小康社会与公民道德断想

应当把社会伦理关系的变革和主体道德人格的完善列为全面建设小康社会的基本的价值目标 ,不仅要切实理顺经济伦理关系 ,而且必须逐步建立起与社会主义市场经济体制相适应的、公正的政治伦理关系和文化伦理关系。小康社会的道德要求包括经济交往中的效率与公平、政治生活中的正义与民主、文化领域中的服务与奉献。小康社会的人格理想将以追求人性的自我完善和人格的自主、自觉、自由为基本特点。小康社会也将使人们的行为方式发生这样或那样的变化。     

Personal autonomy in group‐based interventions

Marginalized individuals are often caught in a vicious cycle of economic or health problems, a lack of social connection and disempowerment. The present research examines interventions that provide opportunities for social inclusion to break this cycle. Specifically, in two longitudinal field studies, we examined the effect of social inclusion on self‐efficacy and hope in two vulnerable groups, namely, 68 residents in a drug and alcohol rehabilitation centre (Study 1) and 48 marginalized adults taking part in activities organized by a community organization (Study 2). Although somewhat counterintuitive, we hypothesized that social inclusion would affect self‐efficacy by fostering feelings of personal autonomy. The hypothesis was supported by results from both studies revealing an indirect effect from social inclusion via personal autonomy on self‐efficacy and hope. The findings are discussed in relation to how group inclusion may stimulate the development of personal autonomy in disadvantaged adults, an important factor in their recovery and mental health.     

预期追寻与社会进步关系的当代分析

该文在积极利用当代预期研究成果的基础上,以哲学的视角对预期概念的基本内容与基本特点做出了重新反思。同时,还重新阐释了恩格斯历史唯物主义观点中有关预期论述,并在这种新的阐释下,从预期追寻对于社会进步的重要性、影响力以及作用的有限性等三个方面,对预期追寻与社会进步之间的内在联系进行了有针对性的当代分析。     

论《周易》的隐逸思想

《周易》原为卜筮之书,以知来藏往、本隐之显来预测吉凶、趋利避害,包含着深刻的人生智慧。在进退存亡、仕隐出处这一问题上,从蛊、遁诸卦中可以看出“与时偕行”的出处观念。先秦原始儒家在此基础上,对《周易》中隐逸行为的动机进行了道德化的阐释,将其归结于一种真诚的道德自觉和抗议精神,体现了儒家在道统与政统之间所始终坚持的一贯张力, 以及不愿同流合污的崇高道德气节和独立不屈的政治不合作态度。这对后世中国知识分子的出处、进退观念产生了极其深远的影响。     

Contingency, Education, and the Need for Reassurance

This short paper is a response to Richard Smith’s ‘Abstraction and finitude: education, chance and democracy’. In his paper Smith contends that a rationalist agenda dominates education and democracy today, and that this agenda by rendering us insensitive to the tragic dimension of life, breeds a sense of hubris, or arrogance towards fate which is fuelled by an inordinate confidence in our knowledge. In the worlds of education and politics it has led to an obsession with management and transparency, and to students who fear to take risks. As a specific example of this, he takes up the recent fixation in universities with learning how to learn, which he says leads to an over-emphasis on skills in the curriculum, and to an ‘audit’ culture. While sympathising with much of his analysis of the latter, my counter-suggestion is that the contemporary world lacks anything but a sense of the contingency of things, to the contrary, that at the heart of its mangerialist culture and its performatist ethos lies the need for reassurance. My response focuses on the politics of the self-directed learner that lies at the heart of the lifelong learning literature, on learning how to learn, on the notion of transparency and on the transparent society, and on the politics of contingency and scepticism. Prof. Kenneth Wain teaches philosophy of education and courses in ethics and political philosophy at the University of Malta, where he is also involved in teacher education. Last year (2004) he published his most recent book The Learning Society in a Postmodern World with Peter Lang (New York). His earlier books were Philosophy of Lifelong Education (1987) Croom Helm (London), The Maltese National Curriculum: a critical Evaluation (1991) Mireva (Malta) Theories of Teaching (1992) Mireva (Malta) The Value Crisis: an Introduction to Ethics (1995) University of Malta Press. He has also published several articles in international refereed journals.     

