. This part gives mostly a historical background of the early phases of the Baltimore case. Part II. The First Issue of Responsibility. This part presents a discussion of certain scientific responsibilities based on that background, specifically: the responsibility of answering questions about one's work, and the responsibility whether to submit to authority. Part III. The NIH Investigations. This part summarizes the two NIH investigations. Part IV. The Dingell Subcommittee. This part deals with the responsibilities of a Congressional Committee vis-à-vis science. Part V. Further Issues of Responsibility. This part goes into an open ended discussion of many issues of responsibility facing scientists, vis-à-vis themselves and vis-à-vis society at large, including Congress. The list is long, and readers can look at the section and paragraph headings to get an idea of their content. Part VI. Personal Credibility, a Shift at the Grass Roots, and Baltimore's Persistence.