We can distinguish two senses of the Given, the nonconceptual and the non-doxastic. The idea of the nonconceptual Given is the target of Sellars’s severe attack on the Myth of the Given, which paves the way for McDowell’s conceptualism, while the idea of the non-doxastic Given is largely neglected. The main target of the present paper is the non-doxastic Given. I first reject the idea of the nonconceptual Given by debunking the false assumption that there is a systematic relation between the conceptual and the nonconceptual. I then propose a constitutive understanding of experience and concept, which at once challenges the idea of the non-doxastic Given. Unlike the more familiar Davidsonian challenge, which questions the transition from the non-doxastic to the doxastic, the constitutive understanding implies that the idea of the non-doxastic Given endangers the very possibility of having thought about the world. I urge an exorcism of the Myth of the Given by proposing doxasticism, the view that experience is essentially a doxastic attitude towards that which is experienced.
This note is devoted to the problem of signaling (marginal inconsistency) in the Bell-type experiments with physical and cognitive systems. It seems that in quantum physics, this problem is still not taken seriously. Only recently have experimenters started to check the signaling hypothesis for their data. For cognitive systems, signaling was statistically significant in all experiments (typically for decision making) performed up to today. Here, one cannot simply ignore this problem. Since signaling contradicts the quantum theory of measurement for compatible observables, its statistical significance in experiments with humans can be considered as an objection for quantum-like modeling-applications of quantum theory to cognition, decision making, psychology, economics and finance, social and political science. In this paper, we point to two possible sources of signaling generation that are consistent with quantum measurement theory. Thus, the signaling objection for quantum-like modeling is not catastrophic. One of these sources is the direct physical signaling about selection of experimental settings, questions or tasks in quantum-like studies. Another possible source is a state modification dependent on experimental settings. The latter was a rather common source of signaling in quantum physics. Since the physical size of the brain is very small comparing with the light velocity, it seems to be impossible to prevent the direct physical signaling (with electromagnetic waves) between the brain's areas processing two questions a and b. However, if, for these questions, not the electromagnetic waves, but electrochemical communication plays the crucial role, the experimenter may hope to make signaling weaker by answering the questions faster. The problem of question-dependent mental state modification seems to be solvable via smarter experimental design. This paper can be useful both for physicists interested in quantum foundations and for researchers working in quantum-like studies, e.g., applying the quantum theory to model decision making or psychological effects. This paper is solely about quantum theory. Thus, we do not consider general contextual probabilistic models.
The contemporary debate on collective intentionality in analytic philosophy has lasted several decades,but questions concerning the nature of we and the relation between the individual and the community are obviously far older.We can find a particularly rich discussion in early phenomenology.Indeed,while starting out with an interest in the individual mind,phenomenologists began their exploration of dyadic forms of interpersonal relations shortly before the start of World War I and were already deeply engaged in extensive analyses of collective forms of intentionality a few years later.A distinctive feature of the phenomenological contribution was its exploration of the relation between the first-and second-person singular and the first-person plural perspectives.How are I,you and we intertwined?The aim of the present paper is to present some core insights from this early debate.
The issue of evolutionary progress is a significant topic in the philosophical debates on the theory of evolution.Did Darwin oppose the idea of evolutionary progress?Through an analysis of his works from different periods,we find that Darwin himself recognized the existence of a progressive trend in the biological evolution process.In his travel logs,he regarded the development of organisms from simplicity to complexity as progress.In later manuscripts,he attributed the reasons for progress to natural selection.In the book On the Origin of Species,he considered the standard of progress to be the specialization and division of labor in biological physiological structures.In his later works,he associated human progress with the development of intelligence and civilization.Darwin also provided answers to some challenging questions regarding the progressiveness of evolution.The difference between Darwin's view of progress and Lamarck's view lies in the fact that Lamarck saw progress as an inherent tendency within organisms to develop towards higher levels,while Darwin considered progress as the result of the action of outside natural selection.
