The third in the shadow of the fourth

The notion of the third in recent years is seen by noted psychoanalysts as the locus of healing. Jung explored the third beginning in 1916 in a way strikingly postmodern in its implications for clinical work and for understanding reality. This article(1) proposes that we cannot see the third except in the shadow of the fourth, and attempts to describe what the fourth is. The fourth remains shadowy (suggesting two meanings of shadow); it is only known by living it, for we are part of the larger reality it discloses. In experiencing this fourth, we are led to develop whatever we each leave out. Hence the aliveness of the fourth engenders a new kind of consciousness of the bigger surround, the moreness of reality as a whole that includes and transcends the psyche.     

Positive psychotherapy effectiveness study and quality assurance

Positive Psychotherapy is a form of short-term psychotherapy based on an in-depth psychological approach, resulting from cross-cultural psychotherapy. After a brief introduction to some central elements of the theory of Positive Psychotherapy (PPT), the first results of the effectiveness study will be discussed in this paper. an assessment of alterations in symptoms, as well as changes in the way subjects feel and behave, which occurred in the period of time between the beginning and after the end of therapy will be presented here. In a longitudinal study, patients treated with PPT showed a distinct reduction of symptoms as well as improvement with regard to the way the subjects experience and behave compared to the control group, where no significant changes were observed. an additional cross-section comparison between the post-measures of the prospective assessment of PPT patients and retrospective assessments of PPT patients was carried out. No significant differences between the assessments made directly after finishing PPT and the assessments made within three different time spans after finishing PPT (a) 3-10 months; b) 10 months-4 years; c) 4-5 years) were found. This finding is viewed as an indication of the lasting stability of the therapeutic effects of PPT, which can still be detected up to five years after finishing PPT.     

Effects of amphetamine-CNS depressant combinations and of other CNS stimulants in four-choice drug discriminations

Three pigeons were trained to discriminate among 5 mg/kg pentobarbital, 2 mg/kg amphetamine, a combination of these two drugs at these doses, and saline using a four-choice procedure (amphetamine-pentobarbital group). Three other pigeons were trained to discriminate among 5 mg/kg morphine, 2 mg/kg methamphetamine, a combination of these two drugs at these doses, and saline (methamphetamine-morphine group). After 10 to 13 months of training, the pigeons averaged more than 90% of their responses on the appropriate key during training sessions. In subsequent testing, dose-response curves were determined for the individual drugs, for a wide range of dose combinations of the training drugs, and for two drugs to which the pigeons had not been exposed previously (pseudoephedrine and nicotine). After low test doses of the training drugs, pigeons responded on the saline key. As the dose increased, responding on the key associated with that drug during training sessions increased. When training drugs were combined at doses that were not discriminable when given alone, responding occurred on the saline key. When a discriminable dose of one training drug was combined with a nondiscriminable dose of the other training drug, responding occurred on the key associated with the discriminable dose. When both drugs were given at discriminable doses, responding almost always occurred on the drug-combination key. The response-rate decreasing effects of pentobarbital and amphetamine were mutually antagonized when the drugs were combined, but the rate-decreasing effects of morphine and methamphetamine were not. After low doses of pseudoephedrine and nicotine, pigeons in both groups responded on the saline key. After higher doses of pseudoephedrine and nicotine, responding in the amphetamine-pentobarbital group occurred primarily on the amphetamine key. In the methamphetamine-morphine group, higher doses of pseudoephedrine and especially nicotine engendered more responding on the combination key than had occurred in the other group. The four-choice procedure can reveal subtle effects in the discrimination of individual drugs and drug combinations that are not apparent with procedures offering fewer response alternatives.     

EFFECTS OF DRUGS AND DRUG COMBINATIONS IN PIGEONS TRAINED TO DISCRIMINAT AMONG PENTOBARBITAL,DIZOCILPINE, A COMBINATION OF THESE DRUGS,AND SALIN

