Responsibility and Alternative Possibilities: The Use and Abuse of Examples

The philosophical debate over the compatibility between causaldeterminism and moral responsibility relies heavily on ourreactions to examples. Although we believe that there is noalternative to this methodology in this area of philosophy, someexamples that feature prominently in the literature are positivelymisleading. In this vein, we criticize the use that incompatibilistsmake of the phenomenon of ``brainwashing,' as well as the Frankfurt-styleexamples favored by compatibilists. We provide an instance of thekind of thought experiment that is needed to genuinely test thehypothesis that moral accountability and causal determinism arecompatible.     

两个世界与历史理念--一种历史观念的考察

两个世界与理性自由的理念构成了古希腊时代以来西方哲学-文化的基本传统和基本精神。这一传统直到马克思哲学产生后才受到了实践批判的深刻挑战。本文对这一历史过程作了概括性考察,认为在两个世界的张力结构与理性自由的基本理念之间存在着深刻的内在关联。本文不同意把持续了数千年之久的这样一种精神传统仅仅批判为唯心主义的简单化做法,认为有必要深入考察这种传统在西方哲学-文化史上的基本意义。在本文看来,两个世界与理性自由的理念在历史的前进发展中不断发生着内容的更新与转换,但只有在马克思唯物史观的实践批判中才得到了彻底的革命性变革。     

Open Theism: An Answer to My Critics

Abstract :  Open theism is a version of historic free will theism which posits God as granting to human beings significant freedom to cooperate with or to resist the will of God for their lives. God's goal is to make possible relationships of mutual love between God and creatures and therefore set up a dynamic give and take situation in which God can even be said to risk failure to the degree permitted by the overall plan. A debate has broken out as to whether open theism goes too far in its revision. I myself see it as a mere adjustment to standard Arminian thinking on the point of understanding the divine foreknowledge. In this article, I argue that, despite a goodly number of objections, the position deserves to be viewed as a legitimate option for Christian theology, yea even for "evangelical" theology.     

Is Europe, Along with its Bioethics, Still Christian? Or Already Post-Christian? Reflections on Traditional and Post-Enlightenment Christianities and Their Bioethics

This introduction explores the relationship between Europe andits Christianities. It analyses different diagnostic and evaluativeapproaches to Europe's Christian or post-Christian identity.These are grouped around the concepts of diverse traditional,and, on the other hand, post-Enlightenment Christianities. Whilethe first revolves around a liturgical and mystical accountof the church, a Christ-centred humanism, an emphasis on man'sfuture life, noetic theology and a foundationalist claim touniversal truth, the second endorses a moralization of the "Christianmessage," political implementation of "Christian goals," rationalism,a this-worldly humanism, and tolerance for religious diversity.Since even the concepts of "traditional" and "post-Enlightenment"Christianity turn out to be deeply ambiguous, the essay concludeswith exploring the different ways in which the Christianityof the Apostolic Church, the Enlightenment (along with the "Western"Christianities it shaped), and contemporary liberalism eachconceive of their respective endorsements of human freedom aseither normative, that is obligatory, value-laden, or contingent,and arbitrary. In each case, a different notion of "tradition"(as well as familial and church authority) is placed eitherin harmony or in opposition to such freedom. As a result ofthis conceptual analysis, the deeply fractured identity of Europe,as exemplified by the diverse bioethical positions adopted bythe authors in this issue, becomes visible.     

Flickers of Freedom and Modes of Action: A Reply to Timpe

In recent years, many incompatibilists have come to reject the traditional association of moral responsibility with alternative possibilities. Kevin Timpe argues that one such incompatibilist, Eleonore Stump, ultimately fails in her bid to sever this link. While she may have succeeded in dissociating responsibility from the freedom to perform a different action, he argues, she ends up reinforcing a related link, between responsibility and the freedom to act under a different mode. In this paper, I argue that Timpe’s response to Stump exploits concessions she need not have made. The upshot is that, contrary to what Timpe maintains, there is no reason to doubt that Stump's brand of incompatibilism is a genuine alternative to the traditional variety.

