上帝之手——高道德风险的生命技术何以从伦理学与神学获得辩护

克隆人的出现是后生命科学时代开始的标志;原有的高新生命科学技术发展时期是科学过渡带;人类基因组计划、克隆人与胚胎干细胞研究是后生命科学事件。传统伦理学和神学伦理学在后生命科学时代理论资源桔竭,已达边界;我们“只有同意识形态断裂,彻底改变其结构,才能有真正的科学”;我们必须一边从传统中寻求辩护、一边解放伦理学和神学（经典理论后现代化）。清除障碍,获得解放。     

Forgiveness and the Holocaust

This paper considers whether we have any reason to forgive the perpetrators of the most terrible atrocities, such as the Holocaust. On the face of it, we do not have reason to forgive in such cases. But on examination, the principal arguments against forgiveness do not turn out to be persuasive. Two considerations in favour of forgiveness are canvassed: the presence of rational agency in the perpetrators, and the common human nature which they share with us. It is argued that the presence of rational agency does not generate a reason to forgive. However, our common human nature may be sufficient to provide such a reason, and evidence for its general reason-giving power can be seen in phenomena such as vicarious shame, and the moral significance which we attach to the notion of crimes against humanity. A reason for forgiveness based on common human nature will not be a strong one, but a weak reason still has some force.     

论天人合德与道德价值的定位

中国传统伦理道德的天人合德为伦理道德价值提供了本体上的根据,这是道德价值的根本定位。其把道德价值定位于整体利益,就是定位于超越的绝对本位。这与现代伦理道德价值定位于人类个体利益一样,都存在理论和实践上的失误。伦理道德的逻辑发展,必将从此引申出集体利益与个体利益和谐一致的集体主义原则。     

梁漱溟的"人类心理学"及其理论意义

通过对以华生、郭任远为代表的行为主义心理学在研究对象和研究方法观点上的批判,梁漱溟建立了自己的一套理论体系－－“人类心理学”。它是儒家心性论的“现代版”,同时又是一种人性论。该理论体系产生于二十世纪二十年代,在心理学史和伦理学史上都具有重要的理论意义。     

Apologising for the past: German science and nazi medicine

Recently, religious organisations, governments and public institutions have begun to offer apologies for historical wrongs. Can they legitimately do so? Departing from the tendency, Professor Hubert Markl, President of the Max Planck Society, has offered strong reasons for not apologising for the crimes of medical scientists who experimented on human subjects during the Nazi era. He argues that only the perpetrators can meaningfully apologise. Markl’'s position is considered and rejected in favour of the view that apologies by proxy for historical wrongs are justifiable and should be made by institutions that have the authority to do so.     

Managing financial conflicts of interest in clinical research

Upholding public trust in clinical research necessitates that human subjects be protected from avoidable harm and that the design, interpretation and reporting of research results be shielded from avoidable bias. On both counts, managing financial conflicts of interest is critically important, especially in the modern era when the opportunities for investigators to benefit personally from the commercialization of their intellectual property are overtly encouraged and rapidly expanding. Efforts are underway in the United States to provide more useful guidance to universities and medical schools for purposes of strengthening the oversight and management of financial conflicts of interest in clinical research. An earlier version of this paper was presented at an International Conference on “Conflict of Interest and its Significance in Science and Medicine” held in Warsaw, Poland on 5–6 April, 2002.     