Drugs with multiple actions can have complex discriminative‐stimulus properties. An approach to studying such drugs is to train subjects to discriminate among drug combinations and individual drugs in the combination so that all of the complex discriminative stimuli are present during training. In the current experiments, a four‐choice procedure was used to train pigeons to discriminate among dizocilpine (noncompetitive NMDA receptor blocker), pentobarbital (GABA_A receptor agonist), a fixed‐dose combination of these two drugs, and saline. Following extended training, low doses of pentobarbital or dizocilpine administered alone produced saline‐appropriate responding. Higher doses of pentobarbital produced responding on the pentobarbital‐appropriate key and higher doses of dizocilpine produced responding on the dizocilpine key. Administering the lowest doses of pentobarbital and dizocilpine together resulted in responding on the saline‐appropriate key. Increasing the dose of pentobarbital in the presence of low doses of dizocilpine produced responding primarily on the pentobarbital‐appropriate key; increasing the dose of dizocilpine in the presence of the lowest dose of pentobarbital produced responding primarily on the dizocilpine‐appropriate key. Combining the higher doses of pentobarbital and dizocilpine resulted in responding primarily on the drug‐combination key. Low doses of phencyclidine or ethanol produced responding on the saline‐appropriate key, but intermediate doses resulted in individual subjects responding predominately on either the pentobarbital key, the dizocilpine key, or the drug‐combination key depending on the subject. After the highest dose of phencyclidine or ethanol, most subjects responded predominantly on the drug‐combination key. Low doses of other drugs tested produced responding on the saline‐appropriate key. With the highest diazepam doses responding was largely confined to the pentobarbital‐appropriate key. The highest doses of dextromethorphan or dextrorphan resulted in responding on the dizocilpine key more frequently than on other keys. Across a range of doses, morphine produced responding predominantly on the saline key. The results using the four‐key procedure emphasized the role of both GABA_A and NMDA receptors in the complex discriminative stimulus properties of phencyclidine and of ethanol.     

论孟子的“四维”人格理论及贫困生的人格自我培植与修复

从孟子的“四维”人格理论出发,分析贫困生人格的负性特征,探寻人格建构途径,试图为贫困生的人格培植与修复提供一条内在心性路向的人格建构路径。     

内隐学习的主观测量标准

近40年来,验证知识的内隐性一直是内隐学习研究的焦点。传统三大范式常以自由言语报告或是迫选测验作为验证知识内隐性的外显指标,然而各种迹象表明,言语报告和迫选测验存在一定的局限性。由此,Dienes等人提出了内隐学习的主观测量。文章将从言语报告和追选测验的局限性着手,阐述主观测量诞生的必要性及其在衡量知识意识性上的效度。     

脑的四个功能系统学说

本文根据实验事实 ,讨论脑内评估 -情绪的功能系统。在此基础上 ,发展鲁利亚的脑的三个功能系统学说 ,提出脑的四个功能系统学说 ,认为脑内存在包括评估 -情绪功能系统在内的四个互相紧密联系的功能系统 ,人的各种行为和心理活动是这四个功能系统相互作用和协同活动的结果     

创造性思维四阶段的神经基础

华莱士(Wallas)四阶段论是创造性思维过程研究的重要模型, 该模型认为创造性思维包括准备期、酝酿期、明朗期、验证期。相关神经机制研究表明, 准备期主要包括题目呈现前大脑状态和静息状态的研究, 内侧额叶/ACC及颞叶构成准备期网络; 酝酿期主要包括酝酿期提示、延迟顿悟以及心智游移的相关研究, 这一阶段涉及左右脑的共同参与, 海马、腹内侧前额叶等脑区在酝酿过程中起重要作用; 现有顿悟研究反映明朗期和验证期神经活动, 前额叶、扣带回、颞上回、海马、楔叶、楔前叶、舌回、小脑等在内的脑区构成其神经基础, 其中, 扣带回、前额叶在不同角度进行的研究中均有参与, 颞上回是负责远距离联想的关键脑区, 海马参与定势打破与新颖联系形成, 外侧额叶是定势转移的关键脑区, 楔前叶、左侧额下/额中回、舌回在原型激活中起关键作用, 左外侧前额叶参与对答案细节性的验证加工。未来研究可从研究对象、研究内容、研究手段三方面加以改进, 以对创造性思维过程作更系统的探讨。     

论道德现象的特点

从道德存在论看 ,道德是普遍性与特殊性的统一 ;地域性与历史性的统一。从道德价值论看 ,道德是相对性与绝对性的统一 ;多元性与一元性的统一。从道德认识论看 ,道德是客观性与主观性的统一 ;群体性与个体性的统一。从道德实现论看 ,道德是他律性与自律性的统一 ;现实性与理想性的统一。     

Aristotle's Four Causes of Action

Aristotle's typical procedure is to identify four causes of natural changes. Intentional action, a natural change, has standardly been treated as an exception: most think that Aristotle has the standard causalist account, according to which an intentional action is a bodily movement efficiently caused by an attitude of the appropriate sort. I show that action is not an exception to Aristotle's typical procedure: he has the resources to specify four causes of action, and thus to articulate a powerful theory of action unlike any other on offer.