撩起"人性自私论"的面纱

随着我国社会改革的深入,"人性论"之争再次成为理论界关注的热点,这一争论,实质上是关系"举什么旗,走什么路"的问题.由于争论双方对"自私"含义的不同理解,往往使得争论成了两股道上跑的车.因此,撩起"人性自私论"的面纱,科学界定并明晰"自私"内涵,不仅是理论界统一思想,科学认识"人性"的前提,而且也是引导社会形成正确的价值理念,自觉抵制"人性自私论"侵蚀的重要保证.     

“新帝国论”与小布什外交

当前，“新帝国论”(或“新帝国主义论”)甚嚣尘上。“新帝国”究竟所指为何?它是怎样出笼的?本质是什么?小布什的新帝国主义外交给世界带来了哪些影响?     

石涛“蒙养”说创作主体构成论研究?--石涛?画语录?画学理论体系研究之五

石涛所论“蒙养”是其?画语录?重要概念，“蒙养”说是其画学理论体系的重要组成部分，也是画家论及其创作主体构成论的重要内容。“蒙养”在“蒙以养正”内涵基础上扩大延伸为性灵颖悟、思想品德、社会人生、艺术素养等要素构成的主体心智结构，分别从“蒙养之灵”、“蒙养生活之权”、“蒙养之道”形成“蒙养”说理论构成，特别从“蒙养”与“资任”关系讨论中展现“蒙养之功”、“蒙养之任”、“蒙养以仁”、“蒙养生活之操”、“蒙养生活之理”等理论实践价值与现实意义。     

从“论”到“语”?--?论语?简称变更原因探析

先秦至宋，在古代文体理论发展、?论语?社会地位沉浮及其命名解释的多重影响下，?论语?简称经历了从“论”到“语”的演变，反映了文体、社会和语言发展的相互影响关系。     

战斧巡航导弹对美国海军的影响

战斧巡航导弹是美国军事现代化计划中争论最为激烈的武器之一,作为海军一种新的攻击力量,它对舰队的组织和战术的影响是美国其它新式武器无法比拟的。关于这种新式武器的军事意义和政治意义值得认真研究。一、背景和问题尽管在五十年代,美国海军拥有过象“天狮星”Ⅰ和“天狮星”Ⅱ两种核对地攻击巡航导弹,但美国政府从来没有象现在这样重视过海射巡航导弹(SLCM)。是什么因素促使美国发展 SLCM 呢?看来至少有两点起了重要作用:     

着力推进民航空管文化建设

党的十六大报告指出:“文化的力量,深深熔铸在民族的生命力、创造力和凝聚力之中”。这一科学论料,准确地论述了文化建设的战略地位,深刻地阐明了文化在社会生活、经济生活、政治生活中特殊而重大的作用。文化是一定社会的经济、政治在观念形态上的反映。文化是有层次的,可以分     

"新帝国论"与小布什外交

当前,"新帝国论"(或"新帝国主义论")甚嚣尘上."新帝国"究竟所指为何?它是怎样出笼的?本质是什么?小布什的新帝国主义外交给世界带来了哪些影响?     

加加林死因真相？

1961年4月12日，尤里加加林成为了世界上家喻户晓的人。但过了不到七年，他却不幸死于一次飞行事故。对于这次事故的原因，众说纷纭，“阴谋论”、“醉酒论”、“高空气球碰撞论”……，今年6月，美国航天网站（americaspace．com）刊载文章提出了不同观点，特进行编译整理，以飨读者。     

浅析如何在管制一线实现持续安全

引言 2008年,李家祥局长对民航系统提出了贯彻落实“科学发展观”,牢固树立“持续安全理念”的要求,并通过三论“持续安全”,系统闸述了其科学内涵、理论框架和根本要求,全民航自上而下都在学习和落实“持续安全理念”。“持续安全”的最后一道把关者是一线的员工,就民航空管而言,如何在管制一线落实“持续安全”,成为了必须要思考和解决的问题。     

