1,720,953 research outputs found
The Methodological Reflection about the Criticism to Hu Hong in The Doubt of Zhi Yan by Zhu Hsi
No full text本文討論《知言疑義》中朱熹對胡宏的批評意見，企圖澄清兩造思路的差異，從而各自呈現兩家思維的特色與要點。《知言疑義》中胡宏的文句多半是本體工夫論合構的發言，因此語多跳躍，致引朱熹之批評。朱熹即由性善論的本體論立場批評胡宏有「性無善惡」之說，及由存有論思路的「心統性情說」批評胡宏的心性相關語句之不佳，以及由「未發涵養已發察識」的工夫次第思路批評胡宏並未重視平日涵養一節。本文將藉由作者所提之「實踐哲學的解釋架構」，以及「存有論哲學」的問題意識分析，以澄清兩造哲學問題意識的不同，因而並未形成真正的衝突，從而亦藉此說明朱熹與胡宏各自論學之重點意旨。The discussion in this article is about the criticism to Hu Hong in The doubt of Zhi yan Proposed by Zhu Hsi. The author is aiming to clear the dissimilar way of thinking between the two philosophers to the effect that both their significant theory could be appeared. Hu Hong’s philosophical announcement always integrates the ontological and practical theory, which results to the ambiguity and give rise to the criticism from Zhu Hsi. Zhu Hsi possessed the position of the goodness of nature to query Hu Hong about his no good and no evil opinion toward the theory of the human nature. In the definition of the mind and nature, master Zhu Hsi proposed the mind comprise the nature and the felling and argued with Hu Hong’s different opining. Concerning about the practical procedure theory, Zhu Hsi insist the cultivation should be built on daily life, and critic Hu Hong’s philosophy being short of this understanding. In this article the author will use the interpretational structure of the practical theory and the theory of being to analyze the different consciousness in these two systems and suggest that there exist no real conflict between them so as to explain both their philosophical thinking
The Metaphysics of Chu-His
No full text本文討論朱熹形上思想，說明其有繼承北宋儒學的必要性及義理創作的特殊性，更有與其工夫論不同思路的獨立性。首先討論勞思光先生及牟宗三先生對朱熹的批評意見，對於勞先生的心性論中心之解釋架構對朱熹存有論義的形上學的批評，指出勞先生的心性論中心亦須包含形上學議題之意旨，而朱熹之形上學意見可以不混入工夫論意見而有其獨立意義。對於牟宗三先生以朱熹存有論不負擔創生實踐功能，指出牟先生的問題意識是工夫實踐以至境界完成而非存有論思路，而朱熹是在談論存有論，因此不必受到這樣的批評。其次討論形上學概念在當代學界的使用定義，藉由區分實踐哲學的功夫境界論及形上學的宇宙論本體論和存有論的概念使用意義，以說明朱熹形上思想遭受批評的原因，並為朱熹澄清。接著說明朱熹特殊具有創造性意義的存有論形上學觀點，討論朱熹的理氣概念架構以說天地萬物的存有論架構，指出這是特殊的形上學論題，並毋須與工夫論議題混為一談。並就人存有者而言，說明朱熹以性善說為宗旨說本體論及人性論、並藉性氣結構說人的為惡現象、以及在人的氣稟限制中說命定論、及朱熹對整個儒學史的人性論理論意見之重整系統、最後落實於以心統性情說以確立道德實踐主體的存有架構，文中指出這一部份的討論正是朱熹集北宋儒學之大成，並最能徹底解決儒家性善說的形上學問題的創作系統，應予清晰解讀及準確理解。本文藉由形上學問題意識的釐清，來說清楚朱熹所談的形上學問題，用以區隔朱熹工夫論的發言，並避免當代學者從工夫論進路批評朱熹不如象山及陽明學的意見。Neo-Confucianism has now been well-known by the western society, for its influence on Chinese culture is immense. Among its proponents, Master Chu-Hsi is the most influential among them, the reason of which can be attributed to his fully speculative viewpoints and his comprehensive senses of philosophy problems. In Chu-Hsi’s theory, metaphysics is his most creative contribution to Confucianism. However, it is susceptible to being miss-understood by his contemporaries and today’s scholars, for his basic concerns about the metaphysics are so much different from the other Confucians. While the theory of the reality and the value are concerned by all the Confucian philosophers and they had provided many different yet profoundly metaphysical systems, Master Chu-Hsi notices the problems of