首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
文章检索
  按 检索   检索词:      
出版年份:   被引次数:   他引次数: 提示:输入*表示无穷大
  收费全文   645篇
  免费   50篇
  国内免费   8篇
  703篇
  2024年   9篇
  2023年   15篇
  2022年   9篇
  2021年   12篇
  2020年   31篇
  2019年   37篇
  2018年   18篇
  2017年   31篇
  2016年   17篇
  2015年   26篇
  2014年   23篇
  2013年   56篇
  2012年   8篇
  2011年   15篇
  2010年   15篇
  2009年   17篇
  2008年   36篇
  2007年   39篇
  2006年   33篇
  2005年   41篇
  2004年   28篇
  2003年   23篇
  2002年   30篇
  2001年   13篇
  2000年   27篇
  1999年   18篇
  1998年   16篇
  1997年   4篇
  1996年   12篇
  1995年   17篇
  1994年   6篇
  1993年   4篇
  1992年   3篇
  1991年   6篇
  1990年   3篇
  1989年   2篇
  1988年   1篇
  1987年   2篇
排序方式: 共有703条查询结果,搜索用时 0 毫秒
201.
Is nature all there is? Or, is there more? If nature is the only reality, is it ultimate or sacred? Differing answers to these questions determine the different brands of naturalism on the religious shelf. What virtually all of today’s naturalists agree on is this: science provides the means for revealing reality, the sole reality which is material, physical, and cosmic. Naturalists also agree that supranaturalism should be rejected. What naturalists differ on whether nature is divine or not. This article sorts out the issues and differing positions taken on each issue. The author contends that a post-Newtonian worldview remains open to a concept of God wherein divine action in nature’s world influences creativity and transformation.  相似文献   
202.
Abstract

Responding to Cappelen and Dever’s claim that there is no distinctive role for perspectivality in epistemology, I argue that facts about the outcomes of one’s own reasoning processes may have a different evidential significance than facts about the outcomes of others’.  相似文献   
203.
    
Art rs Logins 《Theoria》2017,83(2):120-137
In this article I focus on some unduly neglected common‐sense considerations supporting the view that one's evidence is the propositions that one knows. I reply to two recent objections to these considerations.  相似文献   
204.
    
Evidentialism says that a subject S’s justification is entirely determined by S’s evidence. The plausibility of evidentialism depends on (1) what kind of entities constitute a subject S’s evidence and (2) what one takes the support relation to consist in. Conee and Feldman’s mainstream evidentialism (ME) incorporates a psychologist answer to (1) and an explanationist answer to (2). ME naturally accommodates perceptual justification. However, it does not accommodate intuitive cases of inferential justification. In the second part of the paper, I consider and reject a reply based on a refined explanationist theory of the support relation proposed by K McCain.  相似文献   
205.
    
Scientific findings and innovations play an important role in a range of decisions faced by nonscientists, yet little is known about the skills that nonscientists need in order to read and evaluate scientific evidence. Drawing on research in public understanding of science, cognitive developmental psychology, and behavioral decision research, we develop an individual difference measure of scientific reasoning skills, defined as the skills needed to evaluate scientific findings in terms of the factors that determine their quality. We present the results of three studies assessing its psychometric validity. Our results indicate that the Scientific Reasoning Scale (SRS) is internally consistent and distinct from extant measures of scientific literacy. Participants with higher SRS scores are more likely to have beliefs consistent with the scientific consensus on potentially contentious issues, above and beyond education, political and religious beliefs, and scores on two widely used measures of scientific literacy. Participants with higher SRS scores also had better performance on a task requiring them to analyze scientific information. Our results suggest that the SRS provides a theoretically informed contribution to decoding lay responses to scientific results and controversies. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.  相似文献   
206.
    
  相似文献   
207.
    
Background: Two current trends are making it increasingly important for counsellors and psychotherapists to be more engaged with research. Evidence of effectiveness is being increasingly demanded by those who fund our therapies and also by our clients. Meanwhile therapy research is offering practicable ways for therapists to improve their practice. Therapy organisations have an opportunity, perhaps even a duty, to meet the research needs of their members. Methods: This paper reports on a survey conducted by the UK Council for Psychotherapy (UKCP) to help it plan the activities of its Research Faculty. Findings: Key findings from the survey were that the most common ways of UKCP practitioners engaging with research were through reading, discussions with colleagues and doing research. Engaging with research collaboratively with other therapists, having more time, and access to user‐friendly web‐based research resources and updates, were the factors most commonly cited as supporting practitioner engagement with research. Conversely, lack of time, difficulties accessing resources and materials and feeling not competent were the major barriers to practitioner engagement with research. Discussion: Implications for therapists, for training, and for therapy organisations are considered.  相似文献   
208.
    
by Klaus Nürnberger 《Zygon》2010,45(1):127-148
The approach of experiential realism could indicate where science and faith deal with the same reality, where science questions faith assumptions, and where faith goes beyond the mandate and method of science. Although prescientific, Martin Luther's theology is the classical prototype of an experiential theology. We experience God's creative power in all of reality. We discern its regularities through observation and reason. So faith opens up all the space needed by science. However, experienced reality is highly ambiguous. It obscures God's intentions. God's intentions are revealed in the proclamation of the gospel: God is unconditionally for us and with us and not against us. This proclamation is a promise, appropriated in faith, and geared to a vision of what ought to become. It is based on the interpretation of a catastrophe—the cross of Christ—as God's pivotal redemptive act in human history. It goes beyond the mandate and method of science, yet it is capable of giving the latter a sense of purpose, criteria of acceptability, and authority to act in the interests of humanity and the earth. Theology challenges science to acknowledge the necessity of a transcendent frame of reference and moral accountability. Scientific insight challenges theology to reconceptualize its assumptions on God, creation, and eschatology to integrate best science.  相似文献   
209.
    
Tariq Mustafa 《Zygon》2008,43(3):737-744
Science has been dazzlingly successful in explaining nature. Scientific advances also have led to certain undesirable, though unintended, side effects, one of which is alienation from the spiritual. Revelation comes from the Divine. But what is the status of authenticity of a particular piece claimed to be revelation? What is its historical validity and current state of preservation? This essay proposes to develop a list of rational criteria, in consultation with all stakeholders, for addressing the subject. The aim is to bring objectivity into this discourse by placing it more on the turf of reason rather than basing it on considerations of faith and prior allegiance.  相似文献   
210.
by Timothy Fuller 《Zygon》2009,44(1):153-167
Michael Oakeshott reflected on the character of religious experience in various writings throughout his life. In Experience and Its Modes (1933) he analyzed science as a distinctive “mode,” or account of experience as a whole, identifying those assumptions necessary for science to achieve its coherent account of experience in contrast to other modes of experience whose quests for coherence depend on different assumptions. Religious experience, he thought, was integral to the practical mode. The latter experiences the world as interminable tension between what is and what ought to be. The question, Is there a conflict between science and religion? is, in Oakeshott's approach, the question, Is there a conflict between the scientific mode of experience and the practical mode? Insofar as we tend to treat every question as a practical one, these questions seem to make sense. But Oakeshott's analysis leads to the view that scientific experience and religious experience are categorically different accounts of experience abstracted from the whole of experience. They are voices of experience that may speak to each other, but they are not ordered hierarchically. Nor can either absorb the other without insoluble contradictions.  相似文献   
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号