航天趣闻（六）

乘“太空出租飞船”到太空旅游 什么是“太空出租飞船”？载人航天发展至今还从来没有听说过有“太空出租飞船”。这是什么时候发明的？是哪一国发明的？为什么要发展“太空出租飞船”？当一听到“太空出租飞船”这个名词时大家可能会有这样的想法和问题。其实所谓“太空出租飞船”是一种形象的比喻，主要是用来说明未来的载人飞船不是由国家或政府出资建造的，而是由民营企业或公司建造的。当有人因公或因私要到太空去，即可租用这种飞船。     

“我是实事求是派”——邓小平与解放思想、实事求是思想路线的恢复与发展

本文将实事求是思想路线的恢复和发展过程划分为四个阶段：批评“两个凡是”;支持真理标准问题的大讨论;科学地概括思想路线的内容;十一届三中全会后的进一步完善和发展。通过这四个阶段的阐述,系统地展示了邓小平在恢复和发展党的正确思想路线问题上所作出的历史性贡献。     

Planning the post-Apollo space program: Are there lessons for the present?

The current debate over the future of human spaceflight in the USA has been a fascinating, and troubling, exercise in futility for those inextricably committed to an expansive vision of human exploration and development of space. The retirement of the Space Shuttle, originally set for the end of 2010 but later extended into 2011, the technical and funding problems of the Constellation follow-on program that led to its cancellation in 2009, and the emergence of commercial vendors who might be able to offer human access to Earth orbit have all complicated the current environment. In view of this situation, the question may be legitimately asked: what might we learn from earlier efforts to develop a human spaceflight capability the last time such a transition took place? Using the post-Apollo transition from the ballistic capsule to a winged, reusable vehicle as a case study, this article seeks to illuminate the planning, decision-making, economic, and political issues that have arisen in this policy debate. It suggests that a web of interlocking issues—only one of which was technical—affected the course taken. Instead, politics, economics, social and cultural priorities, values, and institutional considerations all helped to frame the debate and shape the decision.     

Redefining safety in commercial space: Understanding debates over the safety of private human spaceflight initiatives in the United States

In 2009 President Obama proposed a budget for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) that canceled the Constellation program and included the development of commercial crew transportation systems into low Earth orbit. This significant move to shift human spaceflight into the private sector sparked political debate, but much of the discourse has focused on impacts to “safety.” Although no one disputes the importance of keeping astronauts safe, strategies for defining safety reveal contrasting visions for the space program and opposing values regarding the privatization of U.S. space exploration. In other words, the debate over commercial control has largely become encoded in arguments over safety. Specifically, proponents of using commercial options for transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) argue that commercial vehicles would be safe for astronauts, while proponents of NASA control argue that commercial vehicles would be unsafe, or at least not as safe as NASA vehicles. The cost of the spaceflight program, the technical requirements for designing a vehicle, the track record of the launch vehicle, and the experience of the launch provider are all incorporated into what defines safety in human spaceflight. This paper analyzes these contested criteria through conceptual lenses provided by fields of science and technology policy (STP) and science, technology, and society (STS). We ultimately contend that these differences in definition result not merely from ambiguous understandings of safety, but from intentional and strategic choices guided by normative positions on the commercialization of human spaceflight. The debate over safety is better considered a proxy debate for the partisan preferences embedded within the dispute over public or private spaceflight.     

Unpacking the great transmission debate

The debate about the wisdom of sending interstellar transmissions is well-known to those involved in SETI, and frustrating for many. Its tendency towards intractability is a result of multiple factors, including: different models of the scientist's role as citizen and/or leader; disparate ideas about society's readiness to cope with frontier science; variable political substrates, particularly ideas concerning individual freedom and state control; competing ideologies of globalization; and the perceived relative risks and benefits of contact. (Variations in the latter, i.e. assessments of the risks and benefits of contact, derive partly from different thinking styles, including tolerance for risk, and partly from inferences based upon episodes of biological and cultural contact on Earth.) Unpacking the debate into its components may be of use to those debating policy about SETI transmissions, or at the very least, help keep in focus what, precisely, the perennial arguments are really about.     

