Richard Rorty's realism

An examination of late Rorty shows that he does not abandon belief in an external world about which we can, and indeed must, acquire knowledge. His disapproval of the correspondence theory of truth does not involve the idea that anything other than local weather, for example, could falsify remarks about local weather. It is just that once we get done looking out the window or, if we are outside, feeling the right kind of drops make contact with our skin, there is nothing else we can do, nothing better, to make ourselves more certain, more cognitively secure. One can see this in the detailed work that enables scientific progress. Science improves itself by doing more of the same. G. E. Moore's famous open question stays open only as a reminder that our fallibility never disappears and that our cognitive security is never better than pro tem. Rorty, as a faithful pragmatist and undogmatic meliorist, thinks this is perfectly O.K.     

创新期望差距与团队突破性创新：自我调节理论视角

本研究以自我调节理论为基础, 探讨团队领导的创新期望差距推进团队突破性创新的过程。根据实验结果以及一项多时点、多来源的问卷调查发现: 创新期望差距对领导创新投入产生U型影响; 领导创新投入中介创新期望差距与团队突破性创新之间的U型关系; 知觉资质过剩和组织晋升标准共同调节创新期望差距通过领导创新投入对团队突破性创新的影响, 具体地, 当领导知觉资质过剩高且组织实行相对晋升标准时, 创新期望差距通过领导创新投入对团队突破性创新施加更强影响。     

THE CUMULATIVE QUALITY OF CULTURE EXPLAINS HUMAN UNIQUENESS

What explains the unique features of human culture? Culture is not uniquely human, but human culture is uniquely cumulative. Cumulative culture is a product of our collective intelligence and is supported by cognitive processes and learning strategies that enable people to acquire, transform, and transmit information and technologies within and across generations. Technological and social innovations are currently driving unprecedented changes in cultural complexity and diversity. Innovation is a cognitively and socially complex, multistep process that typically requires (cumulative) cultural learning to achieve. I argue that the technological solutions that characterize twenty-first-century innovation can only be explained by understanding both the capacity to learn from and build upon the insights of others and the transmission systems that store the knowledge and technologies of previous generations. Human uniqueness is a product of cumulative cultural learning, transmission, and innovation.     

科学发明情境中问题提出的脑机制再探

以高生态学效度的科学发明问题情境作为实验材料, 采用静息态功能磁共振成像技术, 基于低频振幅(ALFF)和静息态功能连接(RSFC)的分析方法, 探讨创造性科学问题提出的脑机制。结果发现, 在控制了被试性别、年龄后, 提出新颖有效性问题的比率越高, 左内侧前额叶(Left media prefrontal cortex, L-mPFC)和右小脑前叶(Right cerebellum)的ALFF值越高。进一步功能连接分析发现, 提出新颖有效性问题的比率与mPFC和楔叶(Cuneus)之间的功能连接强度呈显著正相关。结果强调mPFC对于科学发明情境中问题提出的重要作用, 且更高比率的新颖有效性问题的提出是通过mPFC与其它脑区的协同联结来实现的。     

Do you believe what you have been told? Morality and scientific literacy as predictors of pseudoscience susceptibility

The aim of the current study was to examine the antecedents of susceptibility to pseudoscientific information. Participants were asked to assess their perceived probability of and familiarity with statements containing popular science misconceptions and pseudoscientific claims, which were fabricated for the study. Measures of scientific literacy, moral inclinations, need for closure, and a set of additional variables were collected. Analysis of the results showed that susceptibility to known pseudoscientific theories predicted falling for novel unwarranted claims. Scientific literacy strongly predicted lower pseudoscience susceptibility of all types. Finally, participants' moral inclinations were found to be a strong predictor of different types of pseudoscientific statements.     

文化演化的认知视角——从个体社会学习出发探究文化动态性

文化演化是多学科共同关心的文化研究主题。文化演化的认知视角是心理学家切入该研究主题的一种方式, 它着眼于社会文化环境中的个体认知, 研究个体在社会学习过程中对文化信息的加工、改变、记忆与提取。文化演化的认知视角借用达尔文生物演化理论, 涉及文化传承、创新、选择三个子领域, 提出了文化演化的三原则: 遗传、变异、选择。文化传承的路径包括模仿和教导, 类型分为工具性与习俗性文化传承; 文化创新具有层次性, 人类特有的累积性文化演化建立在文化创新的基础之上, 体现了文化创新的代际传递; 基于行为生态学和人类认知机制的文化选择造成了文化信息的差异化适应。未来研究可以从研究概念、研究思路、研究方法三方面推进认知视角下的文化演化研究, 探索更高层次的文化创新, 扩展文化演化的前因变量, 结合新技术加深对文化演化的理解; 发挥文化演化对文化心理学研究的助推作用, 研究文化混搭、个性心理特征对文化演化的影响。     

Social genomics: genomic inventions in society. The nature of what's to come

This paper identifies several kinds of intellectual mistakes that proponents of genetic engineering make, in defending their views and characterizing the views of their opponents. Results from research in the social sciences and humanities illuminate the nature of these mistakes. The mistakes themselves play a role in allowing proponents to gather support from other protagonists in the social controversies involving science and technology. Understanding the controversies requires understanding that innovations are components of complex and ill-structured social problems; the "right answer" does not follow from scientific or technological breakthroughs. If the problems are identified correctly, issues of non-economic or non-market values and political and individual rights will need to be addressed.     

Industry,innovation and social values

Remaining important tasks in finding and developing new drugs and vaccines for HIV/AIDS, malaria, cancer and other diseases require continued industry research and development. Industry’s research and development pipeline has produced drugs that have saved AIDS victims previously facing certain death, but still no cure nor vaccine is yet available. Experience with the process of research and development indicates that it requires more than a decade of development to produce a new drug with costs in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Intellectual property protection is critically important in assuring that drug development continues. Partnerships between industry and the public sector have increased access to new therapies in developing countries and promise to enhance access to both patented and generic medicines in the future. An earlier version of this paper was presented at an international conference, “The Ethics of Intellectual Property Rights and Patents,” held in Warsaw, Poland on 23–24 April, 2004. This paper was prepared with the assistance of Maciej Gajewski, Policy Research Analyst, International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association (IFPMA).