Bildung and Modernity: The Future of Bildung in a World of Difference

This paper asks whether there is afuture for the age-old educational ideal ofBildung. It is argued that the modernconception of Bildung in terms of``rational autonomy' should be understood as theeducational answer that was given to thepolitical question about citizenship in anemerging (modern) civil society. Raising thequestion about the future of Bildungtherefore means to ask what educationalresponse would be appropriate in our time. Itis argued that our time is one in which theidea of a universal or total perspective hasbecome problematic. We now live in a world ofdifference in which the rational autonomouslife is only one of the possible ways to live.Beyond totalisation and isolation, a possiblefuture of Bildung might be found in theexperience that we can only live our life withothers. In a ``world of difference' Bildung might follow from a questioning of``one's right to exist' (Levinas). In thisrespect Bildung can happen anywhere andnot necessarily in those parts of the ``Bildungssystem' that educators are mostfamiliar and comfortable with (i.e., theschool). Bildung becomes a lifelongchallenge and a lifelong opportunity.     

Towards emergent ethical action and the culture of engineering

With the advent of the newest technologies, it is necessary for engineering to incorporate the integration of social responsibility and technical integrity. A possible approach to accomplishing this integration is by expanding the culture of the engineering profession so that it is more congruent with the complex nature of the technologies that are now being developed. Furthermore, in order to achieve this expansion, a shift in thinking is required from a linear or reductionist paradigm (atomistic, deterministic and dualistic) to a nonlinear paradigm (holistic, chaotic and subjective). Three aspects of such a nonlinear paradigm (holism, transparency and responsiveness) enable an engineer to shift from “applying ethics” to “being ethical”. This culture change can be a basis for developing new curricula to satisfy the ABET-2000 requirements as well as for the practice of engineering in the 21^st Century. David Norris, Ph.D., specializes in organizational and institutional culture change. Gloria Hauser-Kastenberg, J.D., teaches at UC Berkeley and is also an attorney.     

Religion,Human Rights,and Neo‐liberalism in a Post‐Humanist Era

In a modern and secularized world, churches and religious groups that fight in the public sphere for social justice justify these actions in the name of defending human rights. This has been the path taken to express in non‐religious language what they understand to be a God‐given mission. Based on the distinction between civil rights, political rights, and social rights, which make up the set of human rights, this article analyzes the relationship between the notion of religious mission and the struggle for human rights; how neoliberal ideology, in an anti‐humanist perspective, criticizes the notion of social rights and social justice with the denial of any human right above the laws of the market; and the challenges that this neoliberal ideology poses for the justification of the social and political action of religious groups and institutions in the contemporary globalized world with a growing post/anti‐humanist culture.     

Are New Technologies the Enemy of Privacy?

Privacy is one good among other goods and should be weighed as such. The relationship between technology and privacy is best viewed as an arms race between advancements that diminish privacy and those that better protect it, rather than the semi-Luddite view which sees technology as one-sided development enabling those who seek to invade privacy to overrun those who seek to protect it. The merits or defects of particular technologies are not inherent to the technologies, but rather, depend on how they are used and above all, on how closely their use is monitored and accounted for by the parties involved. In order to reassure the public and to ensure accountability and oversight, a civilian review board should be created to monitor the government’s use of surveillance and related technologies. Proper accountability requires multiple layers of oversight, and should not be left solely in the hands of the government.

“社会矛盾与社会和谐”笔谈——“矛盾”是合理解读“社会和谐”的关键

自从关于“建构社会主义和谐社会”理论提出以来,“社会矛盾与社会和谐”的关系问题就成为学界关注的热点。不同的学者依据于各自的学术资源和经验感受,对于问题作出了各自不同的阐述。这是十分有意义的工作。它不仅扩展着人们的思维,也必将有益于实践。以学术的维度关注现实重大理论问题,是人文社会科学学者应尽的职责。有鉴于此,本期刊发了这组笔谈,并期待着学界朋友的进一步参与,共同推进社会主义和谐社会理论的完善与发展。[编者按]