Explanation aims at understanding,which is a mainstream view no matter in philosophy of science or epistemology.But whether all understanding is subject to explanation is in debate.Lipton claims that there are unexplained understandings,Kvanvig believes that there is an"explanatory understanding"only in the deterministic system of causality,and Khalifa believes that there is also such explanatory understandings in the relationship of logic,probability,etc.According to the article,this question involves what is explanation,the explanatory relationship and the standard of explanation,and the relationship of explanation is regarded as that of giving reasons.It is manifested in:if the explanans a gives a rational explanation for the nature,relationship,style,etc.of the explanandum,so that people can not only know what it is,but also understand the"why"of things,that is to give an explanation.It is this relationship of reasons that enables us to explain things clearly,thereby grasping the ground of things and gaining understanding.
"Possibility"is the core concept in Jin Yuelin's metaphysical construction.Jin Yuelin believes in the On Dao that it is possible that all of them are logically not contradictory.After Jin Yuelin accepted Marxism,he discussed"possibilities"from specific conditions.This article attempts to provide a reconciliation interpretation for this change of Jin Yuelin on the"possible"view.This interpretation still continues the views of Jin Yuelin in On Dao,that is,what is logically not contradictory is possible,but the focus of the problem is transferred to the judgment of whether there is logical contradictions,and the"impossible"is transferred to the"impossible"that may be logically contradictory in Jin Yuelin's later period,so it is"impossible"to resolve.
Husserl traces the origin of logical judgment back to the activity and creativity of pre-predicative intuition,which brings vitality to the form of logical judgment,breaks through the rigid understanding of traditional logic,breaks the logical prejudice of substantivism that has been dominant in the West for more than 2,000 years,and provides a wider logical space for primitive thinking,mythological thinking,and artistic thinking.However,out of the narrow prejudice of traditional Western rationalism,he tried to put all poetic discourses into the a priori framework of"pure logic"in order to establish an all-embracing"strictly scientific philosophy",which blocked out the true origin of logical forms.This blurs the true origin of logical forms.In his case,there is no origin of logical judgment,but only the"genealogy"composed of the pre-predicate and predicate phases of logical judgment,and therefore language,empirical intuition,and poetry ultimately belong to logic,and the illogical meaning of"Logos"is obscured,and living metaphors are smothered.This paper argues that pure logic develops out of language,and that in metaphor it is not the logical but the poetic element that plays the dominant role,and that language originates in poetry,not in logic.Husserl's hollowing out of language and his determination to attribute everything illogical to the logical cannot really solve the problem of the origin of logic.But what his genealogy of logic implies is precisely that logic was originally formed by the non-logical elements of language as a result of their self-negation.
Generally speaking,as other schools of thought have said,the so-called virtue and nature of Taoism in the pre-Qin period refer to the innate endowment of all things.However,Taoism pays more attention to the original meaning of virtue that indicates the reason why all things are born(or the origin of life),and its virtue theory also has the following characteristics:as the root of the world,Tao has the virtue of breeding all things;Similarly,as the child of Tao,all things have their own virtue,that is,each has its own unique vitality and existence endowment;accordingly,Taoist Gongfu Theory also shows a distinctive reversibility.Taoist theory of Virtue is also the logical starting point of its thought of governance,and its ideal governance is also called the governance by Xuande.Under this rule,the monarch acted as if he had done nothing.He is like the caretaker of everything,so everything can freely follow its virtue and showing its nature.However,Huang Lao Taoist,based on the utilitarian pursuit of ruling the world,also strengthened the image of the dominator.Taoist theory of virtue determines that its historical view is degenerated,and its living attitude of advocating virtue and zhi also shows an ideological tendency of anti-civilization,compared with the Confucian emphasis on enlightenment and morality.
The nature and role of models have been amply discussed by philosophers of science as well as the scientists working at the cutting edge of science.Previous studies focus on the roles of scientific models played as visual or theoretical representation,explanation,or prediction.However,few philosophical discussions focus on how scientists construct and use different kinds of models in their real scientific practice.This paper analyzes the discovery of the conservation of orbital symmetry and its applications to articulate two functions that highly idealized chemical models have.Besides visual or theoretical representation,simple models play roles as a tool to improve scientists'scientific understanding,and help them to reason,predict the trends of chemical processes,and make contractive explanations with theories.With simple models,scientists could achieve the skills of understanding-why and have the skills to use theories in fruitful ways.
