Rethinking Accountability in the Context of Human Rights

Within liberal democratic theory, ‘democratic accountability’ denotes an aggregative method for linking political decisions to citizens’ preferences through representative institutions. Could such a notion be transferred to the global context of human rights? Various obstacles seem to block such a transfer: there are no ‘world citizens’ as such; many people in need of human rights are not citizens of constitutional democratic states; and the aggregative methods that are supposed to sustain the link are often used in favour of nation-state strategic action rather than human rights. So what could accountability mean in relation to human rights? This article argues that discourse theory offers resources for approaching these problems and for rethinking a normative notion of accountability in relation to human rights. It is suggested that accountability should link political decisions to universal agreements through global rights institutions and that the link should be sustained by deliberative rather than aggregative procedures.     

男性择偶策略改变的前提：自感配偶价值提高

研究分为问卷调查与实验研究两部分。首先,40名女性和33名男性完成有关自感配偶价值评价（SPMV）和择偶偏爱策略的问卷调查,问卷调查结果是实验研究中数据分析的基线。其次,第二部分实验开始后,被试会得到实验者编造的他人潜在择偶对象的积极正面评价,其目的在于提高被试的SPMV。可以假设,男性的SPMV与随意性行为的认同或追求有正相关,男性SPMV的提高将会更加偏爱短期的性策略;女性SPMV与随意性行为不存在相关,女性SPMV的提高不会改变女性的性策略。研究结果显示,SPMV高基线水平的男性更加认可随意性行为,男性SPMV的提高与短期策略选择的增加有关。另外,SPMV提高,而不是一般自尊的提高,与择偶策略的改变具有相关。本研究结果没有证实,与长期稳定的性关系相比,SPMV的基线水平或是提高与女性对随意性行为的认同或追求之间存在相关     

Environments That Make Us Smart: Ecological Rationality

ABSTRACT— Traditional views of rationality posit general-purpose decision mechanisms based on logic or optimization. The study of ecological rationality focuses on uncovering the "adaptive toolbox" of domain-specific simple heuristics that real, computationally bounded minds employ, and explaining how these heuristics produce accurate decisions by exploiting the structures of information in the environments in which they are applied. Knowing when and how people use particular heuristics can facilitate the shaping of environments to engender better decisions.     

ART伦理督导的实践与评价

在生殖中心(医院)中,将伦理原则的学习与技术规范的掌握相结合,将伦理学评价与员工的奖惩机制相结合,将伦理学研究与管理骨干的培养相结合,将伦理原则的贯彻与工作总结相结合;发挥医学伦理委员会监督的权威作用,重视群众监督手段的督促作用,借助国家行政督导机构和行业法规的震慑作用,是ART增强道德约束能力的有效机制。     

"生态平衡":中国心理学研究突围的别一个方向

当下心理学研究出现的种种问题就其实质而言,是一种生态失衡现象,因此,心理学欲走向健康发展之轨道,应注重心理学研究的生态建设。     

A Just Global Economy: In Defense of Rawls

In The Law of Peoples, John Rawls does not discuss justice and the global economy at great length or in great detail. What he does say has not been well-received. The prevailing view seems to be that what Rawls says in The Law of Peoples regarding global economic justice is both inconsistent with and a betrayal of his own liberal egalitarian commitments, an unexpected and unacceptable defense of the status quo. This view is, I think, mistaken. Rawls’s position on global or international economic justice is richer, more nuanced, and generally more compelling than his critics have been willing to acknowledge. My aim in this essay is to sympathetically set out, and then defend against two common families of objection to, Rawls’s position on global or international economic justice. Objections of the first sort reject Rawls’s position as inadequately attentive to the material and economic interests of individual persons worldwide. Objections of the second sort reject it as inadequately attentive to the material and economic interests of well-ordered peoples. Throughout the paper I develop several arguments implicit in The Law of Peoples but not well-developed there as well as offer some additional arguments of my own consistent with the spirit of The Law of Peoples and Rawls’s work more generally. I conclude with some brief remarks expressing two worries I have about Rawls’s position – one concerning global public goods, the other concerning the formation of a morally adequate and effective political will within the international context under contemporary conditions. I wish to thank Alyssa Bernstein, Allen Buchanan, Samuel Freeman, John Hardwig, John Mandle, Rex Martin, Jim Nickel, Walter Riker, Kok-Chor Tan, and Leif Wenar for helpful comments or instructive conversation regarding earlier drafts of this paper.     

OUR COMMON ENEMY: COMBATTING THE WORLD'S DEADLIEST VIRUSES TO ENSURE EQUITY HEALTH CARE IN DEVELOPING NATIONS

In a previous issue of Zygon (Carvalho 2007), I explored the role of scientists—especially those engaging the science-religion dialogue—within the arena of global equity health, world poverty, and human rights. I contended that experimental biologists, who might have reduced agency because of their professional workload or lack of individual resources, can still unite into collective forces with other scientists as well as human rights organizations, medical doctors, and political and civic leaders to foster progressive change in our world. In this article, I present some recent findings from research on three emerging viruses—HIV, dengue, and rotavirus—to explore the factors that lead to the geographical expansion of these viruses and the increase in frequency of the infectious diseases they cause. I show how these viruses are generating problems for geopolitical stability, human rights, and equity health care for developing nations that are already experiencing a growing poverty crisis. I suggest some avenues of future research for the scientific community for the movement toward resolution of these problems and indicate where the science-religion field can be of additional aid.     

中学生时间管理自我监控量表的研究

时间管理自我监控是一个多层次多维度的心理结构,按其抽象程度的不同,可分为整体监控和具体监控两个层次,整体监控系统分为主动性、开放性和有效性三个维度,具体监控系统分为目标设置、时间规划、灵活性、自制力和检查评估五个维度。通过对832名中学生的测试结果进行分析,编制了具有较高信度和效度的中学生时间管理自我监控量表。     

"必要伤害"作为生态伦理规范的合理性

"必要伤害"是在对不伤害原则理论缺陷的反思、挖掘和借鉴西方生态伦理学有关解决人与自然矛盾和冲突的伦理思想的基础上,提出的新的道德规范原则。它包括:人类为了自身的利益对自然界不得不做出的损害;人类为了自然的完整和稳定不得不对自身的权利做出让步、节制而造成的损害。"必要伤害"原则的提出,既丰富和完善生态伦理学的道德原则体系,又为人们的生态道德实践提供了有效的行为指导。     

论"行为事实属性"是一个错误概念——兼论王海明的伦理规范推导公式的失误

“行为事实属性”是王海明的伦理规范推导公式的核心概念,是其整个伦理体系的基础。他创造此概念的目的是想表达这样一个重要思想：人们制定行为规范时必须以该行为的客观效果为基础,而不能仅从主观愿望出发。这一思想具有重要理论意义。但该概念不仅不能表达出这一思想,而且还犯了诸多构词法和逻辑学错误,引起严重的思想混乱。王海明创造这一错误概念的理论原因是他对伦理规范制定程序的理解过于简单且存在混乱,为此,本文提出一个替代公式。