Toward understanding the active SETI debate: Insights from risk communication and perception

Insights from the robust field of risk communication and perception have to date been almost totally absent from the policy debate regarding the relative risks and merits of Active SETI or Messaging to Extraterrestrial Intelligence (METI). For many years, the practice (or proposed practice) of Active SETI has generated a vigorous and sometimes heated policy debate within the scientific community. There have also been some negative reactions in the media toward the activities of those engaged in Active SETI. Risk communication is a scientific approach to communication regarding situations involving potentially sensitive or controversial situations in which there may be high public concern and low public trust. The discipline has found wide acceptance and utility in fields such as public health, industrial regulation and environmental protection. Insights from the scientific field of risk communication (such as omission bias, loss aversion, the availability heuristic, probability neglect, and the general human preference for voluntary over involuntary risks) may help those who have participated in either side of the debate over Active SETI to better understand why the debate has taken on this posture. Principles of risk communication and risk perception may also help those engaged in Active SETI to communicate more effectively with other scientists, the public, with the media, and with policy makers regarding their activities and to better understand and respond to concerns expressed regarding the activity.     

中国特色社会主义文化的哲学思考

尽管近年来我国学术界对中国特色社会主义文化进行了深入研究，取得了可喜成果，但是，对于什么是中国特色社会主义文化这个首要问题还是没有完全搞清楚并取得共识。将问题放在一定的历史环境中，具体地历史地认识和解决问题，是马克思主义哲学的基本道理。中国特色社会主义文化是一项伟大的历史性事业，有其具体的历史内涵和时空限度，对之进行时空限度的说明是我们把握其科学内涵、基本性质以及划分其发展阶段、确定其历史地位的基本前提。     

The future of space medicine.

In November 2000, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and its partners in the International Space Station (ISS) ushered in a new era of space flight: permanent human presence in low-Earth orbit. As the culmination of the last four decades of human space flight activities. the ISS focuses our attention on what we have learned to date. and what still must be learned before we can embark on future exploration endeavors. Space medicine has been a primary part of our past success in human space flight, and will continue to play a critical role in future ventures. To prepare for the day when crews may leave low-Earth orbit for long-duration exploratory missions, space medicine practitioners must develop a thorough understanding of the effects of microgravity on the human body, as well as ways to limit or prevent them. In order to gain a complete understanding and create the tools and technologies needed to enable successful exploration. space medicine will become even more of a highly collaborative discipline. Future missions will require the partnership of physicians, biomedical scientists, engineers, and mission planners. This paper will examine the future of space medicine as it relates to human space exploration: what is necessary to keep a crew alive in space, how we do it today, how we will accomplish this in the future, and how the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) plans to achieve future goals.     

Large-scale military funding induces culture clash

Mission-oriented research shifts the assessment of research products and potential from scientists to external factors. This is the point of mission funding, but it introduces what the author calls ‘epistemic drift’, which is part of a more general clash between different value systems and cultures. The culture clash between the military and industry has led to a shift in debate from spin-off to dual-use technologies. Similar conflicts and tensions are introduced into the university research system by large-scale mission funding such as that of SDI, and it is imperative that universities establish a strong civilian base for fundamental research funding instead of lobbying for military support.     

内圣外王

内圣是人格主体在德、能、学三个基本方面的自我修养,其至高境界是"极高明而道中庸";外王则是指卓越的"治平"社会功德。内圣是外王的前提和基础,外王是内圣的实践归宿和社会价值体现。内圣外王具有道德的、政治的和学术的三重理想人格涵义。内圣外王人格论的思想理论基础是传统的民本思想、"人贵论"和"人性论"。     

Humans versus robots for space exploration and development

Every few years, the eternally resurgent question of whether humans or robots should be adopted for space exploration is dusted off, with arguments on both sides leading nowhere. I argue that this debate is misplaced—there is a well-defined distribution of tasks across humans and the machine, and this distribution is of an evolutionary nature. This article uses a variety of examples to illustrate where robotic capabilities are most appropriate and where human attributes cannot be dispensed with. It further suggests that, even as robotics and artificial intelligence are becoming more sophisticated, they will not be able to deal with ‘thinking-on-one's-feet’ tasks that require generalisations from past experience. Given the current and perceived status of robotics research, I submit that there will be a critical role for humans in space for the foreseeable future.