A critical controversy in the epistemology of trust is whether trust is a private attitude or a normative requirement.Robert Brandom's theory of trust introduces an analysis of the historical dimension of trust formation,pointing out that trust is a normative ethical requirement that is eventually formed through changes in social forms.Specifically,individuals can establish a real community based on trust in each other only in the postmodern society,where a genuine balance between the"normative attitudes"of individuals toward each other and the"normative status"they occupy in society has been achieved.Individual turns to be a subject only in a community thus formed.Trust is therefore taken as a meta-ethical attitude of understanding and treating each other,and it is only on the base of trust that one can understand what trust is and why we trust.This answer can also provide a different solution to the debates in the epistemology of trust.
翟振明的《虚拟现实的终极形态及其意义》已由商务印书馆出版(以下简称"翟著")①,其主体内容来自作者 1998 年出版的英文著作,后者实为有关虚拟世界的开创性哲学探索之一.
On March 14,2023,OpenAI released ChatGPT-4.On March 22,the future of life institute published an open letter co-signed by 1127 tech leaders and researchers in the AI field,titled"A Call to Pause Mega AI Labs",which openly addressed the uncontrolled competition in AI technology development and highlighted the risk of losing control over our civilization.Given the situation of AI,can its development and application obtain appropriate ethical boundaries to ensure that the threat to humans is minimized?This can be explored by examining AlphaGo,looking back at its past with Chinook and Deep Blue,and its present with ChatGPT and AlphaFold.In tracing the history of AlphaGo,we find that human generative development unfolds arithmetically,while AI technology's generative evolution unfolds geometrically.In examining AlphaGo's present,we reveal that the development of human infinite potential is absolutely limited,while AI technology's potential development opens up unlimited possibilities.In short,through the past and present of AlphaGo,AI technology has evolved from initial simulation to transfer and expansion,generating self-constructing and self-creating mechanisms,attaining human-like qualities and subjectivity.Under these circumstances,designing ethical boundaries for artificial intelligence is no longer possible.Although establishing ethical boundaries for AI applications and further research is possible,it faces environmental and human-made challenges,as well as the question of how to achieve openness and transparency in research and application.The more difficult aspect,however,is whether technology experts,researchers,companies,and especially governments can truly restrain their innate greed and reach a consensus to deconstruct interests,power,monopolies,and the wild passions and stubborn brutality of competition.
After the recent Confucian renaissance movement,the discussion of the issue of life and death by Confucianism has a rediscovery significance.This is not only a rebound from the active avoidance of this issue within Confucianism,but also a reflection of the value consciousness of responding to the challenges of Buddhism and Taoism to defend the fundamental spirit of Chinese culture.The entire process can be divided into three stages,namely,concern,confront,and transcend.Among them,the concern stage is mainly represented by Han Yu,Li Ao,and Zhou Dunyi from the perspective of the construction of Confucianism itself.This article attempts to explore how the three changed their attitudes and the inherent logic of responding to the issue of life and death,as well as the renewal of traditional Confucian students'view of death.On this basis,this article reveals the transformation of their role consciousness in responding to Buddhist challenges during the recent revival of Confucianism.
"Cultural appropriation"as a buzzword is used to refer to the unauthorized or unspecified display of the cultural elements of an alien people.However,with the tension between cultural communication and cultural protection,these accusations are controversial.Because of its performative quality,accusing others of cultural appropriation,instead of protecting vulnerable groups,only causes secondary harm in addition to placing false accusations on the accused.Moreover,as the essence of cultural appropriation is to set the victim as the"absolute other",it actually reinforces the discourse of Orientalism while posing to charge others for Orientalism.Accusation of cultural appropriation embeds with dangers,should be avoided,in addition with open attitude in cultural communication.