On Mill,Infallibility, and Freedom of Expression

Philosophers have tended to dismiss John Stuart Mill’s claim that ‘all silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility’. I argue that Mill’s ‘infallibility claim’ is indeed open to many objections, but that, contrary to the consensus, those objections fail to defeat the anti-authoritarian thesis which lies at its core. I then argue that Mill’s consequentialist case for the liberty of thought and discussion is likewise capable of withstanding some familiar objections. My purpose is to suggest that Mill’s anti-authoritarianism and his faith in thought and discussion, when taken seriously, supply the basis for a ‘public interest’ account of ‘freedom of expression as the liberty of thought and discussion’ which is faithful to Mill in spirit, if not to the precise letter. I outline such an account, which – as I say in conclusion – can serve as a valuable safeguard against ad hoc, reactive legislation, and the demands of a spurious communitarianism.     

康德论述根本恶的三重维度及其矛盾

康德在《单纯理性限度内的宗教》一书中对根本恶的论述贯穿了三种维度,即先验维度、自由维度和进步维度。但这三种维度之间并不是自恰的,而是存在着矛盾。通过对这些矛盾及康德对矛盾的解决的成败的分析可以看出,这些矛盾是内在于康德的哲学的。对（善）恶的理解只有与人的生存处境和价值追求相联系才有可能。     

哲学的教化与教化的哲学——论儒学精神的根本特质

Edification 教化 is one of the central concepts of Confucianism. The metaphysical basis of the Confucian edification is the “philosophical theory” in the sense of rational humanism rather than the “religious doctrine” in the sense of pure faith. Confucianism did not create a system of ceremony and propriety owned by Confucians only. The system of ceremony and propriety on which Confucians depend to carry out their social edification is that of “rites and music,” the common life style of ancient China. After continual metaphysical explanation and elevation, the system of ceremony and propriety and that of rites and music have undergone a sort of ever-evolving historical fluctuation, and evinced a sort of openness and forgiveness comparable to that of any other religious form. Compared with typical religious practices, whose ceremonies and rituals that have their own special fixity and exclusivity, Confucian ceremonies and rituals are fundamentally different. The edification of Confucianism can be labeled as “edification in the sense of philosophy.” As a “philosophy”, Confucianism’s vision did not focus on cognition but on completion and realization. Translated by Lei Yongqiang from Tianjin Shehui Kexue 天津社会科学 (Tianjin Social Sciences), 2005, (6): 19–26     

损失规避源于得失程数多于获得？——损失规避的得失程数变化视角的再检验

刘欢、梁竹苑 和 李纾（2009a）在证明损失规避的得失程数变化视角时所取的损益值取值范围、对安于现状偏差影响的控制以及所选取的得两程失一程和得三程失两程的决策对象这四个方面存在的缺陷。本研究通过弥补上述缺陷并设计无关变量得到更严格控制的得三程失两程的决策情景,对得失程数变化视角重新进行了检验。结果发现,寿命“得一程失一程”的属性并未导致损失规避消失;在广泛的损益值范围内以自由为对象的决策同样表现为损失规避;将自由感知为生而拥有和后天获得的人数大致相当;因而得失程数变化视角需作出重要修正,同时前景理论与情绪预测误差理论亦不可完全预测损失规避出现的条件。     

The Priority of “Liberty” or “Ping An ”: Two Different Cultural Value Priorities and Their Impacts

“Liberty” is a core, prior value of modern Western culture, and particularly of Anglo-American political and economic discourse. For more than a century, the US and other Western countries have been doing their utmost to promote the value of liberty around the world. However, different nations and cultures have different value priorities. Considering “liberty” as the essential, unassailable prior value is an Anglo-American cultural particularity without universal applicability. In China, “liberty” as a high value is a new idea imported from the West at the beginning of the modern era which never enjoyed a very important position in ancient China. Generally speaking, in Chinese culture, the value of “ping an,” with its connotations of peace, safety, equality, health, harmony, and tranquility, is obviously a prior value. Different value priorities have different impacts on culture. This paper tries to compare the American value priority of “liberty” with the Chinese value priority of “ping an,” while discussing their different historical backgrounds and cultural impacts. It argues that values and value priorities are neither absolute nor universal, but that they are rather historical, situational, and dynamic. Value priority in a society should be based on that society’s particular social reality and on the stage of development and the life requirements of its people, rather than on an outside imperative. In the era of globalization, different and even sometimes contradictory human values may actually mutually complement and counterbalance one another.