Placebo: Its action and place in health research today

The place for the placebo in human clinical research is addressed in this paper. The World Medical Association which is comprised of some 80 National Medical Associations uses much of its resources to address medical ethics and human rights issues. It adopted the Declaration of Helsinki in June 1964 which addressed the protection of individuals in clinical trials. The use of placebos assumes an important role in this document. Five Revisions of the Declaration of Helsinki have occurred and the most recent was adopted in October 2000. The provisions on placebo are now in Paragraph 29 which reads as follows: “The benefit, risks, burdens and effectiveness of a new method should be tested against those of the best current prophylactic, diagnostic and therapeutic methods. This does not exclude the use of placebo, or no treatment, in studies where no proven prophylactic, diagnostic or therapeutic methods exists.” The reactions to the newly revised version of the Declaration of Helsinki were numerous and rapid, not the least of which was the paragraph I quoted above. At the direction of the WMA Council, a small group of experts together with the WMA workgroup studied the Paragraph 29 to ensure that no ethically sound research was being restricted by the revision. The outcome was approved by the Council and later the WMA General Assembly in October 2000. This gives a note of clarification as to the appropriate use of placebos. Numerous papers and statements over the last several years have described positions very much in line with the Note of Clarification cited above. This paper was presented at an international conference, “Placebo: Its Action and Place in Health Research Today,” held in Warsaw, Poland on 12–13 April, 2003.     

Are readers of our face readers of our minds? Dogs (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Canis familiaris</Emphasis>) show situation-dependent recognition of human’s attention

The ability of animals to use behavioral/facial cues in detection of human attention has been widely investigated. In this test series we studied the ability of dogs to recognize human attention in different experimental situations (ball-fetching game, fetching objects on command, begging from humans). The attentional state of the humans was varied along two variables: (1) facing versus not facing the dog; (2) visible versus non-visible eyes. In the first set of experiments (fetching) the owners were told to take up different body positions (facing or not facing the dog) and to either cover or not cover their eyes with a blindfold. In the second set of experiments (begging) dogs had to choose between two eating humans based on either the visibility of the eyes or direction of the face. Our results show that the efficiency of dogs to discriminate between attentive and inattentive humans depended on the context of the test, but they could rely on the orientation of the body, the orientation of the head and the visibility of the eyes. With the exception of the fetching-game situation, they brought the object to the front of the human (even if he/she turned his/her back towards the dog), and preferentially begged from the facing (or seeing) human. There were also indications that dogs were sensitive to the visibility of the eyes because they showed increased hesitative behavior when approaching a blindfolded owner, and they also preferred to beg from the person with visible eyes. We conclude that dogs are able to rely on the same set of human facial cues for detection of attention, which form the behavioral basis of understanding attention in humans. Showing the ability of recognizing human attention across different situations dogs proved to be more flexible than chimpanzees investigated in similar circumstances.     

卜筮与《周易》

《周易》包括古经与《易传》两个有机组成部分。古经为一诞生于西周时期的卜筮之书,但却内蕴着"人的发现"的时代主题。《易传》则对卜筮进行了创造性的哲学转化,充分揭示了人在天地人物相融为一的整个世界中的主体性地位,令古经"人的发现"的意蕴,得到了空前的最高哲学层面上的丰富、深化与升华,即此而确立起易学天人之学的哲学品格。其中也透显出宗教巫术的非理性信仰向理性的转化过程。     

Gene therapy: ethical issues

To discern the ethical issues involved incurrent gene therapy research, to explore theproblems inherent in possible future genetherapies, and to encourage debate within thescientific community about ethical questionsrelevant to both, we surveyed American Societyof Human Genetics scientists who engage inhuman genetics research. This study of theopinions of U.S. scientific experts about theethical issues discussed in the literature ongene therapy contributes systematic data on theattitudes of those working in the field as wellas elaborative comments. Our survey finds thatrespondents are highly supportive of thepotential use of somatic cell gene therapy tocure serious diseases in adults and children aswell as prospective offspring. A clearmajority, however, believe that using suchgenetic techniques for enhancement purposes isunacceptable. Delineating the line betweendisease/disorder and improvement/enhancementposes a problem not easily resolved and oneconducive to the growth of slippery-slopeapprehensions. The majority of respondents alsoadvocate germ-line therapy, in theory at least,and under similar restrictions, but theyrecognize the roadblock that the existence ofunanticipated negative consequences currentlypresents. Another complex matter involvestrying to determine appropriate reasons forchoosing target diseases for research, forwhich the dichotomy between rare single-geneand common multifactorial diseases reveals anongoing dilemma.