帛书《要》篇补释

帛书《要》篇的"万勿润"当读为"万物屯",也就是"万物化生"之义。依据帛书《要》篇的异文,《益》卦上六爻辞的"立心勿恒",只能解为"位心勿恒"。"赐缗■□之为也"是说我将"易筮""之为"视为昏乱。"察其要者"之"要",当训为要妙,精深微妙。"其要",指孔子"老而好《易》"的要妙,也就是本质。"纣乃无道"句之"乃"当读为"仍",在此应训为一再、频繁。     

Issues in the Pharmacological Induction of Emotions

abstract   In this paper, we examine issues raised by the possibility of regulating emotions through pharmacological means. We argue that emotions induced through these means can be authentic phenomenologically, and that the manner of inducing them need not make them any less our own than emotions arising 'naturally'. We recognize that in taking drugs to induce emotions, one may lose opportunities for self-knowledge; act narcissistically; or treat oneself as a mere means. But we propose that there are circumstances in which none of these concerns arise. Finally, we consider how the possibility of drug-regulation might affect duties to feel emotions.     

Agency and Human Rights

What grounds human rights? How do we determine that something is a human right? James Griffin has persuasively argued that the notion of agency should determine the content of human rights. However, Griffin's agency account faces the question of why agency should be the sole ground for human rights. For example, can Griffin's notion of agency by itself adequately explain such human rights as that against torture? Or, has Griffin offered a plausible explanation as to why one should not broaden the ground for human rights to include other elements of a good life such as freedom from great pain, understanding, deep personal relations, and so on? These concerns have been raised regarding Griffin's agency account, but in his new book, On Human Rights, Griffin has offered new arguments in support of his view that agency is the sole ground for human rights. In this paper, I examine these new arguments, and I argue that Griffin's arguments are ultimately unsuccessful.     

帛书《要》篇"夫子老而好易"章新释

马王堆帛书<要>篇"夫子老而好易"章第十四行中间的缺文当补为"予樂[亓辤也,予何]尤於此乎",第十五行的"校"字当依<论语·泰伯>孔子语读为"绞",第十五行中同的缺文当补为"吾告女(汝)<易>之道:良[筮而善占],此百生(姓)之道[也,非]<易>也",第十六行中间的缺文当补为"[非文王]之自(作<易>,予何[知]亓事纣乎".