Changing explanatory frameworks in the U.S. government’s attempt to define research misconduct

Nearly two decades of debate have not settled the definition of research misconduct. The literature provides four explanatory frameworks for misconduct. The paper examines these frameworks and maps them onto efforts by the U.S. Public Health Service to define research misconduct and subsequent responses to these efforts by the scientific community. The changing frameworks suggest that closure will not be achieved without an authoritative effort, which may occur through the Research Integrity Panel’s recent attempt to create a government-wide definition.     

Who is my Jung? Memories,Reflections, Prospects

The author describes his personal and professional journey in relation to the subject of the AJA 40^th anniversary conference, ‘Who is my Jung?’ The first part of the paper covers his early life and his attempt to bring together two opposing parts within him: valuation of a scientific approach, and an interest in the inner world, dreams and the paranormal. Discussion of his professional life follows, including his relationship with Gerhard Adler, past problems and splits within the Jungian community and the author's attempts to heal these. The value of both remembering and forgetting is questioned. This leads onto ideas that bring value and meaning to his work and life, and which bridge the inner divisions he felt in his early life: notably Jung's focus on applying scientific theory to the mystery of the psyche, his relational attitude (exemplified by the dialectical process and his interest in countertransference) and his theory of synchronicity. Recent discussion in Jungian writing has questioned the nature of synchronistic experiences and explored how they may emerge naturally from complex systems. The paper ends the author's continuing journey with two personal vignettes describing how meaning may emerge from the unconscious.     

John Cage and W. R. Bion: an exercise in interdisciplinary dialogue

The author discusses some striking convergences which appear in the thought of two unsettling and powerfully stimulating personalities of the 20th century: John Cage in music and art, and W.R. Bion in psychoanalysis. Both foster openness to the unknown and the need to tolerate 'uncertainties, mysteries, doubts', arguing for an attitude requiring negative valence and receptive emptiness. In their search for fresh personal awareness of reality aimed at allowing mental transformation and growth, both strive to disturb intellectual comfort and do not hesitate to use pro(e)vocative and even shocking means. They both propose an attitude towards tradition which demands the freedom to use and recreate inherited knowledge in a personal and innovative way. Finally, both Cage and Bion maintained a highly auto-reflective attitude, carefully considering the artist's/psychoanalyst's contribution to the process of art and psychoanalysis. These convergences probably represent important and wider contemporary cultural trends which permeate in their different realizations.     

Why Jesus?

Jesus plays potentially a uniquely important role in relation to the world's greatest needs. To respond to the global crisis, we need historical consciousness. The source of historical consciousness is the prophetic tradition. Through Jesus the prophetic tradition became widely available and important. However, this consciousness has been responsible for great evil as well as great good, often bound up with we/they thinking and the use of violence. Jesus’ teaching of love of the enemy in principle overcomes this tendency and points to way forward.     

神仙迷雾中的科学颗粒--中国传统炼丹术面面观

中国传统炼丹术虽因目标的虚幻早已退出历史舞台,但拨开炼丹术的神仙迷雾,在炼丹术的理论与实践中也包含着诸多值得总结思考的内容。在荒谬的追求中,神仙意志支配下的炼丹活动客观上产生了一些有价值的副产品。从“炼丹所依据的正确哲学和科学命题”,“在正确前提指导下的炼丹术如何最终走向谬误”、“在歪曲和虚妄中又何以能取得客观的科学成果”等问题展开分析论证,既肯定了古代炼丹家通过人工变革自然的主动探求精神,也揭示了其中错误的原因。     

关于医疗、科研的一点认识

临床医疗是医院的根本使命,在权重上医疗自然重于科研.医疗实践是科研的出发点与归宿,决定了科研的基本走向.当前,科研工作受到前所未有的重视,科研作为医疗人员绩效考核的权重过大,偏离了医院的根本使命,会对科研、医疗、医护人员乃至整个社会造成伤害.SCI论文与临床关系不密切,不宜用来评价临床医师的水准.应该建立科学的考评机制,考核标准应细化、全面,对科研的奖励应适度.对于医护人员的考核应以医疗为主、科研为辅.     

Ideology,inquiry, and antiquity: a critical notice of Lloyd's The Ideals of Inquiry: An Ancient History

A discussion of Lloyd's Tarner Lectures at Trinity College. The importance of Lloyd's previous scholarship is characterized and these sweeping, erudite lectures are placed in the context of that scholarship. In the broadest terms, the lectures are a call to culturally and historically comparative study of human reasoning. At their heart is a comparative history of scientific theorizing from the ancients through to modern science. Lloyd rejects the positivist picture, and the view of modern and ancient science as discontinuous; he urges scholars to undertake comparative work on the ancient sciences in different traditions. This critical notice evaluates Lloyd's view and raises several questions for further reflection.     

Who’s afraid of the big bad wolf? The interweaving of values and science

The role of values in the scientific process is widely debated. But evidence and values cannot be neatly separated. Instead, values infuse the entire scientific process, starting with the choice of research questions. Research avenues are selected based on prior beliefs about the workings of the world. In fact, informally assigned prior probabilities and normalizing constants play an essential role in distinguishing causes from correlations and ignoring irrelevant associations that would otherwise be suggested by raw data. But since these initial probabilities often have a heterogeneous pedigree – often not all that went into their formation is known or knowable – it becomes difficult to cleanly separate evidence from values. At the same time, this reality does not undermine science’s unique status in generating knowledge. This is because it is not the evidence per se generated by science, but rather the method by which science generates it, that justifies science’s privileged role.