the definitions of all the concepts concerning the reality and the ultimate value and develops a new metaphysical system discussing the problems of the reality of the whole Being in the universal, the moral potential difference between people and the animal. In this article the author is going to introduce Master Chu-Hsi’s metaphysical constructions and creations. The discussion will be proceeded as follows: (1) the reflection of the modern interpretational systems, (2) the definition of the concept of metaphysics in Chinese philosophy, (3) the original questions of Chu-Hsi’s metaphysical thinking, (4) the theory of the whole Being of the Universal, (5) the theory of human nature and the explanation of why the moral ability is different in the human beings, (6) the existential difference between human creatures and the animals, and (7) the meaning of the contribution of Chu-Hsi’s metaphysics in the history of the development of Confucianism
Reflections on Wang, Yang-Ming’s Criticism of Chu, Xi
No full text本文針對哲學史上王陽明對朱熹批評的意見做反思，指出這些批評意
見，從直接的材料上講，主要都是依據《大學》文本詮釋而來的，從陽明的
哲學創作來講，又多是針對朱熹理論做反對而來，就此而言，王陽明實在是
受到朱熹影響很深，兩人真正的差距，不像是哲學史上將程朱、陸王分為理
學、心學兩派之差異那麼樣的極端。又從實際上王陽明所爭辯的問題來看，
則多為朱熹工夫不得力的批評，這就又有屬於朱熹談工夫理論還是朱熹自己
的工夫修養程度兩種問題，陽明亦是混淆此兩者。又從工夫理論的批評來
講，陽明又有哲學基本問題的錯置，將朱熹談於工夫次第及形上學存有論問
題的發言都從本體工夫的形式去批評，以致失去其批評的準確度。此外，還
有從不同的先秦典籍之義理依據而做的文本詮釋之批評，以及對《大學》版
本本身的意見不同之批評，但上述批評，還是可以化約到哲學基本問題的不
同所致之批評。本文即以此為進路，說明陽明批評朱熹的意見是有可以被解
消之處，關鍵即在問題意識不同。This paper, taking ideas from history of philosophy, reflects on Wang,
Yang-Ming’s criticisms of Chu, Xi. The reflection indicates that these critical
ideas are all derived directly from Wang’s interpretation of Dah Xue (The Great
Learning). Taking the perspective that nearly all Wang’s works are based on
criticizing Chu’s theory, we can say however that Wang is deeply influenced
by Chu. Actually, their difference is not that explicit as seen from the generally
held distinction in history of philosophy between Cheng and Chu about Li
(principle) school on the one hand and Lu and Wang about Xing (principle)
school on the other. In fact, according to Wang’s criticisms which concentrated
the limits of Chu’s theory of Kung Fu, we see clearly that the problem originated
from Wang’s confusion of Chu’s theory of Kung Fu with Chu’s personal
ability of Kung Fu. Moreover, on the Kung Fu theoretical level, Wang’s
criticisms confused Chu’s theory of Kung Fu procedure and ontology with
pure Kung Fu theory. Consequently this confusion caused the lost of accuracy.
Besides, there were other problems relating to criticism based on different
interpretations of Pre-Qing Dynasty texts and various views on deviating
editions of Dah Xue. This paper however holds the view that these differences
caused by referring to ancient texts can be attributed to their differences concerning
their attitudes towards the fundamental philosophical problems. It is on this
view that this paper argues that the difference between Wang and Chu can be
resolved by elaborating their differing problematics
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
- …