Jin Yuelin is the founder who made the modern logic be studied and spread in China.He introduced modern logic methods into the reflection and reconstruction of Chinese philosophy system,and opened up an innovative path of academic development.From the expansion method of Jin Yuelin's logic thought,whether the explanation of the relationship between logic and philosophy,logic and natural science,logic and social life,or the presentation of the modern logical knowledge system bearing the mission of logic education,it shows that Jin Yuelin's logic thought has distinct features of adaptability,openness and innovation.This also makes the study of Chinese logic with full of modern logic consciousness become an important part of the world logic thought system,highlighting its contemporary value.
译者按:作为技术哲学研究领域的先驱之一,安德鲁·芬伯格迄今为止共主编和撰写了 13 部涉及批判理论和技术哲学的著作,其中最著名的是《技术批判理论》.在与澳大利亚墨尔本大学高级讲师丹尼尔·麦卡锡的访谈中,安德鲁·芬伯格围绕辩证法理念,先后阐述了他对现代科学技术与世界各民族文化之间的辩证关系、现代科学技术的政治经济学问题、公众舆论、商业利益与科学技术争议之间的关系等问题的看法,通过引入程序与反程序的概念,芬伯格解释了他对技术官僚主义与技术民主化问题的思考.鉴于访谈者的国际关系学背景,二人还就科学技术与国家间竞争、普适文明等问题进行了探讨.最后,芬伯格表达了自己对资本主义世界体系的未来发展与解决现代化造成的全球治理问题的悲观预期.
Jin Yuelin made a profound analysis of"字"("zi")from the perspective of epistemology,mainly focusing on the form of"zi"as cognitive tools.He explored the four necessary conditions for the establishment of"zi":"zi"is the objective presentation,"zi"is the type and token,"zi"has the meaning in the idea,and"zi"is the numerator of the language;he also explores the meaning and flavor of different philosophical discourses through the inclusion of"zi".In addition,the differences in philosophical expression in different grammatical structures are discussed from the perspective of the grammatical structure of"zi".These studies are undoubtedly different from the traditional study of"zi"confined to the perspective of linguistics and philology,but expand to the level of philosophical reflection,which provides an important dimension for our understanding of"zi"today.
马歇尔:是什么让你成为了一名哲学家?(问题1) 拉兹:但愿我知道!就好比我很想知道有关我童年其他问题的答案一样.例如,是什么让我在14岁就报名并参加了我家乡的成人教育课程,参加课程的大多数都是一些比我父母年龄还大的成年人,他们当中很多都已退休,而为什么我并没有因为我是那里唯一的一个小孩而被吓到呢?这或许比那些课程都是哲学课这个事实更令人困惑.换句话说,从记得这事起,我就一直饱受困扰.
儒家思想中,"大德者"与"受命"之间具有必然性,而且"大德"和"位""禄""名""寿"等福也存在内在、必然的关系.万物各有其命并通过德把命表现于现实.与"自然物"不同,人作为道德主体具有道德的自觉能力,可以以此来体认命、实现命.在此过程中,人与物相互成就,福就在人实现自己天命的现实过程中生成.因此,"位""禄""名""寿"等具有现实意义的福内含在命中,并实现于德中.尽管现实社会中会出现德与福不一致的情况,但这是因为人具有自由的意志,既能自觉成德,也会私心自用.当人溺于私心时,则不能体会命、实现德,社会发展也可能因此而不能全合于道.但这并不影响儒家思想中德与命的统一性,以及德福一致这一内在逻辑的成立.
形而上学是哲学的核心性问题.康德对传统形而上学的批判与形而上学的重建"唤回了哲学的自信",在古典哲学与现代哲学之间架起了一座"行得通"的思想桥梁,尤其是其对道德形而上学的思考在现代人本主义哲学中产生了深远的方向性与话语方式影响.随着康德对形而上学作为一种认知性的独断论思考的终结,形而上学转向了非知识性的纯粹理性原则、道德原理的普遍意义思考,这种思考基于否定性的、先验性的方法,不再诉求于体系化的、证明性的科学知识理解,而是"消极性地"呈现出非体系性、非理性化的和隐秘性的新认识、新发展.传统形而上学受到了批判,但以道德形而上学为例,形而上学没有终结,正是在通过康德延展至现代人本主义思想的发展中,古老的形而上学开辟出了不同的思想道路,展现出了当代新发展的意义理解空间与未来可能.
