论《共产党宣言》的当代价值

《共产党宣言》包含生产方式与社会形态、阶级和阶级斗争、无产阶级专政和共产主义、马克思主义的唯物辩证法、无产阶级政党斗争策略等基本思想。在新的时代条件下,《共产党宣言》所阐述的历史唯物主义为分析当代世界经济政治演变提供了方法论指导,其阶级斗争理论为分析当代阶级现象和政治形势奠定了基础,其世界历史理论为透视经济全球化复杂状况提供了理论指南。     

博弈实验对博弈论的方法论意义

博弈论是研究理性人的交互决策的理论。研究者用实验研究博弈理论,而实验结果则揭示出博弈论预测有偏差,对博弈论的验证竟变成了质疑的来源。进而研究者又针对这种偏差进行了一系列的实验研究,以寻求问题的根源和解决的方案。实验在博弈论中具有很重要的方法论意义,是检验博弈论的平台和工具。尽管博弈实验也存在局限性,但是这种局限性又为其发展提供了可能性。本文通过分析博弈实验的产生及其特征,指出博弈实验对博弈论的方法论意义。     

邓小平科学评价毛泽东的若干方法论原则

科学评价毛泽东 ,维护毛泽东和毛泽东思想的历史地位 ,是邓小平的两大历史性贡献之一。他不仅提出了“确立毛泽东同志的历史地位 ,坚持和发展毛泽东思想”的总原则 ,而且提出了解放思想 ,实事求是 ;纵观一生 ,功过比较 ;由表及里 ,辩证透析 ;分别是非 ,把握体系等一系列方法论原则。为我们党科学评价毛泽东 ,坚持和发展毛泽东思想 ,提供了科学的理论指南     

Unpacking cosmopolitanism for the social sciences: a research agenda

This article calls for a re-conceptualization of the social sciences by asking for a cosmopolitan turn. The intellectual undertaking of redefining cosmopolitanism is a trans-disciplinary one, which includes geography, anthropology, ethnology, international relations, international law, political philosophy and political theory, and now sociology and social theory. Methodological nationalism, which subsumes society under the nation-state, has until now made this task almost impossible. The alternative, a 'cosmopolitan outlook', is a contested term and project. Cosmopolitanism must not be equalized with the global (or globalization), with 'world system theory' (Wallerstein), with 'world polity' (Meyer and others), or with 'world-society' (Luhmann). All of those concepts presuppose basic dualisms, such as domestic/foreign or national/international, which in reality have become ambiguous. Methodological cosmopolitanism opens up new horizons by demonstrating how we can make the empirical investigation of border crossings and other transnational phenomena possible.     

新中国成立以来中国共产党人价值观建设的三维解读

新中国成立以来共产党人的价值观发生了深刻变化,从时代背景、方法原则和话语内容三个维度看,共产党人价值观建设以现代化转型的时代背景、意识形态竞争的文化背景、党的自我发展的客观要求等为出发点,以唯物辩证法为理论依据,以国情社情党情为现实基础,以执政为民为基本价值宗旨、以共产主义为终极价值目标,实现了从“革命”到“发展”的话语转换,创造了为人民服务、“三个有利于”、“全面从严治党”等价值观建设新成果。     

Health Claims and Methodological Controversy in Nutrition Science

This article analyzes the debate about data acquisition and assessment in health claims regulation by identifying the underlying controversies on methodological choice. Regulation in the European Union imposes the need for a scientific substantiation of all health claims (claims about a relationship between consumption of certain food ingredients and positive health effects). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the method that generally is considered to provide the highest quality data for decision making in claims regulation because they allow for establishing cause–effect relationships. The latter are demanded in European regulatory practice for authorization of a claim. This requirement has contributed to a debate about the advantages and limitations of the RCT methodology in nutrition research and regulation. Our analysis identifies five types of tensions that underlie the controversy, with respect to evidence, cognitive values, standards of proof, future lines of research, as well as expert judgment. We conclude that there is a direct and mutual interaction between methodological decisions in nutrition science, and different strategies in health claims regulation. The latter have social and public health consequences because not only may they affect the European market for functional foods, as well as concomitant consumption patterns, but also the generation of future regulation‐relevant evidence in nutrition.     

语用学的跨学科性研究及其意义

目前,跨学科性研究成为当代语用学的一种新进路,具有学科互涉融合化、解释趋向认知化与研究范式复杂化等特征,对 当代语用学的发展具有重要的方法论意义和价值。     

弥曼差派的无神论和认识论思想中体现出的复杂性观念

古代印度哲学的后期弥曼差派的无神论思想中深刻体现着宇宙、宇宙事物无目的、自创生、自组织演化的生成论、过程论的复杂性思想。在认识发生的机制上,后期弥曼差派认为现量的产生是在对象、对象特性、感官、意与我等多重因素的相互作用中产生出来的,这是一种多因素、多中介相互作用、综合建构的信息中介论、多元和合论、整体涌现生成论的复杂性观点。     

佛教与弥曼差派中的神观念比较

佛教和弥曼差派在印度历史上都属于赋予神地位不高的派别。两派在发展中的神观念有一定变化,并且都否定有实在的创世神,但否定的程度和出发点不同。二者的神观念与其各自的理论体系的基本倾向有很大关系。分析和比较这方面的内容有助于认识印度宗教哲学的特色,对深化东方文化的研究有积极意义。     

Aeromobilities’ extra-sectoral costs: a methodological reorientation

ABSTRACT

For over a decade, scholars have graced a number of aeromobilities’ socio-cultural dimensions, from being in an airport to commanding an aeroplane. Yet, while this work has heightened appreciations of the political nature of aerial worlds, the propensity has been to focus on the immediate arrangements and politics related to flight. Using civil aviation as an example, this article offers a methodological reorientation and conceptual rethink of how aeromobilities’ (re)production invokes far-reaching political economies in excess of the core activity of aerial conveyances. It seeks to open up worldly webs of iniquitous movements and relations that make aerial life – rather than flying per se – possible in the first place. Interspersing a selection of our research with extant literature, reports and statistics, the article outlines, in coincidence with our earlier findings, two ways in which civil aviation has thus incurred extensive extra-sectoral costs: the material mobilisation of resources for air infrastructures, and the mobilisation of populations and labour for aeromobile development. The discussion aims ultimately to promote a more nuanced understanding of the constituents, and costs, of moving in the present age.