评吉登斯对马克思的“两种商品化”理论的分析

文章紧紧围绕吉登斯思想的展开基点即"两种商品化理论",通过吉登斯理解资本主义社会存在、分析资本主义劳动的必然特征及其所蕴含的资本主义社会的权力本质三个方面的论证,指出了吉登斯思想与马克思思想的关联性.     

"Men of Stone and Children of Struggle": Latin American Liberationists at the End of History

This article critiques the political theory of Latin American liberationists and suggests a theological source of resistance to the regnant capitalist order. Drawing on the work of Raymond Williams, the liberationists' commitment to "politcs as statecraft," manifest originally in the hopes of seizing the state and more recently in the praise of an emergent civil society, is shown to be unable to resist "paranational hyper capitalism." Instead, liberationists should reconsider the church as a "public", as a social, political, economic formation in its own right. Toward this end they might learn from the Christian base communities.     

Anger at unfairness: is it moral outrage?

Anger at unfair treatment has been called moral outrage. However, moral outrage—anger at the violation of a moral standard—should be distinguished from personal anger at being harmed and empathic anger at seeing another for whom one cares harmed. Across a preliminary experiment and a main experiment, both designed to manipulate the appraisal conditions for these three forms of anger, we found evidence of personal anger and empathic anger, but little evidence of moral outrage. Participants perceived unfair treatment of another, even another for whom they had not been induced to feel empathy, to be as unfair as participants perceived unfair treatment of themselves. But the appraisal conditions that evoked anger were unfair treatment of self and unfair treatment of a cared-for other, not unfairness per se. In the absence of empathic concern, unfair treatment of another evoked little anger. Possible implications for understanding moral emotion and moral motivation are suggested. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

从基督教与进化论的第一次相遇谈起

在许多学者眼中,达尔文(Darwin,1809-1882)的进化论与基督教的创世说之间的分歧始终是困扰着现代西方文化的和谐发展的一大矛盾。但事实上,当达尔文的《物种起源》一书于1859年首次在英国伦敦面世时,非但没有使他在当时仍受教会资助的剑桥大学中陷入四面楚歌的境地,反而在一定程度上得到了一些信仰或同情基督教的科学     

Grounding nonexistence

ABSTRACT

Contingent negative existentials give rise to a notorious paradox. I formulate a version in terms of metaphysical grounding: nonexistence can't be fundamental, but nothing can ground it. I then argue for a new kind of solution, expanding on work by Kit Fine. The key idea is that negative existentials are contingently zero-grounded – that is to say, they are grounded, but not by anything, and only in the right conditions. If this is correct, it follows that grounding cannot be an internal relation, and that no complete account of reality can be purely fundamental.