La classification des exemples d'après Aristote (Rhétorique 2,20)

Aristotle considers all examples, as far as they are used as rhetorical arguments, to be inductions (Rhetoric 1, 2, 8). On the other hand, he finds it worthwhile to distinguish different kinds of examples (viz., historical example, comparison, and fable). Moreover, comparisons and fables are said to be made by the orator, whereas historical examples are not (Rhetoric 2, 20, 2s). The present article attempts to explain this opposition.A close examination of what can be meant by induction reveals that this term applies differently to historical examples and to comparisons and fables. In a broader sense, all examples can be called inductions, insofar as a certain logical relation, different from the syllogistic one, obtains between conclusion and premises. This relation, however, is unable to explain why examples can serve as arguments. Applied to historical examples only, the term induction preserves its original meaning of checking samples in a number sufficient to yield generalization. In its narrow sense, induction gives a satisfactory account of how historical examples work. As for comparisons and fables — to which induction applies in a broader sense only — Aristotle fails to explain what makes them arguments. The explanation, missing in Rhetoric 2, 20, can, however, be given according to the general lines of Aristotelian dialectics and rhetorics. The main task of comparison and fable is to elaborate a so far unconsidered middle term (M) meeting the following conditions: the hearer is prepared to agree that M applies to the subject of the conclusion and that the predicate of the conclusion applies to M. All examples make use of a general proposition from which their conclusion can be inferred. Historical examples (like real inductions) produce instances, in order to confirm a proposition previously admitted as suitable premise, provided that its truth can be proved. Comparison and fables, by introducing a new middle term, try to form a premise susceptible of being admitted without proof.

---

La classification des exemples d'après Aristote (Rhétorique 2,20)

     

Aristotle and the tradition of rhetorical argumentation

The first part of this paper contends that argumentation is central and essential to Aristotle's Rhetoric, and recounts a number of arguments in support of that view, particularly the recognition that deliberative rhetoric or the rhetoric of counsel is the primary concern of Aristotle's work. The second part of the paper reviews the work that follows in this present volume to show that the other writers' views fit in perfectly with this thesis.     

样例类型与解释方式对初中生数学概率问题解决的效果

为考察样例类型与解释方式对初中生数学概率问题解决的促进作用,实验1随机选取初中生90名,比较正确样例组、正误样例组、对照组的学习效果,实验2随机选取另外90名初中生,比较有教学解释、有自我解释与无解释的正误样例组的即时与延时测试学习效果,研究发现:(1)正误样例学习效果显著好于正确样例;(2)有解释的正误样例学习效果显著好于无解释的正误样例;(3)与有教学解释的正误样例学习效果相比,有自我解释的正误样例学习效果显著且更持久。     

关于两项样例学习心理实验研究报告的分析与评论

对两项关于样例学习心理实验研究的报告进行了逻辑分析,指出了Ross的研究设计的合理性以及莫雷等的 “表面概貌对原理运用的影响的实验研究”中的逻辑欠缺,进而给出了莫雷等的结论“样例与作业问题表面概貌的相似性,不仅会影响原理的通达,而且也会影响原理的运用” 尚不足信的断言,所以只能继续维持Ross的“表面概貌是否相似不影响原理的运用”的结论。最后明确了莫雷等实验研究应该采取的正确设计思路和方法。     

小学生"去括号"运算规则的样例学习

为了考察小学生样例学习能力的发展和完整与不完整样例以及样例分类作业对样例学习效果的影响,作者采用完整和不完整样例以及"不完整样例-分类"三种学习作业,对270名3-5年级小学生学习"去括号"运算规则的效果进行了实验研究.结果表明:小学生"去括号"运算规则样例学习的能力随年级的增长而提高;样例分类作业对小学生学习"去括号"运算规则具有促进作用;不同类型的样例对学习不同难度的"去括号"运算规则的学习效果不同.     

