Displaying: 21-40 of 69 documents

0.204 sec

21. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 3
DongKai Li 自由的自然受限是道 德和法律的伦理基础
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
As per my new ontology and cognition theory, in my this paper, I demonstrate theory about Moral and Law, point out, the naturally limited freedom is the basis of moral and law. Following is my new ontology and cognition: New ontology: The onto is the uniform contradiction being. The essence of people: The uniformcontrast body within people’s body, is “ego and nonego”. New Cognition: Cognition course moves by the force from the contrast between the Ego and Nonego within an exist being live body. Above ontology and cognition is the theory basis of my this paper.
22. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 3
Jian Wang, Dong Ming Cao 现代技术伦理规约的困境及其消解
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
With the rapid development of modern technology, people has stepped into an risky era. Ethical stipulation is the important means to reduce the risks. But in reality, ethical stipulation of technology always face some kind of dilemma which mainly come from two aspects: one is that when we try to regulate the subject oftechnology, we find that it always difficult to distinguish the responsibilities. The other aspect is that when we try to limit the result of technology, we often have to give up because of lacking feasibility, which means we sink into the famous “Collingridge dilemma”. Are we able to get out of the dilemma? What should we doif we want to got out of it? First, in the modern technological system, individual’s action is taken over by group’s action according to the technological criterion. Any part of the modern technology need multiple subjects finish his job during the course. Therefore a new form of responsibility named group responsibility has been formed. Like Johnas said, in this ethics, ‘I’ will be replaced by ‘we’ and decision will be the business of a group. So it is difficult for us to find out that “I” from “us” once the technological risks happened. We lost the object of ethical stipulation as the result of no convinced standard and principals of prescribing the group responsibility. Second, when we try to stimulate some certain results of technology, we find we lack not only the wisdom of precisely judging or assessingtechnology itself, but also the ability of correcting the bad results if it has. Here again do we fall into the dilemma. This make it difficult for us to stipulate technology with ethic. From above discussion we can see, the stipulation, no matter from the aspect of technological responsibility or from aspect of the application of technology, has been sure to meet the dilemma. If the conflicts between a hypothesis and experiment cannot be eliminated, we have to rethink the theoryand come back again to technology itself and pursue the essence of technology again. Technology is a process from inventing, designing to forming material technological products; is a process from invisible technology to visible technology; is a process potential technology to real-life technology or intellective technology to reallife technology. Technology exists in process. The essential and innate characteristic is it’s process and dynamics. The transition oftechnological form involves many factors of economic, social, historical, constitutional and cultural. Technological creation of intellectual form is the duty of inventor or technologist. And it is entrepreneur’s job to use the technology or invention, and make them in large quantity, apply them in reality or get economic or other profit. Although there need be interaction, understanding, cooperation, support, coordination among scientist, technologist and enterpriser, they have different responsibility and delimitation. Technology exists in process, no doubt, so does modern technology. This decides that the ethical stipulation of modern technology should be a process stipulation . The essence of modern technological is not only the limitation of subject of technology either not only controlthe object of technology. It is the ethical stipulation in the unity of subject and object of technological dynamic process. This is basic point of understanding ethical stipulation of modern technology. Responsibility ethics consider that the group responsibility as the premise of technological stipulation .It noticed the static structure of modern technological system, but neglect the dynamic linkage between factors. And it only analysed the special construction, neglected the evolution of system of technological responsibility and the inter relationship between space dimension and time dimension. If we unfold the group responsibility along with the process of technology, we will see the different responsibility belong to different subject in different stage of the process. We can also see that different actors obey different norm or criteria according to their task. In this case, we can distinct the distribution of the group responsibility. Collingridge fixed the effective control on the two points of “before ”and ”after” the process of the technological action, namely, the stipulation for the staring point and stipulation of terminal point. But the whole process was neglected. According to the point of view of process stipulation .it is not the sudden occurrence for technology from “nothing ”to “having”. There are time and space during the process. From middle experiment to industrial experiment, the most characters of the result of technology will havebeen shown gradually, so will the social results. So we can give the small quantity an ethical evaluation and ethical choice which is possible and feasible. Over all, if we confirm the ethical stipulation of modern technology is a process regulation, we can delimitate the responsibility of the subjects of technology and also settle the prestipulation of the application of technology. At the end, we can eliminate the dilemma of ethical regulation of modern technology.
23. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 30
Jisheng Bi 论黑格尔“本质性或反思规定”的形而上学实质
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Hegel "Science of Logic essential theory "Thereunto” essential” Adv of Excoriate target "Sham essential”, with matter together method Identity, so serves as concact” sham Essential” The "Reflection" "Ground”, ” Contradiction” as well as its ” Identity", "Difference” etc. Also Necessarily false doubtless, currently fad make believe becomes reality of viewpoint, by the root perversion speculative philosophy, must be corrected.
24. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 30
Jisheng Bi 黑格尔《逻辑学〈本质论〉》 中范畴过渡之谜
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Hegel oneself indicate “essential theory " Thereunto category transition, large orientation yes as best as one can in accord with cognize course process of, to this aspect ought earnest comprehend, but history with logicality improbable Absolute coherent, More Plus For the sake of fabricate institutions of demand, additionally have to pray in aid of imaginary, To this aspect ought to appropriate comment critically, though never be able to use dot supplant bodily general denial.
25. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 34
DongKai Li 黑格尔认识论和本体论的根本错 误以及我的新的本体论和认识论
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Almost all think Hegel’s Ontology and Cognition is wrong. Yeah, his is wrong. But, what mistake? What mistake is the essential one? How to demonstrate Hegel’s this essential mistake in his great Ontology and Cognition system? This section is Ontology. But, Ontology can not be there without the Cognition. Hegel’s great achievement in philosophy history is his Cognition. While, His main mistake is also in his Cognition, and, his that mistake in Cognition is at the basis of hisOntology, his wrong Ontology. So, before point out Hegel’s mistake in Ontology, we must take out his Cognition, point out his that essential mistake in his Cognition. By law of contradiction, Hegel ever study the Cognition, demonstrated that the Cognition course moves by the force of contradiction from the contrast between the object and knowledge. This was really a great achievement and big progress on the development of Cognition, clear up Kant’s confusion in Kant’sstudy of Cognition. But, now, I ask, is that contradiction from the contrast between the object and knowledge the force to move the Cognition course? Pls be kindly noted, this is the place where Hegel’s essential mistake in Cognition rooted. Pls your attention, how does the contrast between the object and knowledge produce a kind of contradiction force, while the object is external exist, the knowledge is another exist? By law of contradiction, only when a pair of contrast exist in a samebody, that contrast could produce the force. the object and the knowledge, obviously are not in a same being body, so, even though there is the contrast between the object and knowledge, that contrast can not produce the force to more the Cognition. For example, the tree is there as a kind of exist being, the knowledge about the tree is there also as a kind of exist being, or, this knowledge about the tree could be regarded as that in people’s mind, in book. Of course, betweenthe tree and the knowledge about that tree there is the contrast, pls be kindly asked, does this contrast produce the force to move your Cognition about the tree? Can you get? Can you feel that force? of course, the answer is NO. So, the force to move the Cognition course is not from the contrast between the object and knowledge! This is Hegel’s essential mistake in Cognition. So, the force moves the Cognition course must come from one same exist being body, in which a pair of contrast exist. In my this Paper, besides point out above mentioned Hegel’s mistake in Cognition, I already present the pair of contrast, existing in one same exist being body, to produce the force to move the Cognition. The contrast to produce the force is demonstrated out by following steps: Firstly, find out Hegel’s mistake in Ontology, because, his wrong Cognition is on basis of his Ontology. Secondly, demonstrate what is the Ontology. I demonstrated successfully that theuniform contradiction body is just the noumenon, the ONTO, which is the root for everything. Then, people, as a kind of external exist, exist also as per the law of uniform contradiction, is a kind of specific uniform contradiction body, in which, a pair of contrast exist, produce the force to control people’s exist, move. Then, I study this uniform contrast in people’s body, finally, I found out this uniform contrast body within people’s body, it is ego and nonego. Ego, refers to the people’s live body, include the body and the instinct, the desire in mind, etc. Nonego, refers to the Idea in people’s mind, the idea reflects the external exist being. For one person, one live body, the Ego and Nonego is a kind of contrast, producing the force to make this live body move. Cognition is a kind of movement of human, so, Cognition course moves by the force from the contrast between the Ego and Nonego within an exist being live body. Following is the Cognition move course way: “EGO”+“Nonego” →→ Force to move (N times) → → Feeling (N times) → → Idea (N numbers)+ thinking (N times) →→ Knowledge (N numbers) ≈ Object →→=Object
26. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Yan Yin 论个体自我认同危机
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Self-identity of Individual-subject is evaluative knowledge and factive confirmation on basic of an evaluative knowledge on “who am I”. Crisis of Self-identity of Individual-subject is a extremely stern reality which Individual-subject is confronted with in modern sociality. The paper researches the essence of self-identity of individual-subject, and analyzes the characteristics and reasons of crisis of self-identity of individual-subject from the point of view of theory of evaluation. The paper hold that crisis of self-identity of individual-subject is a difficult position of self-evaluation of individual-subject in modern sociality, and arrives at conclusion that crisis of self-identity of individual-subject can be overcome and prevented by modeling positive self and building a reasonable mechanism of self-evaluation of individual-subject.
27. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Ziyi Feng 全球化条件下的民族文化发展
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
In view of previous discussions about national culture were limited in the framework of “traditional-modern”, this essay attempts to re-exam this framework in a wider field of “globalization-nationalization”, and treats the development of national culture under the condition of globalization. Since globalization has become an important background and inner essential factor, no matter maintenance, inheritance, accumulation or development of culture cannot be separated fromglobalization, the new frame of reference. Under the condition of globalization, development of culture has its own new characteristics and inner logic, so development of national culture has to be advanced on basis of following these points and law. If a developing country wants to advance the development of national culture, it has to raise cultural consciousness, adjust cultural mind, strengthen cultural transform, and push cultural conformity and innovation.
28. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Yan Zhao On Transformation of Historical Forms of Globalization
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
As an objective tendency in social development, globalization has experienced three different historical forms. They are globalization as communication survival purposes, globalization for capital expansion and globalization in amalgamation of cultures. The thesis point out that globalization does not equally mean capitalization. The capital expansion, however, is only one of the forms of globalization process. In the era of the new globalization, both the developed and the developing countries have to coordinate and make active and positive use of the favorite conditions as well as opportunities for further development. The developed and developing countries must learn to respect each other and open up more channels of communication to understand each other better in an effort to better serve their own interests and create a win-win situation despite of their different cultures and stages of development. This is the only way to bring about harmonious coexistence for peoples of various countries around the world.
29. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 37
DongKai Li 根据最新的本体论和认识论, 我们应该有怎样的教育理论
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
As per my new theory in ontology and cognition, the theory of education could be demonstrated. My this paper is to demonstrate the theory of education as per my new ontology and cognition. Following is my new theory in ontology and cognition: New ontology: The Onto is the uniform contradiction being. The essence of people: The uniform contrast body within people’s body, is “ego and nonego. “New Cognition: Cognition course moves by the force from the contrast between the Ego and Nonego within an exist being live body. Following is the Cognition move course way : “EGO” + “Nonego”→→ Force to move (N times)→→ Feeling(N times)→→Idea (N numbers) + thinking (N times)→→Knowledge (N numbers) ≈ Object →→ = Object As per above new ontology and cognition, Theory ofeducation is demonstrated in my this paper.
30. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 37
Yong-ping Dou 数学教育整体思路导言
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
This paper represents an introduction to whole approach of mathematics education and takes an example for wholeness principle by area. It is also an introduction to whole approach of education.