Quantized Linear Logic,Involutive Quantales and Strong Negation

A new logic, quantized intuitionistic linear logic (QILL), is introduced, and is closely related to the logic which corresponds to Mulvey and Pelletier's (commutative) involutive quantales. Some cut-free sequent calculi with a new property quantization principle and some complete semantics such as an involutive quantale model and a quantale model are obtained for QILL. The relationship between QILL and Wansing's extended intuitionistic linear logic with strong negation is also observed using such syntactical and semantical frameworks.     

《周易》象理无隔视野下的船山经学观

王船山学宗张载,以易学为入路构建起形上学体系。他从易学最基本的象理问题出发,提出了“《易》之全体在象, 象理一体无隔”的易学基本理念,并据此导出“即象以见理”的易学方法论。他以此象理无隔的易学视野和方法来统摄《六经》,进一步得出了“《五经》皆象,《易》统其理”的经学观,并主张治经要以训诂为根基,以义理为标的,从而使他的经学呈现出汉宋兼采并治的学术特色。     

归纳推理心理效应的研究

归纳推理心理效应指的是归纳论断中各种因素对个体做出归纳结论时把握性（力度）大小的影响,根据影响因素的不同,主要可分为类别效应、属性效应和交互效应三种。文章认为,个体通常会采用分割－综合方式判断归纳力度大小,并且在归纳判断中形成的推理序列及由此造成的顺畅感直接影响着归纳力度的估计,作者还提出了对此模型的一种证明     

Priming productive study strategies with preparatory quizzes in an engineering course

One approach to encourage productive study strategies is to incorporate preparatory quizzes (or pre‐quizzes) in which students are required to submit answers to questions before the underlying material is covered in class. In the present study, students took an introductory mechanical engineering class that either included pre‐quizzes (treatment group) or did not (control group). Students in the treatment group visited the online textbook more often and earlier in advance of deadlines, indicating better management of their study time—behaviors that have been shown to be productive study strategies. They also performed better in the course, indicating that techniques intended to prime productive study strategies can pay off. Finally, measures of productive learning strategies correlated with measures of course performance for both groups. These findings support the pretesting principle, which holds that students study more effectively and learn better when they take practice tests before a lesson.     

The rhetorical foundation of philosophical argumentation

The rejection of rhetoric has been a constant theme in Western thought since Plato. The presupposition of such a debasement lies at the foundation of a certain view of Reason that I have called propositionalism, and which is analyzed in this article. The basic tenets of propositionalism are that truth is exclusive, i.e. it does not allow for any alternative, and that there is always only one proposition which must be true, the opposite one being false. Necessity and uniqueness are the ideals of propositionalism. But the question of the necessity of such a necessity is bound to arise. Foundationalism and propositionalism are intrinsically related. Since necessity excludes alternatives, rhetoric, which is based on the possibility of opposite standpoints, is unavoidably devalued as the crippled child of Reason, identical to sophistry or eristic. But propositionalism cannot justify itself and provide a justification for its own foundation without circle or contraditction. Since it responds to the problem of eradicating problems and alternatives through propositional entities, propositionalism is ultimately based on questioning to which it replies in the mode of denial. The unavowed foundation of Reason is therefore the question of questioning, even though this very question is suppressed as propositionalism. The trace of such a question is not only historical, but can also be seen, for instance, in the role played by the principle of contradiction in the constitution of propositional Reason (Artitotle): opposite propositions are not the expression of a problematic situation, they are either possible or successively unique propositions.We want to replace propositionalism by problematology which allows for the conceptualization of alternatives, thereby rendering a true rhetoric possible. Argumentation cannot then be equated with eristic any more, as propositionalism maintained.Rationality must be seen as having questioning as its true starting-point. Reason must be rhetorical if it is to survive the death of propositionalism which took place after the radical criticisms of Marx, Nietzsche and Freud. Even if it is still hard ffor philosophers and rhetoricians to think within another framework and even though they prefer endlessly to deconstauct the old one instead of changing it, problematology is bound to impose itself as the new voice for rationality, because Reason has always endeavored to solve problems. Propositionalism has been only one way of conceiving problems, based on the view that solutions could be but the suppression of questioning.     

CAN SCIENCE AND RELIGION RESPOND TO CLIMATE CHANGE?

With the challenge of communicating climate science in the United States and making progress in international negotiations on climate change there is a need for other approaches. The moral issues of ecological degradation and climate justice need to be integrated into social consciousness, political legislation, and climate treaties. Both science and religion can contribute to this integration with differentiated language but shared purpose. Recognizing the limits of both science and religion is critical to finding a way forward for addressing the critical challenges of climate change. How we value nature and human–Earth relations is crucial to this. We need a broader environmental ethics in dialogue with the science of climate change.     

Global Distributive Justice

The paper discusses the problem of global distributive justice. It proposes to distinguish between principles for the domestic and for the global or intersocietal distribution of wealth. It is argued that there may be a plurality of partly diverging domestic conceptions of distributive justice, not all of which need to be liberal egalitarian conceptions. It is maintained, however, that principles regulating the intersocietal distribution of wealth have to be egalitarian principles. This claim is defended against Rawls's argument in The Law of Peoples that egalitarian principles of distributive justice should not be applied globally. Moreover, it is explained in detail, why Rawls's "duty of assistance to burdened societies" cannot be an appropriate substitute for a global principle of distributive justice.     

诊疗最优化原则的伦理学探析

讨论了诊疗最优化原则的伦理学意义:它充分体现了医学的宗旨、医学职业道德理想和对患者的无私关爱,有利于纠正医疗卫生行业的时弊,昭示着医疗卫生改革发展的方向。针对实践中遇到的阻力和困惑,作者提出了促进最优化原则实施的五点建议。     

Profiting from poverty

We consider whether and under what conditions it is morally illicit to profit from poverty. We argue that when profit counterfactually depends on poverty, the agent making the profit is morally obliged to relinquish it. Finally, we argue that the people to whom the profit should be redirected are those on whom it counterfactually depends.     

Adding emotionality to seductive details—Consequences for learning?

According to the seductive detail effect, adding interesting but irrelevant information (i.e., seductive details) can be detrimental to learning success. In this study, it was explored within two experiments whether the valence of text‐based seductive details might affect learning outcomes differently. For Experiments 1 and 2, we pretested text‐based seductive details for their emotional valence (n = 32 or n = 25 students, respectively). For the main studies of Experiments 1 (n = 105) and 2 (n = 131), university students were randomly assigned to one of four conditions that varied with respect to the presence of seductive details and their emotional valence (no vs. positive vs. negative vs. neutral). Unexpectedly, results revealed in both experiments no seductive details effect and also no differences between the three seductive detail conditions for the used learning outcome measures retention and transfer. Possible reasons for these findings and their implications are discussed.