中国城市农民工子女心理健康研究述评

城市农民工子女是指户籍身份还是农民, 有承包土地, 但主要从事非农产业、以工资为主要收入来源的进城务工人员的子女, 他们一般为6~18周岁的适龄上学儿童少年。中国城市农民工子女心理健康的总体水平低于城市当地儿童, 社会认知方面存在着一定的歧视知觉、相对剥夺感和身份认同危机, 情绪情感方面表现为情绪不平衡、孤独(抑郁)倾向较强和自卑(自责)心理严重, 社会适应方面显示出社会适应不良、人际关系紧张与敏感、学习适应性较差和问题行为较多。性别、年龄、人格、应对方式、生活满意度等个体因素以及家庭、学校、社会等环境因素是其心理健康水平的主要影响因素。而关于城市农民工子女的教育干预还没有形成系统, 主要是一些质性的研究。今后研究的重点应包括研究对象与内容的拓宽、研究方法的改进与完善及系统研究和理论建构的加强等。     

The Moral Philosophy of Raimond Gaitaand Some Questions of Methodin the Philosophy of Religion

Raimond Gaita's moral philosophy is distinguished by, among other things, its attention to the role of embodied, enacted witness in disclosing certain moral values, and its understanding of the emotions as forms of thought. In this paper, I consider how Gaita's insights on these matters may be applied to certain questions in the philosophy of religion, paying particular attention to the nature of religious experience and 'the problem of evil'. I suggest that Gaita's discussion of how we come to recognise moral values or 'meanings' can be extended to the question of how we might recognise religious meanings. On this view, religious experience may take the form of an appreciation of the meaning borne by a material context (rather than, for example, some supra-sensory encounter with a supernatural agent), and our sense of the goodness or otherwise of the world may be answerable to the authoritative example of particular lives.     

Embracing complexity in research on learning from examples and from problem solving

This contribution is a commentary to a special issue titled “Example-based learning: New theoretical perspectives and advances to a contemporary instructional approach” published in Applied Cognitive Psychology (2020). In the commentary, the presented research is discussed with respect to three extensions compared with previous research, namely, theoretical frameworks, learning scenarios and domains. It concludes with some suggestions for methodological advancements.     

表面概貌对原理运用的影响的实验研究

探讨样例与作业问题的表面概貌相似性对原理运用的影响作用。实验１扩大了Ｒｏｓｓ的研究材料中样例与测题表面概貌方面的差异程度,探讨两者的表面概貌相似性对原理运用的影响。实验２探讨样例与测题在表面概貌的事件类型方面发生改变的条件下,两者的表面概貌相似性对原理运用的影响。实验３探讨在样例与测题表面概貌有两个级别差异的条件下,两者的表面概貌相似性对原理运用的影响。３个实验均采用被试内设计,要求被试学习原理及样例后完成与样例的表面概貌有不同相似关系的测题。结果表明：（１）样例与问题的表面概貌对原理运用有影响,当两者表面概貌发生较大的变化尤其是在表面概貌的事件类型方面发生变化时,其表面概貌相似性对原理运用的影响就会明显地表现出来;（２）样例与问题的表面概貌对原理运用的影响作用,受到两者对象对应性质的制约,当对象对应相似时,其表面概貌相似就会促进解答测题时运用原理,而当两者的对象对应相反时,其表面概貌相似就会对原理运用产生干扰作用。据此可以认为,样例与作业问题表面概貌的相似性,不仅会影响原理的通达,而且也会影响原理的运用。Ｒｏｓｓ关于表面概貌相似与否不影响原理运用的结论应该予以修正。     

Example-based learning: New theoretical perspectives and use-inspired advances to a contemporary instructional approach

Decades of research has shown that example-based learning is an effective instructional strategy for learning new skills. The field of learning from examples is seeing a shift in focus towards more innovative and use-inspired research, in part because the use of examples for informal and formal learning purposes has mushroomed. This special issue comprises a set of eight papers in which students learned a procedural skill from worked examples or modeling examples. Each study characterizes a recent development towards more innovative example-based learning research. These developments are: (a) the integration of social-cognitive and cognitive example research, (b) the integration of example-based learning and analogical reasoning research, (c) the extension of traditional Cognitive Load Theory effects, (d) a greater focus on learning from (productive) errors, and (e) more research on individual differences. This special issue concludes with insightful commentary articles written by Prof. Dr. Katharina Scheiter and Prof. Dr. Richard Mayer.