创造性思维与创造力培养的概念

创造性思维是适应性思维或称重新概念化。其绝大部分不是外显行为,而是内隐的认知。我们日常大部分认知和行为是自动化的。它们满足着我们的日常需要。而满足我们需要的方式有一定导向,甚至变得刻板严格。在我们日常生活的所有方面,象饮食社交、宗教艺术、学术训练等等,我们都发展了动作的、自动化的认知和行为来满足基本的需要。我们去餐馆吃饭来满足饥饿的需要,与亲属的社会交往在家庭团聚中已经仪式化,我们的医生每月     

系统属性的产生问题

《哲学问题》1992年第2期上刊登了C.и.雅科夫连柯一篇内容丰富的文章《论自然界中的组织作用和破坏(随机的)作用,该期还登载了B.и.阿尔申诺夫和я.и.斯维尔斯基的文章《从涵义的读出到涵义的产生》。按照编辑部的意图,后一篇文章大概是前一篇文章的评论。但我以为,这篇文章并没有起到多大的评论作用,因为这篇论涵义的有趣     

人对动物有道德义务吗?

自从10年以前彼得·辛格的《动物解放》一书出版以来,在英国人的书籍中便对动物的道德处境的问题展开了激烈的讨论,在这期间,这个问题也在我们国家引起了较大的重视。从历史上看,这种关心无疑是对于自然的新意识的结果,而这种对于自然的新意识又是由于那些不能再忽视的生态问题产生的。可是按照事情的性质,我们这里所谈的与两个不同的问题有关。适当同自然环境打交道的问题是个我们共同的切身利益的问题,不是一种“生态     

Comparing Locomotion With Lever-press Travel In An Operant Simulation Of Foraging

An operant model of foraging was studied. Rats searched for food by pressing on the left lever, the patch, which provided one, two, or eight reinforcers before extinction (i.e., zero reinforcers). Obtaining each reinforcer lowered the probability of receiving another reinforcer, simulating patch depletion. Rats traveled to another patch by pressing the right lever, which restored reinforcer availability to the left lever. Travel requirement changed by varying the probability of reset for presses on the right lever; in one condition, additional locomotion was required. That is, rats ran 260 cm from the left to the right lever, made one response on the right lever, and ran back to a fresh patch on the left lever. Another condition added three hurdles to the 260-cm path. The lever-pressing and simple locomotion conditions generated equivalent travel times. Adding the hurdles produced longer times in patches than did the lever-pressing and simple locomotion requirements. The results contradict some models of optimal foraging but are in keeping with McNair's (1982) optimal giving-up time model and add to the growing body of evidence that different environments may produce different foraging strategies.     

Behavior analysis and farm animal welfare

This article demonstrates that there is a role for behavior-analytic techniques in the area of farm animal welfare and provides examples of the kinds of work that can be done. Behavior-analytic procedures, specifically those used in the study of psychophysics, preference, and demand, can provide answers to three questions people concerned with the welfare of farm animals are likely to ask: What can the animals detect? What do they like and dislike? What will they work to attain or preserve? Such information certainly is necessary for making reasonable decisions about animal welfare, although it is not sufficient in and of itself.     

Predicting and scaling hens' preferences for topographically different responses

Six hens were exposed to several concurrent (second-order) variable-interval schedules in which the response requirements on the alternatives were varied. The response requirements were one key peck versus five key pecks, one key peck versus one door push, and five key pecks versus one door push. Response- and time-allocation ratios undermatched the obtained reinforcement ratios but were well described by the generalized matching law. Time and response bias estimates from two pairs of response requirements were used to predict bias in the third pairing. The predicted values were close to those obtained; this result supports the notion that both numerically and topographically different responses act as constant sources of bias within the generalized matching law. The differences between the response and time biases could be accounted for by the different times needed to complete each response requirement. The results also suggest that the door push is a useful operant for research with domestic hens.     

Maximizing internal and external validity in MMPI malingering research: a study of a military population

The authors investigated the effectiveness of various commonly used Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI; Hathaway & McKinley, 1943) indices of exaggeration and malingering in detecting suspected malingering in a military sample of 121 enlisted men. To maximize external validity, only men undergoing psychological evaluation were used as participants. Forty-one participants were identified as suspected malingerers through multiple criteria and were contrasted with schizophrenic-spectrum and clinic outpatient groups. To improve internal validity, the 41 suspected malingering participants were asked to retake the test without exaggerating. Results revealed that there were many false positives and fewer, but nonetheless many, false negatives with standard malingering indices. It appeared that the Gough Dissimulation scale (Gough, 1947) might hold the most promise as a measure of malingering, but other scales are also useful. Individual comparisons between different samples and implications for MMPI-2 (Butcher et al., 1989) are presented.     

2001年的科学哲学

一种民主制度的最重要也是讨论最少的任务之一就是要保护它的成员免遭这种制度中的意识形态的伤害.必须正确地看待所有的意识形态.人们必须把它们当作神话故事来看待,它们能告诉人很多有趣的事,但也包含了很多谬误和令人生厌的谎言.当人们按照某一观点行动时,他们的态度也应该像密探一样,为了在一个陌生的国家里获得成功而采纳它的信仰并在细枝末节上按照这些信仰去做,但并不全盘接受.这一点适用于所有的信仰,适用于基督教上帝的存在这一信仰,适用于所有的人生来平等的信仰,也适用于科学.那么,这是否是一种陌生和荒谬的态度呢?科学当然总是处在与权威主义和迷信战斗的前沿.相对于宗教信仰而言,我们有了越来越大的思想自由,这应当归功于科学;人类从古代的僵硬思维方式中解放出来,也应当归功于科学.今天,这些思维方式仅仅是一些糟糕的     

现实化的可能体与最简的量化模态逻辑

现实论(actualism)这项方案,旨在清除逻辑与模态形而上学中那些讨人嫌的本体论承诺。它从一切存在的都是现实的这个观点出发,试图重新解释语言,以避免承诺“可能体”(possibilia)的存在。所谓“可能体”,指那些可能的,但非现实的对象。量化模态逻辑(QML)似乎就要求这种对象存在。最简QML为古典量化理论与模态命题逻辑之合并,可是它使巴康(Barcan)公式(今日x由→ax令Q)有效。从而,由可能存在一头会说话的驴子这个事实,就推出了存在某物,它可能是一头会说话的驴子。这看起来在宣称一个可能实体的存在(假定每个现实的东西都不可能是会说话的驴子)。现实论者们大力主张克里普克(Kripke)所描述的语义学,以此来免除这项承诺,这种语义学采用了可变论域,因而使巴康公式归于无效。     

生命保护的推断论理由

推断论伦理学家就堕胎和安乐死的问题而提出的命题,主要是澳大利亚人P.辛格的那些命题,一直引起激烈的论战。推断论将生命保护理解为一种利益保护,它使个体的生命权利依赖于成为人的那种特性。按照推断论的观点,不是所有人类的个体都是人,因而就不能赋予非—个人的人类个体以生命权利——这在实践中是有相应的结果的。不管对P.辛格的命题在感情上的反应多么可以理解,光靠这些命题是得不到什么结果的,因为重要的是研究这些命题所引用的证据,研究那些已经决定了推断论的问题表述的前概念。只要推断论的潜在的前题不受到怀疑,人们也许将无法摆脱单纯的口头侮辱。